.
As we are gaining experience on insurance covers and the various tricks that the insurance firms come up with, here is a new experience on the subject.
Firstly, and based on our previous report (on insurance company tricks and illegalities) we had a visit from the administrative staff of the Association of the Insurance Companies.
We were informed that provided the property is correctly insured (not underinsured) the insurance firm will cover the replacement cost of similar quality without deducting wear and tear.
I have asked for this to be put in writing because the depreciation deduction appears to be widespread by the insurance companies, based on our readers’ experience.
So, for those who dispute the depreciation claim could take the insurance company to court and ask the association to be a witness (will the association go against its members who are the insurance companies in Cyprus??).
Regarding the subject of bad workmanship as a result of which the insurer suffered damages, its validity will depend on the insurance surveyor’s report.
For this reason and if you have such a claim against you, ask to get a copy of the surveyor’s report, which you may dispute using your own consultant on the subject. Getting a copy of the insurance firm report is, therefore, a prerequisite.
We came up with another innovative claim by the insurance firms of third party insurance.
It is highly recommended that you get an insurance cover to pay any damage caused to a visitor to your property.
A simple fall as a result of protruding tiling or pavements could give cause for anyone who suffers damage to seek payment of damages. The cost of such cover is not much, whereas the lawsuit/damage sought could run into thousands.
The cause of the “neglect” on behalf of the insured must be doubted and for the injured person to have exercised due care themselves.
So here you have the odd situation where the insured resident is not covered, be it that all others are covered. Did anyone know this? It was explained to us by an insurance firm that not only the insured/owner is not covered but also his wife, children and other extended members of his family.
We have asked this also to be put in writing so that people know the insurance policy falls short.
On this point, we had a case some time ago where two young boys entered the ground of a house illegally and used the pool as a result of which one of them got injured. End result, the insured had to pay damages. So, trespassers are the responsibility of the insured?
In an odd case, the property belonged to a company, the ownership of which belongs to the insurer (in shares).
The insurance claimed that because the insurer was in effect the owner the insurance firm was not liable for payment.
The insured claimed that they and the company are two different legal entities and the insured in this case had nothing to do with his company.
He claimed that he is also a shareholder of the Bank of Cyprus, Louis, Group, several insurance Cos (be it small shares) and wondered that in the event he suffered any damage in such buildings, if he is covered or not.
A person with fully comprehensive car insurance, in case of an accident, is not covered although everybody else is. This case and the others can be covered with a small additional amount say €10-€20 p.a., but has anyone been informed about this?
The position of the insurance is that “you should study the contract”, but then should not the insurance provider explain all these odd things to the insured? What is the responsibility of the Registrar of the Insurance Companies?
Is it not the “duty of care” of a provider to explain fully the pitfalls, as well as that of the Registrar of the Insurance Cos to make sure that the public at large understands and the Insurance firm not hide behind legalese and the small print?
A house duly insured for fire was almost burned down because the neighbours decided to burn the weeds and clean their plot next door.
The homeowner was informed that “he was lucky” because the contract stipulated that he the insured) ought to clean a distance of 3 meters around his plot perimeter!!
As we understand it, this means the employment of a labour force is a must unless you insure for this eventuality (in addition to trespassing into the neighbours’ property!!). God help the unfortunate insured who seem to believe that their insurance cover is in good order!
