Poster: A snowHead
|
I am in the process of renewing our annual travel insurance, and am looking at it through completely different eyes having needed to claim for the first time ever following a ski accident earlier this year.
The claim is still going through and includes £500 of damaged equipment / ski clothing, however I now realise that I am only going to get back a very small portion of this due to the depreciation factor they apply. E.g. a perfectly good pair of Spyder salopettes bought in resort for about £120 are now completely ruined, but as they are older than 5 years I'm not going to get a penny for them. Incredibly frustrating given the accident was no fault of my own whatsoever.
So I am now paranoid about getting the best cover possible for the new policy. I have found the odd company who will provide new for old on lost baggage, which would cover ski equipment in transit, but does anyone know of any cover that provides new for old at other times, e.g. damaged as a result of an accident?
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
@saskew, nope...pretty standard
|
|
|
|
|
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
|
You're whingeing about not getting new for old on a 5 year old pair of pants? Realistically how much would you get on ebay for them?£20 tops even in pristine nick. Full new for old insurance policy would add many multiples of that to your premium.
If I had a bad enough ski accident to write off £500* of kit, I'd be more concerned about return to skiing at all than the cost of replacing some old kit.
* fairynuff my most recently worn pants are about to be declared an atrocity by the Hague.
|
|
|
|
|
You need to Login to know who's really who.
You need to Login to know who's really who.
|
@Dave of the Marmottes, I thought it...you said it
|
|
|
|
|
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
Anyway, snowHeads is much more fun if you do.
|
Maybe just accept that stuff wears out, and that it's cheaper to just replace it when it does, than to insure against the problem? Most people have house insurance but probably don't actually insure their clothing as it's kind of not that expensive.
|
|
|
|
|
You'll need to Register first of course.
You'll need to Register first of course.
|
Think it's very hard to get decent cover for kit more than a year, maybe two years' old - some policies better than others but most not what we might still think our kit is worth ( or would cost to replace, even 2nd hand ).
More importantly, IMHO, as I also sadly found this year, check how they'll calculate and how much they'll reimburse you for costs associated with an injury, holiday curtailment, physio, travel, time off, other or extra associated losses and costs. Amazing how you think you're well covered, then find out how much you don't get back & how much else you're not covered for at all even if a direct & necessary cost.
In my case, they covered all resort emergency bills and an early return home with extra seats for leg injury etc ( and did so very efficiently) - but there was £100+ excess both for me and Mr G, and we're looking at about 70% (estimate off top of head) of total lost, non-claimable holiday and lift pass costs at present (still negotiating).
Accident on day 1, effectively no holiday or ski/board at all, yet it's cost us a huge amount for the privilege of something which also wasn't our fault at all.
To be fair, don't know if other insurances would have given much better a result - but worth very much reading the small print on any policy. I got caught out on that too by not getting appropriate GP's letter about necessary physio treatment (which I thought from policy was covered) before I started treatment - even though I've never been treated by the utterly non specialist GP at all & never seen them at all re injuries as A&E sent me straight to hospital Consultant!
|
|
|
|
|
|
5 years old !! I bet they were not in completely pristine condition. Not even scuffed around the hems from ski edges? Even Spyder ones wear out.
|
|
|
|
|
|
In fairness, for most people, 5 year's use translates into 30 days ...
|
|
|
|
|
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
You'll get to see more forums and be part of the best ski club on the net.
|
Thank you for the replies, though some I find a tad unnecessary.
The fact of the matter is I was involved in a pretty bad accident, the other party completely at fault, that resulted in £2k medical bills we had to pay out of our own pocket and are still waiting for reimbursement from the insurance company. This has stretched us financially and we have had to make cut-backs while we await the payment. Every aspect of my work and life were affected, and it was weeks after the accident before I could drive again so I had to rely on the kindness of friends to get me to doctor and physio appointments etc.
The accident happened on our 3rd day of skiing, with another 9 days of the holiday left. So like @Grizzler we effectively lost our holiday that we worked hard for to be able to go away.
Yes I agree that not all of my gear was in pristine condition, but all of it WAS more than good enough to continue using for several more weeks of skiing and I had no plans or need to replace any of it. Through no fault of my own this has been damaged beyond repair, and we will have to add a fair amount of our own money to anything we get back from insurance in order to replace clothing/equipment before we can go skiing next.
As I said in my original post I have found the odd company who will provide new for old for equipment in transit, I was simply asking if anyone knew of any company who would do the same for equipment when it was being used so I can cover myself against going through this again.
If anyone can offer any names the help would be much appreciated.
You're right @Grizzler, you always think you've got yourself covered until it comes to needing to make a claim...then you find all the exclusions they hide away in dozens of pages of the policy document Hope you've made a full recovery by now
|
|
|
|
|
|
Alternatively save yourself money by buying cheaper ski gear, not worrying about it and not spending a small fortune on travel insurance. Or buy a needle and thread...
|
|
|
|
|
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
snowHeads are a friendly bunch.
|
@saskew, you have my deep sympathy over the accident the injury and the rehab. What I was trying to do was focus you on the important bit which is the getting fit and well and not the minutiae which is what new for old kit replacement is. If you've broken skis you can almost certainly find second hand replacements for not much over £100 etc. Also think about it from the insurers perspective - if they gave new for old replacement of gear imagine the number of people that will "accidentally" break a ski when they were a bit knackered or assert that splitting their pants was in a qualifying accident.
|
|
|
|
|
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
And love to help out and answer questions and of course, read each other's snow reports.
|
@saskew, I totally see your point, as I refer above, age does not relate to wear necessarily.
But beyond sympathy, I have little else to offer.
Will confess though that in the 1 instance I've required slopeside assistance, kit was far away from my concerns (fractured vertebrae).
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ok let me put it this way...lets say the average cost of a pair of skis, boots and poles was...£700 total. You go away with your partner who has the same kit, and your bags are lost. Your insurance policy does not provide new for old, and because you bought it more than 5 years ago (very conceivable for ski equipment) you get nothing back from the insurance company. You have to start from scratch finding the right gear, and spend £1400 on equipment for yourself and your partner to put yourself back in the position you were before and be able to go skiing again. Would you be a bit peeved?
Our boots are already more than 5 years old, and skis/poles getting close to that. If there's an insurance policy that can protect me a bit more I'd be happy to pay a bit extra!
|
|
|
|
|
You know it makes sense.
|
They should tell you their depreciation rates. Most customers (like the OP) will be surprised at how little your stuff's worth very soon. Factor in the cost of the policy, the fact that most stuff is already covered, and their other "excess" stuff, and you start to understand why some of us think it's an expensive approach. How much will you pay on insurance as a percentage of that £700? Take that money, stick it in the bank at 1.5% and hope gear prices aren't tied to the Euro or the Dollar.
In this specific example, if the airline lost your gear, then they will pay for rentals. After a month they will fully fund replacements. They have no choice. Your insurance company would probably not even pay you precisely because of this: it's already covered.
I'd no more think of insuring ski clothing than ordinary clothing. I'm not much likely to lose it as I'm either wearing it or it's in the wardrobe.
|
|
|
|
|
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
Otherwise you'll just go on seeing the one name:
|
@saskew, have you looked at claiming for the damage on your house insurance policy? Mine covers loss or damage to personal belongings away from home, although damage from an accident is an unusual circumstance.
|
|
|
|
|
Poster: A snowHead
|
@saskew,
Quote: |
If there's an insurance policy that can protect me a bit more I'd be happy to pay a bit extra!
|
I don't think you should to be honest.
With insurance you pay a premium to protect you against risk - you expect to lose out of it but you avoid the small chance of a really bad outcome that would hammer your finances. It just doesn't make sense to pay up to protect yourself against relatively small losses that you can "self-insure" against.
Personally I tend to accept an excess if it results in lower premiums.
Last edited by Poster: A snowHead on Tue 23-05-17 10:58; edited 1 time in total
|
|
|
|
|
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
Obviously A snowHead isn't a real person
|
jedster wrote: |
With insurance you pay a premium to protect you against risk - you expect to lose out of it but you avoid the small chance of a really bad outcome that would hammer your finances. It just doesn't make sense to pay up to protect yourself against relatively small losses that you can "self-insure" against.
Personally I tend to accept and excess if it results in lower premiums. |
This is exactly right and demonstrates the fundmental misunderstanding of insurance products - they aren't generally designed to indemnify against all and every loss even if they weren't your fault. In order to make the policy affordable then rightly IMV they are designed to discourage minor claims through the excess and other qualifying criteria.
Thus people don't claim on their car insurance for a minor bumper scrape etc. There are, of course, products which exploit people's misunderstanding of the insurance market/and or equipment durability such as the mobile phone insurance that costs "only" £5 or £10 a month. These seem to me to be targetted at the young and the less savvy for whom £200 to replace a phone might seem like a lot of money but don't appreciate that in 2 years their £200 phone is effectively worthless anyway so an extra £120 to insure it is just stupid.case of self insure
I'm not quite in philwig's case of self insure for everything you can as I travel fairly often to the US and medical bills and hassle there can seriously ruin your life so a reasonable travel insurance policy is IMV essential. But if my tablet or phone or camera got lost or stolen its no biggie really.
|
|
|
|
|
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
Well, the person's real but it's just a made up name, see?
|
I do see the OP's point and have noted it with annoyance myself when comparing policies - boots & skis just a couple of years old have set you back a lot, are not always easy to replace 2nd hand and if you've looked after your gear or are a low-mileage user then you may well have expected them to give you good "payback " for many a year from their significant original outlay.
However, c'est la vie in all insurance, clothes & boots/shoes not least (think of replacement cost of all your wardrobe & sports clothing contents in case if a fire or flood, say )
As mentioned above, a possibility of insurance of sports equipment or clothing under various provisions of house/contents insurance - but again, high depreciation rates are likely on most policies. Shop around if you have the time.
Or just accept that hopefully loss through accident is not very common. Are you able to recover costs from the other party ( e.g. via legal expenses on your insurance?)
|
|
|
|
|
|