Help please with window locks

[mardinor]

Back to the original question of British Standard window locks...

All our original sash windows have key operated Chubb sash stop locks. Our house insurer suddenly added a new condition on renewal that windows had to have locks fitted to British Standard BS 3621, rather than just be key operated (this was, of course, in the fine print and not pointed out).

Extensive trawling of t'internet suggests that this Britsh Standard applies to mortice door locks, not to window locks. Furthermore, it seems that no British Standard even exists for window locks!

In the face of such abject incompetence I decided to take my business elsewhere...

 

[Flyfisher]

That's interesting. Did you raise that point with them and ask for their advice on which BS3621 standard window lock would be acceptable to them? I can imagine some fun conversations there!

I think you should name and shame the insurer.

 

[lyndasfarne]

Thanks

I have found your comments and advice to be really interesting and helpful.

But, am still finding it very hard to comprehend. Each Insurance Company seem to have it's own rules. On the pemise it is insured as a listed building, some are advising insuring it for the re-instatement cost as stands, some are willing to extend it to 500000. Some are asking about key operated windows and BSA standard deadlocks on doors. Others are saying they do not affect the premiums as the building is in a low risk area, some understand that the windows have screw type locks because of the window fabric and some don't.

There is a very large tree in the garden and yes it's close to the house (preservation order in situ) and Surveyor has confirmed no damage to property. Wanted to be upfront about this at the ouset. Some of the insurers, took notice and asked more questions.(waiting for quote) another just asked if we were asking to insure the actual tree!!

The difference in premiums is staggering. Why, if they are prepared to cover the cost of a rebuild or accidental damage are there so many variations on a theme :roll:

 

[Lime]

Welcome to the real world.
Insurance companies are there to make money not provide you with a service.
It is only since mortgages became so common (ie in last 50 years) that insurance has become such a "necessity".
Before that time it was seen as an extra.

 

[lyndasfarne]

Thank you Lime, but yes I do know that insurance companies are there to make money. I was never under the Illusion that they weren't.

I think all I was trying to say is that it is a little perplexing the huge difference in the requirements for cover, and what is taken into account for the premiums. Yes we are new to Listed Buildings I admit, which does add to the amount of research and understanding required. No way do we want to go into this without plenty of knowledge.

 

[Flyfisher]

I've also found the very wide range of premiums for a given risk rather strange. Surely all insurance companies work from the same basic risk statistics so why such a wide range of premiums?

Still, listed property insurance is nowhere near as perplexing as teenage driver car insurance. :shock:

 

[tobydog]

It's no different to car insurance. Insurers target preferred markets. I went to NFU and got quoted around £400. I went through C&G and got quoted £1,600. C&G don't really want my business but if I'm made enough to pay the premium they are willing to take me. NFU are one of the preferred insurers for thatched rural properties and therefore they want my business.

 

[lyndasfarne]

Thanks folks, that was exactly what I was trying to get across

I tried NFU this morning and was quoted £695 which was a big variation on the others, I have already been told by one company that as a grade 2 it was fairly standard. Also the fact that the insurance companies who are not listed as LB Specialised Insurers are happy to insure a LB with the same cover as the others.

 

[Flyfisher]

It's no different to car insurance. Insurers target preferred markets. I went to NFU and got quoted around £400. I went through C&G and got quoted £1,600. C&G don't really want my business but if I'm made enough to pay the premium they are willing to take me. NFU are one of the preferred insurers for thatched rural properties and therefore they want my business.

That's a fair point, but I still don't really understand why insurers target 'preferred' markets. It's all a risk business and they have all the statistics to hand so surely it's relatively simple to determine a premium to cover that risk? Whatever it happens to be. Anyway, don't they all go to Lloyds or somewhere to underwite their own risks? Just like bookies laying off their own bets? All very strange.

 

[tobydog]

Insurers that tend to try and underwrite everything often come to a sticky end. The housing market is huge and you can end up with a very diluted book of business because you end up picking up all sorts. This invariably leads to bad claims. Insurers therefore tend to focus on certain areas or niches where they have experience or want to develop business.

You are correct FF that insurers do lay insurance business off in a similar way to a bookie. It's called reinsurance and can take several forms. One of the most common forms is a reinsurance treaty. It works on the basis that the reinsurers of the treaty provide the original insurer with strict parameters regarding what business they are willing to accept. So long as the original insurer sticks to these parameters, the reinsurer will automatically accept any business ceded up to a given limit. Effectively it's the tail waging the dog. It promotes underwriting discipline and explains why some insurers may refuse to insure you. Lloyds is a big insurance market and to strengthen this concept, the underwriter is normally a name on the syndicate. By this it means that he has a vested financial interest to ensure that any business he underwrites or accepts is good business, is rated correctly and falls within the syndicates underwriting protocols. He can't just underwrite any old business. If what he writes goes bad, he suffers financially too.

In my case the Co-op wouldn't even quote for a thatched house and the key reason for this is most likely that their treaty reinsurance excludes them. The NFU, on the other hand, specialises in this type of property, has extensive knowledge of all the risks involved and is rated on the basis of sound actuarial analysis of the sector. Their treaty reinsurers know this. It's a partnership.

This concept of reinsurance applies to most categories of insurance including motor, property, construction, marine, aviation, etc. I work in a broking team dedicated to placing global insurances for the worlds largest privately owned engineering and construction contractor. They are based in the US and quite often when we approach new insurers to underwrite certain coverages, they have to decline because their treaty reinsurers will not accept anything with a US exposure.

 

[Lime]

tobydog gives a good explanation of insurance niche markets.

The aspect of modern insurance that I dislike most is the "new for old" concept.
That's fine if you live in a modern property furnished with modern just-bought goods that are easily replaced.
It offers little to people like myself who have surrounded themselves with antique furnishings.

 

[Flyfisher]

Thanks for that explanation tobydog, very informative. Any tips for insuring a teenage driver and getting change from four figures? :shock: :wink:

Regarding Lime's 'new for old' point, I've always assumed that was just another way of saying that depreciation isn't taken into account, i.e. they pay out for the full replacement value. I'd assume that for an antique that would mean the full amount of replacing it with a comparable piece.

I take the point that an antique is probably not exactly replaceable but, actually, neither is a lot of modern stuff. In my time I've claimed for a stolen camcorder, iPod and laptop and in each case I had to negotiate the price for an equivalently specified product because, as you can imagine with such items, all had been superseded by higher-spec models -which made for some interesting discussions, though there was ultimately no problem once I had provided adequate justification for each replacement item. But without a 'new for old' policy, the rapid depreciation of such items would make it fairly pointless to insure them.

Particularly valuable antiques, however, probably warrant more specialised insurance.

 

[Pford75]

Having had to take a major claim to the FOS recently, I am cautious about insurers (the number of FOS complaints has risen steeply as insurers have come under profitability pressures - might they be using claims assessment to manage their payouts?)

There are lots of things to consider, but the single biggest piece of advice I would give is to insure based upon an "agreed value". This applies to either buildings or contents. In other words, the sum insured is agreed upfront by both parties, so that there won't be any wrangling in the event of a claim. Frankly, I think it is bizarre (and possibly deliberately confusing) that insurers ask homeowners to provide the 'rebuild' figure. As others have said, it is not a straightforward calculation (esp. For listed buildings) and the consequences of getting it wrong are significant. If you go too high...then you will overpay on your premium (and the insurer is highly unlikely to ever have to pay out a total loss), if you go too low, you will be underinsured and could lose out in the event of a claim. Therefore, either ask the insurer to provide the rebuild figure or confirm that they accept yours as an 'agreed value'.

The same applies to contents - both the total sum, but also the value of individual items. Many insurers simply take the total sum from the buildings figure, ie. £300k buildings = £xx contents. ThIs can create problems with period properties or where you have either lots of or fewer possessions. We have not only agreed the contents figure, but we have provided a comprehensive list of all items of any significant value. Simply take a digital photo and record details (model numbers, serial numbers, measurements on jewelry etc. With antiques, art etc. We have valuations every 2-3 years and provide these to our insurers.

A surprising number of people will be underinsured on contents. Simply adding up carpets, curtains, kitchen furniture,CD collection (which is often worth more than you'd think) and clothing...you can reach a fairly substantial figure

 

[tobydog]

I should add that insurers often have a few treaties that can accept different categories of business and risk. I don't know for sure but I'm guessing that this may be why C&G still wanted my business but quoted me £1,600. They have an appropriate treaty they can put it into that won't contaminate their core business.

FF - as for teenagers drivers - nightmare. Our youngest was driving my partners car on an occassional basis and she added him to the policy. It cost an extra £60 a month through NFU. He has now gone to uni and NFU allowed her to take him off while he's away (reducing the monthly premium accordingly) but add him at prorata premium when he's back during the holidays. NFU don't charge a fee for this which I think is amazing. This way, by the time he leaves uni, he will be old enough to have got beyond the very early costly years. If, on the other hand, they will be driving full time with their own car, then I was surprised to see how much the insurance drops after the first year with a clean sheet. Maybe worth biting the bullet. I know some insurers let you fit cars with black boxes that sense when they drive too fast generally, corner and brake too hard, or drive between 11pm and 6am. They are penalised accordingly and lack of discipline can be costly.

On the subject of 'new for old', some friends of ours were burgled recently. They lost about £20,000 in expensive jewellery and watches, most of which used to belong to their family like the parents old wedding and engagement rings. After endless arguments with the insurers they were finally offered just under the £20,000 by way of a voucher scheme to go out and by more jewellery to replace it. This couldn't be replaced but the insurer wouldn't have it. They had a box to tick and it needed ticking. In the end our friends accepted a cash offer that was significantly lower. This strengthens the argument for agreed values, provenance and photos.

 

[Flyfisher]

FF - as for teenagers drivers - nightmare. Our youngest was driving my partners car on an occassional basis and she added him to the policy. It cost an extra £60 a month through NFU. He has now gone to uni and NFU allowed her to take him off while he's away (reducing the monthly premium accordingly) but add him at prorata premium when he's back during the holidays. NFU don't charge a fee for this which I think is amazing. This way, by the time he leaves uni, he will be old enough to have got beyond the very early costly years. If, on the other hand, they will be driving full time with their own car, then I was surprised to see how much the insurance drops after the first year with a clean sheet. Maybe worth biting the bullet.

Funny you should mention all that - we're doing exactly the same thing, although we're not with NFU for our car insurance and our insurer charges a £15 admin fee each time we add FF junior to the car policy during uni holidays, so it works out at about £20 per week.

He wanted to take the car to uni but his hall of residence wanted £500 for a parking permit (which was only by special dispensation anyway because he's a member of a GB national sports team) and he would then have required his own insurance policy, rather than being a named driver on mine, and this was going to be in the region of £4000, so about £90 even before any petrol costs. Ludicrous! No wonder uninsured drivers are an increasing problem.

 

[tobydog]

£4,000 :shock:

That would buy 133 £10 taxi rides over a 3 year uni term. I know what I'd suggest now!

 

[Flyfisher]

I know, which is why he doesn't have his car at uni. Of course, he doesn't need a car for uni at all so that's not a problem, but he does have to travel around the country most weekends for sporting competitions, which is more problematic, and public transport is not a practical option when kayaks and associated equipment are involved.

 

[tobydog]

Tobydog junior is at Kington upon Thames so again no need for a car. He did suggest it once until I pointed out that I wasn't prepared to spend all my weekends fixing it. He's studying sport coaching analysis and has played basketball at national level. Now mixing it with the big boys at uni so needs to earn his stripes again.

 

[Pford75]

See this edition of Ombudsman news
http://www.financial-ombudsman.org.uk/publications/ombudsman-news/92/92-insurance-claims.html

The FOS is very clear that voucher schemes are not mandatory and that insurers should not reduce cash settlements in line with the discount they get from their suppliers. It doesn't stop most of them doing this though.

 

[lyndasfarne]

Hello I'm back again

As advised , I contacted The Listed Property Owners Website and was given a quote for Listed Property Insurance Elite.

It's seems very comprehensive and not unreasonable premiums.

I just wondered if anyone here used this company, or knew anything of them?