On 30/07/2010 21:42, Norman Wells wrote:
Clive George wrote:
On 30/07/2010 17:21, Norman Wells wrote:
Invisible Man wrote:
On 30/07/2010 16:35, Norman Wells wrote:
Invisible Man wrote:

Have you ever claimed on your house insurance, I wonder? Mine's
just come up for renewal and I can't recall ever making a claim in
35 years except one in 1990 for a relatively small amount of damage
caused by a couple of ridge tiles being dislodged by high winds.

The house is unlikely to collapse or hit an aeroplane, so what's it
for exactly? What are the most common claims?

I'm thinking of not renewing mine (£300 quoted) as I think I'm
relatively low risk. You are too, so why do you pay to keep it going?

You talking buildings or contents?

It's both.

I've got buildings, because should something go wrong like a house
fire, I simply can't afford a full rebuild. The chance is very low,
but I'm prepared to take a loss on the bet because the potential loss
of not taking it is catastrophic.

Yes, since open fires went, and we don't smoke, the risk really is only
of something going wrong while cooking or an electrical fault. You just
don't see house fires like you used to!

Maybe not, but the risk is still there. Don't forget to include other
sources of ignition - including malicious (burglar dropping a fag?).

I'll agree contents is closer to optional, but again, take the house
fire example : there's a lot of stuff to cover. I could probably start
again, but it would be very tight for a while.

Contents also gets you third party insurance when out of your house,
which is potentially useful. My parents claimed on it for a bike
crash I caused when I was a kid.

True, but again the risk is very low, I'd have thought. You're most
unlikely to lose the lot in one go.

But if you do, you're screwed, and really badly so.

Are you prepared to take the risk that in high winds, a slate or tile
flies off and injures somebody, meaning you get sued personally and have
to sell the house to pay for their care?

Of course you're entirely at liberty to take the risk, and it will give
you a little bit of extra cash. The chances are that you'll be ok, and
quite strongly in your favour. But are you prepared to gamble your house
on that? It's bad enough suffering a biggish claim if you are insured.

('course if your house is in the right place, could be that the land
underneath it is worth enough for you to simply sell on the bust house
for redevelopment and you buy a cheaper one elsewhere. Doesn't work for
big 3rd party claims though)