Home Beware liberty insurance new change to terms

8till8

Registered User
Messages
407
Beware of house insurance with Liberty Insurance, my policy comes up for renewal shortly and they wrote to me sayint they have changed their terms and conditions. Normally I wouldn't read these letters but I did on this occasion and its quite a surprise;

Here is the new term that I noticed;

"How we settle claims (building section)
If we have agreed to pay your claim and the total amount to be paid under this section is more than €3,000, we may keep up to 30% of the payment until the reinstatement work is complete. We will consider the work as complete when we have received and checked the final invoices and, if necessary, carried out a final inspection of the work. The inspection may be carried out by us or a representative we appoint.
Once we have settled your claim (less any amount we have kept back), we will agree a date that the reinstatement work should be completed by and the invoices sent to us. If you have not claimed the amount we have kept back after six weeks from the date we settled your claim, we will write to you to remind you of the unclaimed amount and our requirements to release the payment. If you need us to extend the agreed date, you should contact us to let us know. If we do not hear from you before the agreed date, we may close your claim."



My understanding of this is, that during the hassle and stress of getting reinstatement work done, the insurer will deliberately hold back 30% (how is the household supposed to fund that shortfall?) and only when the work is complete will they examine the paperwork and then pay out at their leisure.

I for one won't be renewing with Liberty and will shop around for better cover.
 
Put another way, if I had a builder in doing a job for me I would hold back 30% of the cost until the job is fully complete to my satisfaction. Doesn't seem unreasonable.
 
It would be the norm with a lot of insurers, it's called "retention". You'll find in most cases too, unless you have an insurer that has a panel of tradesmen they want you to use you will be funding the entire portion of the claim until you can submit all invoices. If its unusually large, they may authorise an interim payment.
 
Why not agree with insurer that repairer will submit invoice direct to them for payment. That way, you don't have to fund any shortfall and repaired is guaranteed his payment (less policy excess).
 
Why not agree with insurer that repairer will submit invoice direct to them for payment. That way, you don't have to fund any shortfall and repaired is guaranteed his payment (less policy excess).

It doesn't work that way, the insurers approach will be stall, delay and impede the process so as to minimise the pay out, all at the expense of the customers sanity! There are lots of stories out there to believe it isn't an isolated event.

My point with this post is to draw attention to the written policy of holding back 30% which the householder will have to fund, I notice that this new t&c doesn't mention any time scale that they will settle.
 
In many cases, the retention is never claimed. Why? Perhaps the insurer wore the policyholder down and they have simply give up, or possibly, the job was completed for a cheaper price anyway. In Ireland, we have an expectation of making easy money on insurance claims. It is this that is helping to drive up prices. This in turn then tempts more to try to make easy money, driving up prices so it is a never ending hamster wheel.

I disagree that insurers 'stall, delay and impede the process'. Insurers are bound under central bank CPC to be 'fair'. If they are not 'fair' in their dealings with policyholders, complaints can be made and sanctions imposed by Central Bank. I am aware that if asked, some insurers will pay the repairer direct. Others will at random call out to inspect the completed repairs to ensure that they have been carried out to the agreed specification and if a less expensive repair was done, the settlement figure will be adjusted downwards or at worst, the entire claim may be voided on grounds of fraud.

I note your point that you are simply drawing this new condition to peoples attention. As peteb says, it is the norm with most insurers now.
 
In many cases, the retention is never claimed. Why? Perhaps the insurer wore the policyholder down and they have simply give up, or possibly, the job was completed for a cheaper price anyway. In Ireland, we have an expectation of making easy money on insurance claims. It is this that is helping to drive up prices. This in turn then tempts more to try to make easy money, driving up prices so it is a never ending hamster wheel.

I disagree that insurers 'stall, delay and impede the process'. Insurers are bound under central bank CPC to be 'fair'. If they are not 'fair' in their dealings with policyholders, complaints can be made and sanctions imposed by Central Bank. I am aware that if asked, some insurers will pay the repairer direct. Others will at random call out to inspect the completed repairs to ensure that they have been carried out to the agreed specification and if a less expensive repair was done, the settlement figure will be adjusted downwards or at worst, the entire claim may be voided on grounds of fraud.

I note your point that you are simply drawing this new condition to peoples attention. As peteb says, it is the norm with most insurers now.

Ravima,
I am a loss assessor and handle property claims on behalf of the policy holder.
I agree with most of what you have written
If the repairs are carried out the insurers simply want proof in the form of photographs and invoices.
The may inspect the property to confirm that repairs have been carried out as per the specification this will be done by appointment.
They have no right to turn up at random and ask to be shown the repairs.
Generally insurers are moving away from insisting that the policyholder use the insurance companies own contractors partly due to the fact that they are guaranteeing the repairs and one insurer has incurred costs to date of over €3M to remedy the works carried out by their own contractor.

Insurers have for a number of years paid 70% of the repair cost upfront and retained the remaining 30% until works are completed.

As a system it generally works well and once it is explained clearly it is not an issue with a policyholder.

The vast majority of property insurers pay claims on this basis.
 
I should have phrased my reply differently. Insurers will randomly inspect (by arrangement/appointment) to ensure that work has been done as agreed. I did not mean to imply that insurers barge in unnanounced.
 
Back
Top