Bike Insurance Woes - Help

joey54321

Mine and my partner's bike were stolen last night after locking them up outside a friend's house. They were locked to two other (friend's) bikes that were locked to a tree. When we came out my 2 friend's bikes were still locked to the tree but mine and my partners were gone.

I have called up the insurance company, Pedal Cover, and they have informed me that as the bikes were not locked to a permanent structure they don't have to pay out. I would argue that as the tree and my friend's bikes were unmoved, undamaged and not stolen that the anchor point was sufficiently secure. They cut through my lock in order to get to the bikes.

Is there anything I can do? I feel may people would lock bikes together before locking them to an anchor point, to realize only the innermost bike is covered by insurance...surely there is some sort of lack of common sense going on there?

I feel somewhat underwhelmed by a company that advertises that it understands the difficulties cyclists face with insurance, it's fine not having to name your individual bikes but only if they actually pay out when you need them! The insurance isn't cheap.

shiznit76

Hate to say it, but insurance company are correct, by saying your bike was locked to the other bikes and.not the actual tree then they were not attached to a permanent structure. Insurance companies by and large will try find any excuse not to pay out, but this one is a pretty easy one for them. I take it your home insurance won't cover it either?

joey54321

shiznit76 wrote:

Hate to say it, but insurance company are correct, by saying your bike was locked to the other bikes and.not the actual tree then they were not attached to a permanent structure. Insurance companies by and large will try find any excuse not to pay out, but this one is a pretty easy one for them. I take it your home insurance won't cover it either?

They are my home insurance company.

shiznit76

D'oh. Could appeal the decision, but I wouldn't be confident. What was approx value?

webboo

I guess they could argue a tree is not a permanent structure.

joey54321

Webboo wrote:

I guess they could argue a tree is not a permanent structure.

They actually don't mind the tree. It's the bikes that were and remained locked to the tree. Apparently, the fact that the bikes and tree remained in place, undamaged and unstolen is irrelevant. I'd argue it's highly relevant.

joey54321

shiznit76 wrote:

D'oh. Could appeal the decision, but I wouldn't be confident. What was approx value?

£1500-2000 new for old when included all accessories, upgrades, lock and nick nacks, which is what the policy was for.

webboo

When I was looking for insurance, they emailed me after doing an online quote. They said they might be a bit more expensive than your usual home insurance company but they were cyclists and understood how it is for cyclists. I think they even said other companies don’t pay out in a lot of circumstances where as they do.

joey54321

Webboo wrote:

When I was looking for insurance, they emailed me after doing an online quote. They said they might be a bit more expensive than your usual home insurance company but they were cyclists and understood how it is for cyclists. I think they even said other companies don’t pay out in a lot of circumstances where as they do.

Yeah, I was sold on the same line. I feel like the above situation is one of those cases; common sense seems to inidicate they were locked up to a sufficiently secure anchor point.

big_harv

Lodge a formal complaint, 1st to the insurance company, thereafter be prepared to take it to the FOS. The details are here:

https://www.financial-ombudsman.org.uk

joey54321

Big Harv wrote:

Lodge a formal complaint, 1st to the insurance company, thereafter be prepared to take it to the FOS. The details are here:

https://www.financial-ombudsman.org.uk

Thanks, I'll look in to that.


It's such a shame, insurance companies always seem to make a bad situation worse.

shiznit76

To be honest, it is clear that your bikes have to be locked to a permanent structure, being locked to other bikes is not permanent structure. As much as it galls me, but i think the insurance company will win this battle

Beatmaker

I really feel for you as something similar happened to me as a teen. I would like to think Pedalcover might have been a little more sympathetic than your usual faceless home insurer but it appears legally they don't have to pay out.

slowbike

joey54321 wrote:

Big Harv wrote:

Lodge a formal complaint, 1st to the insurance company, thereafter be prepared to take it to the FOS. The details are here:

https://www.financial-ombudsman.org.uk

Thanks, I'll look in to that.


It's such a shame, insurance companies always seem to make a bad situation worse.

No harm in complaining and taking it as far as you can ... at the moment you stand to lose nothing more than you already have - and everything to gain.

FWIW, I don't bother with specific bike insurance - because the get-out clauses are just too many to make it viable & cost effective.

timothyw

The thing is, they'd have a point if your friends lock had been cut and all four bikes had gone into the back of a van.

But yeah, if they cover that lock, and the anchor point you used isn't the thing that failed, they are basically being bastards.

What lock was it, out of interest?

webboo

I wonder what they would have said had you threaded a chain through your friends lock, then locked your bikes to that.

joey54321

TimothyW wrote:

The thing is, they'd have a point if your friends lock had been cut and all four bikes had gone into the back of a van.

But yeah, if they cover that lock, and the anchor point you used isn't the thing that failed, they are basically being bastards.

What lock was it, out of interest?

A Kyrptonite gold sold secure series 4 evolution lock (I looked it up).

Webboo wrote:

I wonder what they would have said had you threaded a chain through your friends lock, then locked your bikes to that.

Yeah, I am curious about this as well.


Well, I've raised a formal complaint and we'll see what happens. Feel a bit "kicked when I'm down" to be honest but we'll see what happens. Fortunately for me, I can still get to work as I can (though don't like to) commute by car but my partner uses her bike every day to get to work and as her main source of transport.

shiznit76

Keep us up to date how you get on. Hate insurance companies when act like this, but there are that many clauses I only take car, house and contents. Found out the hard way on animal insurance what a shower of you know what they are.

dee4life2005

Well that sucks.

I'm sure most of us would probably consider locking up our bikes in such a fashion, e.g. at club cafe stop etc.
As the tree was undamaged and your friends bikes were still attached ... how is you locking to their bikes really any different to locking your bike to your typical cycle rack in town (they can usually be easily removed with a suitable vehicle with a towbar), given that what you'd locked to was still there.

I'd also argue on the basis that the thief had chosen to break through a Kyrptonite Evolution 4 Gold lock to take your bikes ... thiefs are likely to take the path of least resistence and the fact they've chosen to break your lock over how your friends bikes were attached to the tree speaks to how secure what you attached to was - it does to me anyway.

Were your friends also using gold standard locks? If so, are they saying that you can't lock a bike to an immovable object with a gold standard lock and then lock to that object with another gold standard lock (daisy chaining them).

I think they are just being mean and trying to weasel out of it ... or the insurance rep doesn't understand what you're describing. From experience with insurance companies best of luck, but I can't see a favourable outcome i'm afraid.

pastryboy

shiznit76 wrote:

To be honest, it is clear that your bikes have to be locked to a permanent structure, being locked to other bikes is not permanent structure. As much as it galls me, but i think the insurance company will win this battle

As someone with many years of experience of all kinds of insurance claims, I concur.

This type of exclusion is common in such policies - assuming the policy wording is clear then it was either locked to a permanent structure or it wasn't. You can argue about what you did or didn't do and how you feel it was good enough but your insurance policy is a contract. You agreed to the contract, as written. If you don't fufil your part of it (meeting the security requirements) then they don't have to meet their part of it (pay the claim). I'm assuming the requirement is part of the insuring clause rather than an exclusion but that's probably not an important distinction here.

Insurers aren't stupid, they don't wriggle out of claims as people (who don't understand insurance) make out. What they do is assess the risk and insert clauses and exlcusions to minimise the risk to themselves. Those clauses and exclusion are (usually) set out clearly for anyone who takes the time to look at them.

If you want me to take a look at the repsonse you receive I'm happy to do so to see if there's any holes in it or potential avenues of argument but I'm afraid it's likely to be a disappointing outcome. I'd also want to see a copy of the relevant part of the policy wording too - they don't seem to have it on their website.

As an aside, Pedalcover isn't an insurer - it's just an administrator. Your policy will be underwritten by someone else (I'll take a wild guess at a Lloyd's syndicate). Make it clear you want the undewriter to respond rather than Pedalcover as it will save time later if you want to escalate the complaint.

thistle_

joey54321 wrote:

A Kyrptonite gold sold secure series 4 evolution lock (I looked it up).

Have you got the remains of the lock?
Did that lock come with the anti theft protection?

alex222

I think Axa underwrite the Pedalcover policies

joey54321

So a bit of an update:

- No remains to the lock unfortunately, not sure what anti theft protection is though?

- My friends bike had a decent lock, but is also a very cheap bike, it could be that the easier option was to take mine and my partners (both reasonable value) rather than all 3.

- PedalCover have passed me on to Axa, the underwriter, and it is they who are denying to claim. I have raised a formal complaint and they have to respond within 3 days.

- I also don't hold how much hope, but we'll see what happens. It's not even that big a claim, I would have thought it would be cheaper for them just to pay it to be honest.

Beatmaker

joey54321 wrote:

So a bit of an update:

- No remains to the lock unfortunately, not sure what anti theft protection is though?

- My friends bike had a decent lock, but is also a very cheap bike, it could be that the easier option was to take mine and my partners (both reasonable value) rather than all 3.

- PedalCover have passed me on to Axa, the underwriter, and it is they who are denying to claim. I have raised a formal complaint and they have to respond within 3 days.

- I also don't hold how much hope, but we'll see what happens. It's not even that big a claim, I would have thought it would be cheaper for them just to pay it to be honest.

What happened to the lock out of interest? If you don't have the damaged lock to prove this was cut through to take the bikes, the issue gets less clear, or are you saying you have now disposed of it? Some locks come with a 'sold secure' (or similar) guarantee where they will pay out a fixed amount if the lock was broken to steal a bike.

joey54321

It was taken with the bikes. Apparently, it is quite common according to the police officer I reported my last stolen bike too (~10 years ago).

shiznit76

Suppose they would take the lock as this is most likely going to have their prints/DNA on after forcing it.

Like I say, good luck, but fear the worst to be honest. And also this should be a warning to the rest of us who do the same and on regular basis

andyh01

How you getting on?

It may be worth looking at the Insurance Act 2015 which clarifies a little on what insurers can and can't not do in the event of repudiated claims following breaches.

joey54321

Haven't heard anything for a little while. It was raised to their complaints resolution center and by law, they have 40 days to get back to me. I think it may be a long one

Thanks for the tip, I'll have a look.

joey54321

I got a letter today saying that they have "not upheld my complaint" and that they are still declining my claim.

They say, in writing, "It has been explained that it is a condition of your policy cover that your bicycle is locked to an immovable object when left unattended", so now I need to go back to them once again and offer to once again lock my friends bike to a tree and watch them move it without causing criminal damage.

cooldad

But 'criminal damage' is not what your policy says.

You can raise it with the ombudsman, as I doubt your insurers will budge with your argument.

shiznit76

Have to agree, the chances of you winning this are tiny, the policy has it worded simply, it must be an immovable object, your friend's bike isn't such a beast. This is a simple case for the insurers