if the exclusions are stated and you willingly accept the terms - why is that a scam ? it only becomes a scam when the claim is refused on grounds that weren't within the agreed policy I have every sympathy for the OP and his loss - but I don't feel at all sorry for people who don't read the full terms of a contract, ignorance has never been good grounds on which to base a defence any insurance company can include or exclude anything and everything as they feel fit, it's up to the purchaser of the policy to ensure an adequate level of cover
Why is the small print very small? - and why is the premium and all the main selling points of the insurance in large letters? All the large print is ok, it looks hunky dory on the surface, but most people dont read the small print. Its a license to steal honest peoples money because they know that largely.people don't read small print..because if they did they probably wouldn't buy the policy.
Dunna worry JP,, Sean's fast turning into the forum clown. He doesn't believe me that the small print is in something about 1/2mm high. He's either never had insurance for anything, or,,, has a solicitor (with a magnifying glass) go through any insurance proposals, before he signs them.
name calling is childish and petty JJ, and it reflects badly on your so call ''trusted'' status - you need to remember that disagreeing with you isn't against the forums rules, however personal abuse is getting back to the topic - believe it or not, all text within an insurance proposal forms the full terms - if you opt not to read all of it .......... I wonder how often folks sign contracts without reading and understanding the full terms ?
Remember also, Sean, that is is in bad taste to discuss small print in front of a guy who has had the misfortune to have his van turned over and he was simply telling us about it. Your response shows no feeling of sympathy for the guy and comes over more as a smug retort that he is somehow culpable because he has fallen foul of small print in an insurance document. Small print in an insurance document does not placate the guys feelings and shows no attempt by you at sympathising. It is clearly an attempt on your part to rub salt in to the wound, the stance one would expect of a forum troll, typical of the equally unsympathetic response from our resident troll, mr silly, whose abrasive remarks appear lower down in the thread. Think about it pal! It is a reflection on your character to drag out a negative and pointless response in the face of misfortune. In other words, what is the point of your argument other than to create ill feeling which you and mr silly are quite at home with.
I think you need to have another read of this thread UP my first comment was to encourage the OP to fight his case if the ins co have refused his claim based on something he didn't agree to when he accepted the policy the small print element of this topic was introduced by others, and added to by others, including yourself
Sean, your very first comment on this thread was "if the ins co has used that clause as reason why the claim is not valid then you must have agreed to having the alarm fitted and the stipulation regards it's being garaged " Not really encouraging SiFi to fight the insurance company. If indeed there is this "clause" in his insurance schedule,, Where do you think he'll find it? What size print do you think it will be in ? ( CLUE,,,,, I bet it's not in large print) .
JJ - just out of curiosity, why did you opt not to quote the rest of my comment ? <em style="font-size: 12px; background-color: #ffffff; font-family: Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif;">''if the ins co has used that clause as reason why the claim is not valid then you must have agreed to having the alarm fitted and the stipulation regards it's being garaged - if you didn't agree to the above when you took out the policy then fight their refusal of your claim, don't just accept their refusal''[/i]
Because, that bit is the second comment you wrote (you know the bit after the first comment.) You also say that SiFi must have agreed to it, so your not really supporting SiFi much ,,, are you ? I think both me and UP have you sussed as a troll. You'd be good on AskFm.
Sean, I'm not desperate, nor have I any wish to "get rid " of you. Just that me (and a few others) would like you to give some thought to the replies you give here on the forum. Some of your replies can be construed as "having a go" at the OP's and others (and not just in this thread) Seems you always have something negative to say about many things on here. (just pointing this out n'all)