Follow this topicFollow this topic Knowledge » Home insurance

Claiming on home insurance costs up to six times the excess

Neil Faulkner
by Lovemoney Staff Neil Faulkner on 24 August 2012  |  Comments 12 comments

It's not worth claiming on your home insurance policy until the cost of an incident is substantially above the excess.

Claiming on home insurance costs up to six times the excess

If you claim on your home insurance, you pay for the excess. But it also costs you in a double-hit of cancelled no claims bonuses and raised premiums for up to five years afterwards.

That's why it's not worth claiming until the cost of the incident is substantially above the excess.

Putting the excess to the test

I compared six insurers offering excesses of £50 or £100 total excess. If you had an incident costing £200, all of these insurers would recover the entire claim through resulting higher home insurance premiums in following years.

In fact, the total cost of claiming would work out at two to four times the excess.

Sometimes you'd be even more out of pocket, with your total costs rising to nearly £300 instead of the £200 if you'd paid for the incident yourself.

This means you could potentially pay six times more than the policy excess a result of claiming on your home insurance.

I also compared another four insurers offering an excess of £150 to £250, based on making a claim for an incident worth £200 more than the excess. Two of those four recovered their entire payouts in following years through higher premiums. The other two clawed back at least £100 extra.

All the banks fared particularly badly in these tests.

Think carefully before claiming

So, whatever excess you choose when arranging your home insurance, it seems you're looking at paying an extra £100 to £200 over and above the excess.

So long as you understand this, it doesn't necessarily mean you're being ripped off. It just means you should think carefully before claiming for incidents unless they are more costly.

Shopping around after a claim

However, you can reduce the extra costs of higher post-claim premiums by being disloyal. You can regularly save money by shopping around for home insurance, but this is particularly the case after a claim.

Each insurer tries to attract different sorts of customer. Some price more attractively for those who have made no claims, while others try to get the market for those who have claimed. The nub is: if your insurer was cheap before you made any claims, it's not likely to be competitive afterwards.

If the renewal price barely budges, on the other hand, your insurer is probably already very expensive.

Note also that some insurers, especially banks again, won't always lower their premiums even if you gain another year's no claims bonus. Others will reward you better.

Quirkily, some insurers increase their prices if your claims history gets better. This is likely an anomaly based on statistics. An insurer might have found that someone with one year's no claims bonus is more likely to claim than someone with no bonus whatsoever.

That's the insurance market for you.

Compare properly to save the most

To reduce your total cost of claim to less than the excess plus £100, you might need to play around with the voluntary excesses when using comparison services such as lovemoney.com.

Increasing the voluntary excess can shave £20 plus from your premium while simultaneously lowering the total excess you have to pay.

This happens because insurers with a low compulsory excess can be boosted up the table. It happened in several of my tests.

If you're looking to buy both buildings and contents insurance, you should also compare them both combined and individually, to see which is cheapest for you each year.

More on home insurance:

Compare home insurance quotes

Home insurance: check your provider isn't hiding the best deal

Homeowners in flood-risk areas face insurance nightmare

Home insurance: the features you can't do without

What you can't claim for

Enjoyed this? Show it some love

Twitter
General

Comments (12)

  • marram
    Love rating 46
    marram said

    It's truly disgusting that you could pay for years without claiming, and then when you DO make a claim they punish you by recouping the money. What about all the years of pure profit? They should take into account all the time you have paid them and got absolutely nothing back.

    I know that's the nature of insurance, that you may never get the money back, I know they are in it to make a profit, but all the same, there should be a limit to how much they can recoup. Otherwise, it could work out better for smaller losses if you simply keep a 'loss fund' somewhere which you pay into every month and forget the household insurance altogether. It would be an interesting comparison.

    The problem, of course, would be if the worst happens - a fire, or a gas explosion or something truly devastating. That is when there is no alternative to insurance. Few people could cover the cost of replacing everything in the house. As usual, they have you over a barrel. And they know it.

    Report on 24 August 2012  |  Love thisLove  5 loves
  • smithdom
    Love rating 34
    smithdom said

    I had my wallet stolen from a locked hotel room, and being a good citizen I told my insurance company about it because that is what you are supposed to do. The hotel eventually compensated me fully without admitting liability of course. There was never any intent on my part to claim. Having suffered this theft I am now less likely to suffer a similar theft again because once bitten twice shy. However, my insurance company with which I had been insured for many years rewarded my honesty with a significant hike in premium.

    Needless to say I am no longer insured with that company.

    Report on 24 August 2012  |  Love thisLove  2 loves
  • MK22
    Love rating 142
    MK22 said

    Don't forget that an insurance company is a business and is in business to make a profit. THIS year. Without making a profit there will be no money for dividends for the shareholding bosses, sorry, dividends to help pay your pension. Mind you. Polly Peck was a business too.....

    Report on 24 August 2012  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • electricblue
    Love rating 643
    electricblue said

    So the alternative to an insurance company being in business and making a profit for those who take risks would be precisely what? Plenty of Lloyds names have lost EVERYTHING over the years. I am totally fed up of all the whining about any company or individual making a profit or getting a bonus. If all the whiners were paid for sitting on their backsides then the economy would be booming? Insurance makes the wheels of business turn and is absolutely vital to modern society. Capitalism is flawed for sure but in the realms of insurance I know many people who have been saved from absolute devastation in their lives thanks to insurance. My experience of making a very large claim with Direct Line due to water damage was very positive, aside from a particularly obnoxious loss adjuster - but he was not directly employed by the insurer and was obviously paid on the basis of what he could shave off a claim. Didn't work in my case, he ended up adding extra due to the aggravation and stress he caused.

    Report on 24 August 2012  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • DavidDale
    Love rating 10
    DavidDale said

    Your article caught my eye as I have just had the quote for renewal of my house and contents insurance. They had been separate but three years ago I took out a combined policy with Direct Line with extra personal possessions cover for my camera equipment at a considerable saving over what I had been paying before. Following an unfortunate incident a year and a half ago which resulted in my camera and I taking an involuntary swim in the sea I had to make a claim. The premium last year went up quite a lot which I presumed was due to loss of a bonus as a result of the claim, which was fair enough, but as it has gone up again this year I thought I would get other quotes. I got a promising quote of £270 from LV which was £70 less than Direct Line's renewal but as the online form didn't seem to cover previous personal possessions claims, I rang LV to check it wasn't necessary to declare it. It turned out it was and their quote went up to £405, now nearly £70 more than Direct Line so I won't be moving for the time being.

    What is interesting is that the LV criteria were clearly not based on risk. As you suggest it seems to more a way of clawing back what has been paid out although in this case it wasn't LV that paid it. They only wanted to know that a claim had been made in the last three years. They did not want to know how much it was for, (£2,500), or that it was the only claim I have made in over thirty years of having insurance cover so I am not an accident prone individual. I am now better aware of the risks of standing near the edge of a quay while my peripheral vision is restricted by having a camera to my eye and more wary of such a situation. The chance of something similar happening again is thus reduced, not increased, and I am an even better insurance risk than I was before.

    I don't think it would be worth separating the house and contents insurance again but it would be nice to know how the individual components of the house, contents and the personal possessions cover, and the claim on the latter, affect the final quote. The renewal notice only gives the one figure.

    Finally, it was my first claim and I anticipated it would be normal practice for the insurers to make it as difficult as possible for me to replace the camera and lens. My experience was the exact opposite and I was very impressed with the speed and helpfulness with which Direct Line settled my claim.

    Report on 24 August 2012  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • oldhenry
    Love rating 266
    oldhenry said

    It is just what youwould expect really. I alaways remember a Mont Pythn sketch where M Palin was selling a' No Claims Policy'. I suppose the client did not hear it right until he wanted to cliam , then he heard properly!

    I believe there is a lot of dodgy claims in insurance , and bumped up losses thathave to be paid for. I recall a friend who having chip a bath made sure teh wholwe suite was replaced. What a waste! I do not balme a company for bumping hs insurance up, he could have lived with teh damage until the bathroom suite was worn out. But many seem tehthink they want to get 'their money back' by claiming- it does not work. I suppose it does if you have a toatl loss , it wuld be hard to get a few £100K back in a couple of years' premiums.

    Report on 24 August 2012  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • MK22
    Love rating 142
    MK22 said

    Oh the irony of it, electricblue whinging on Lovemoney about people who whinge on Lovemoney. Quite made my afternoon.

    Report on 24 August 2012  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • Tanni
    Love rating 91
    Tanni said

    Thi insurance industry and it's associated rectifying industry are money Pitts. Yes we are covered in the event of a claim, but the amount of clauses the insurers use to get out of settling a claim in full are scandalous. I came across a car insurance company which uses a premium phone line costing 50p or more a minute...talk about not wanting to talk to us!

    I will find a link for a broker and put it on here soon. This broker is straight talking when it comes to house insurance and they are rather competitive in the market...watch this space.

    Report on 24 August 2012  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • CuNNaXXa
    Love rating 362
    CuNNaXXa said

    Take my mother. She has had an impeccable driving record, not making a claim since she passed her driving test back in the seventies. So, how do the insurance companies reward such a careful driver? They make her pay for all the bad drivers!

    So, how many bad drivers are there?

    I drive to work and back for five days of the week, which is a 32 mile round trip. In two years of driving the same route, there has only been one accident I have seen.

    There may be more and more people driving without insurance, and more bad drivers, but what percentage of ALL the drivers on our roads do these two groups represent? 0.5%? 0.2%? 0.05%?

    If these two groups were even 1% or more, we'd be seeing more and more crashes and bad driving on a daily basis, but we don't. In fact, I think the insurance companies inflate how bad the situation is so that they can justify hiking prices as they have been. After all, with all those whiplash injuries, shouldn't half the people walking around Tescos be wearing neck braces?

    I'd love to know the percentage of good drivers to bad drivers, but I bet the insurance companies would love to be able to hide those facts.

    Oh, and the law doesn't help either. My friend was in a collision with a drunk driver who had no insurance, and no license. The drunk was known to the police when they arrived to arrest him. So, what will happen to him? His ban will probably be extended, and he may get a little bit of community service, which he will probably skip. He will acquire yet another car, get drunk again, and kill someone next time.

    Then they will really throw the book at him, and ban him from driving for life. He probably won't care, because he is always drunk (on state handouts, by the way).

    If car accidents were investigated more thoroughly, and criminal convictions given to those where drivers were proven to be reckless, then maybe less idiots would be tempted to overtake when it is obviously dangerous. After all, if points means prizes, and the top prize was three years in prison, more people would be more careful.

    Also, attached a custodial sentence to fraudulent claims, and watch them drop off as well, although I think that they are also a minority.

    The majority of people who pay insurance premiums are honest and genuine, and a very small minority abuse the system. I don't think that premiums should be affected as much as they are, but I am just restating what I have said earlier.

    Report on 24 August 2012  |  Love thisLove  1 love
  • MK22
    Love rating 142
    MK22 said

    What CuNNaXXa says makes a lot of sense. Can anyone explain why killing someone with a car is OK, but hopelessly wrong if you do it with a knife? Mind you, bearing in mind how many people do the Lottery for the chance to escape their drab dull wretched lives (copyright Tom Lehrer) I think we can safely assume some people will do anything for money.

    Report on 25 August 2012  |  Love thisLove  0 loves
  • marghurl
    Love rating 6
    marghurl said

    Has anyone else out there received a letter from More Than expounding their wonderful Home Ins policy? I was quite impressed by letter and gave their Phone operator the code on the letter to proceed with Insurance. She then said - is the name correct'. When I checked I noticed that the end of my name was miss spelt. She then said we would have to go through the whole insurance as this insurance was null and void. When I suggested that the insurance depended on my house and not my name ( the ending could be rectified) I was told quite curtly that she could not do this. So we proceed to go through insurance bit by bit. When we came to the end of it, far from being an astounding policy turned out to be £200 more than(!) I am already paying..........................what a scam; for you to ring them back. In my opinion they had no intention of honouring this letter at all. Be ware out there.

    Report on 25 August 2012  |  Love thisLove  1 love
  • CuNNaXXa
    Love rating 362
    CuNNaXXa said

    @ marghuri...

    One of the most common scams is from loan companies who demonstrate how much you would repay on a £10,000 loan. When you go through the process, though, the monthly figure seems to increase, as does the APR.

    When questioned about this, they have numerous excuses such as they have to take into account individual circumstances (if you have a 'T' in your name, that is an additional 0.02% increase), or that the letter was generic in nature, or that the rate of interest has changed since the mailshot.

    Life is one big scam. Always remember that they WANT what we EARN, and they have created some very creative ways to convince us to part with our money.

    For example, buy your car insurance from GoCompare, and get a whopping 1,000 Nectar points. WOW!!! Until you realise that 1,000 Nectar points is worth £5. wow!

    Report on 30 August 2012  |  Love thisLove  2 loves

Post a comment

Sign in or register to post a reply.

Our top deals

Credit card
company
Balance transfers rate and period Representative
APR
Apply
now

Barclaycard 27Mth Platinum Visa

0% for 27 months (3.5% fee) Representative 18.9% APR (variable) Apply
Representative example: assumed borrowing of £1,200, representative 18.9% APR (variable). Purchase rate 18.9% PA (variable). BT fee is reduced from 3.9% to 3.5% (T&Cs apply).

NatWest Platinum MasterCard

0% for 26 months (2.65% fee) Representative 18.9% APR (variable) Apply
Representative example: assumed borrowing of £1,200, representative 18.9% APR (variable). Purchase rate 18.95% PA (variable).

Royal Bank of Scotland Platinum MasterCard

0% for 26 months (2.65% fee) Representative 18.9% APR (variable) Apply
Representative example: assumed borrowing of £1,200, representative 18.9% APR (variable). Purchase rate 18.95% PA (variable).
W3C  Thank you for using CGWEBLIV3