It may happen that an insurance company compensated us a sinister well below what we initially expected, and a frequent reason is to have an under-insurance in capital stated in the policy, so we apply a proportional rule to compensation for damage suffered.
At that time the news gets us by surprise and we often remember many people, and not for good as we thought "pay bills religiously since the first exchange company leaves me with the fine print to save money" .
Partly true, but often we see it as our insurance in minutes (by phone, bank office, etc ...) and then spend hours learning or installing our latest e-procurement. Before having to complain, do our work as well insured, ask for advice and ask who should demand it, ie our trusted insurance adviser.
What is under-insurance?
Occurs when the sum insured is less than the actual value of what we are capable. If the value you have stated is under-reported, the amount you paid for the insurance is less than it should have been paid, so in case of loss may be applicable to the dreaded proportional rule. Here are some examples.
We bought the top floor and have a few things, so we assure at least. Years pass, we stabilize, born a child and increase our assets. We have entered gradually into under-insurance situation, since the effect of the content value is greater than the initial capital insured.
Sometimes we declare a value well below the actual value to spare us some money receipts. You may get a small initial savings, but eventually just got to have under-insured, and we can be very expensive because the companies know this fact and is very aware of when assessing claims.
What is the proportional rule?
The formula used to calculate the compensation for partial loss if under-insurance (for total loss the insured only perceives the liquidated damages, if there is any difference is going to charge). Damage in the same ratio between the sum insured and the actual value of the property insured is compensated.
In accident and illness (sick leave), although no under-insurance occurs as such, we can apply this rule if there is an inaccuracy in the statement of risk (age, profession, etc ...) and have known the company accurate information at the time of recruitment would have implemented another price, or even had not assured us in those conditions.
Buy a property with a value in the continent than 100,000 €. Years pass and without realizing its value becomes 150.000 €. Have suffered a fire and damage to the building for 20,000 €, as there is only 33% under-insurance indemnify us for € 13,333.
Content declare € 20,000 and have an accident with damage to it, if the expert opinion is determined that there really € 40,000, the company applied to be a proportional under-insurance of 50% rule, so we will pay half of the damages suffered.
Have secure off work, and declare an occupation for which we paid 30 € per month. We have a claim and it is shown that our activity is not declared but something for which we should have paid € 40 per month. Our compensation will be reduced by the same proportion, 25%.
In short, we can not assure a Ferrari paid as if it were a Fiat, and in case of an accident claim we pay the Ferrari when we have paid insurance for a Fiat.
What can we do about it?
When we value capital is best secured by a little more for less ever since securing goods € 10,000 it costs twice as secure for 5,000 €. Nor secured by an excessive value because it is not right, and we enter into the opposite situation of over-insurance.
To avoid inflation, and having to constantly update the value of the sums insured, you can incorporate some automatic adjustment in the policy (in terms of IPC, a certain%, etc ...) that reassess the sums insured and premiums accordingly. So we avoid or at least limit, the effects of the application of the proportional rule.
You can instruct the company to exclude a good policy, being obviously also excluded from the guarantee. This incident should not enter into the appraisal of goods.
Remember that the Insurance Contract Act provides that the parties by mutual agreement may exclude the application of the proportional rule, even after the conclusion of the contract.
But the simplest thing is to have a trusted insurance adviser who knows us well and keep our contracts under control. It is appropriate to review our insurance with him regularly if there are circumstances that have changed and we can affect our insurance.
0 comments:
Post a Comment