SSAA (insurance)

[KWhorenet]

RoginaJack,

I think you will find he was having a go at insurance companies stance, not your post. To me he is suggesting that firearms should just be part of the insurance policy as an item treated no differently to other items, except they are secured more than a tv or toaster therefore less chance of being stolen which I totally I agree.

[RoginaJack]

HHmm, just doesn't read that way to me.

[Warrigul]

Honestly, words fail me!
If you think for 1 second that "weapons" are classified as "just another possession the same as your toaster or TV." by ANY insurance company, and don't have to be listed then go right ahead.
I presume that you checked and confirmed this with your insurance company beforehand?

In my case they are, when I asked- face to face- about firearms I was advised to keep an accurate list and any relevent documentation to be able to prove value in the event of theft. If there were any specific items that were of high value(i.e. over $10,000 or hundreds of years old) let them know (which is no different to an ordinary householder having a McCubbin painting etc) but apart from that as long as they were stored according to the law there was no issue as in comparison to general household items that are stolen, firearm payouts are a drop in the ocean.

I know this isn't the case with many, perhaps most and definately two that I know of but my insurance crowd is pretty good. I won't name them as it brings on all sorts of issues.

Insurance is basically a fee for them taking a risk and as long as the statistics are in their favour they don't care whether it is a $1000 flat screen or a .223 howa- except heaven help you if firearms aren't according to the law as you won't get a cent.

Shop around, don't accept the first or cheapest quote. Common sense really. Any doubt ask your insurance company as the onus(duty of disclosure) is on you.

[Bourt]

HHmm, just doesn't read that way to me.

Wasn't having a go at you, was talking about insurance company policies being BS.

Any other sport is fine.

Your $1,000 golf clubs sitting in the office are covered.

Your $1,000 surf board hung on the wall is covered.

Your $1,000 rifle locked in a safe bolted to the wall? Woah now! We're suddenly scared and won't cover that.

It's crap.

[Redwood]

$25 pa with $100 excess on a claim. Can't go wrong really, can you?

Nope, that's good value by any standard.

[scrolllock]

Honestly, words fail me!
If you think for 1 second that "weapons" are classified as "just another possession the same as your toaster or TV." by ANY insurance company, and don't have to be listed then go right ahead.
I presume that you checked and confirmed this with your insurance company beforehand?

I'm with RACV here in Victoria and asked directly (and read the policy ).

They're the same a Warrigul has mentioned basically. I have to take photos or have receipts of them to prove I had them if they were stolen, just the same as any other possession. I did not have to specify or pay extra for their coverage, they are just treated like another possession.

That's the only company I've been with, no idea about others.

[RoginaJack]

Wasn't having a go at you, was talking about insurance company policies being BS.

Fair enough, sorry.

I'm not with RACV but the other motoring body.

The equation is -
Weapons or "Portable Contents - Sporting and recreational items" account for only 5% of total contents insurance amount but by deleting only
the sporting items reduces the overall costs by some 23%.
Basic excess is $300 per claim and to further reduce the premium, increase excess to $500.
I think that $300 per claim is just too excessive to start with.
Solution.
Upgraded to SSAA Gold membership for $25.00, basic excess is $100, coverage for $25,000. and includes overseas coverage for up to 28 days.
Now, with $25,000 coverage and spare space in the cabinet, there is a beautiful Walnut stocked European B.A. left handed rifle, S/S barrel in 30.06 cal. & Bushnell Scope I was fondly in N.Z. last month. The little bit of threaded tubular metal on the business end could prove a problem over here but I'll work on that. Can't waste all that extra coverage!

Cheers,

[Bourt]

Fair enough, sorry.

It's all good

[Seik]

I think that $300 per claim is just too excessive to start with.

That's the idea, make it not worth your while claiming for small stuff.

[Lorgar]

Above...

I had a window smashed during a break in a while back. The excess was about $80 more than the cost of replacing the window

[Point223]

It's a no brainer

[Sender]

It's a no brainer

If it's not covered in your contents, definitely