Bure Valley Railway

I’m reminded of an old “This is David Lander” sketch (a Stephen Fry spoof about an investigative reporter, à la Roger Cook). He was investigating an insurance company who wouldn’t pay out against a house fire. Their reasoning being that the policy required the householder to take all precautions against a fire. A fire nonetheless occurred; ergo all precautions by definition couldn’t have been taken, thus voiding the policy. “Have you ever paid out against that policy?” “Well, now I come to think of it Mr Lander, I don’t believe we ever have”.

While I can see the point @D1039 is making, ultimately I agree with @damianrhysmoore that there is a risk that if insurers don’t pay out, in future people may simply feel taking out the insurance is of no benefit, and act accordingly.

Tom

 

Being picky, expectations of payment (as here) aren't what matters, it's a legal contract between the policyholder and insurer. What's in the policy and the law count, not what the policyholder thinks it reasonably should do.

Correct. To simplify, three categories of policyholder:

Consumer policies (individuals in their private capacity)
Small businesses or charities (fewer than 50 employees or a turnover of less than £6.5 million a year)
Large businesses

I would expect the seller in this case to have been a broker rather than insurer.

Patrick

EDIT: Insurers expect to pay £900m of business interruption claims, plus an amount for policies arranged in Lloyd's and the London market https://www.abi.org.uk/news/news-ar...rs-according-to-latest-estimate-from-the-abi/.

 

Actually, I would say expectations do matter. Not so much in relation to existing contracts, but rather in terms of the willingness in the future for organisations to enter into new contracts if their expectation is that the insurer will be loathe to pay out.

Tom

 

Indeed but where contract and expectation are at significant variance and that is seen as against natural justice, then there may be consequences for the attractiveness of certain types of insurance in the future and the reputation of some insurers....and deservedly so...and governments may step in to penalise companies that have effectively sold useless insurance. I can see some justification in them claiming a 'tax' from the insurance sector to cover costs they made good, where expectation was the risks were insured - edit Tom beat me to it

 

From the article on the news at 13:00 today seems the industry position is pretty much not to pay out but hope the government bail them out.

 

Insurance is really just gambling in a different form - they are betting you won't claim, you are betting that they will actually payout when you need them...

...unfortunately, the dice are heavily loaded in their favour, and by the time you find out if they play fair or not, it's too late

 

Welcome to the world of 'product design'. The Financial Conduct Authority (not the government) conduct 'thematic reviews' of different areas of insurance and - should they find a product area has a high incidence of failed claims or low payouts - it intervenes. I've had experience of some of these reviews. 'Add ons' and premium finance are two that come to mind.

Products are also rated - see Defaqto

Some insurers do have better or worse records for paying out. The brokers for whom I worked included this in their recommendations and the insurers with whom they chose to place business (translation, they minimised using insurers which were more difficult).

Repeat after me - 'natural justice' does not exist. It's a legal contract :-D

In direct 'small commercial' sales (insurer to policyholder) there are requirements for summaries of cover with common exclusions highlighted, and policy wordings to be provided. Where intermediated (insurer > broker > policyholder) the broker has 'ICOBS' responsibilities to set out the policyholder's demands and needs and how the product is suitable. Regulation is designed to minimise nasty surprises: where there are significant differences between contract and expectation it can be because of fault by the insurer or broker, but in my experience it's often the policyholder hasn't adequately explained what they want or hasn't read what's been provided.

It is a very (I stress very) highly regulated sector. My view is that policyholders are overwhelmed by the volume of information now required to be provided, and don't read it all. But that's a different issue.

Patrick

 

There is no dispute between us. I don't disagree with your analysis...and I don't expect the Bure Valley Railway has a leg to stand on, sadly...but this will (further) harm the reputation of the insurance industry and will, I suspect make a lot of people review whether their business continuity insurance is worth having. Much as I cancelled my mortgage protection when I realised that my impending compromise agreement meant I'd get nothing...and wouldn't ever bother again

 

Thanks.

Andrew Barnes, the owner of the BVR, seems an interesting figure. Worked as a client manger for the Royal Bank of Canada investor services. He's in the press in March, "threatening to take the council to the watchdog". In the press again in April saying his insurance brokers "made sure we were covered".

I'd still like to think there's an outcome whereby their insurer is persauded this is a peril under the policy, or to make an ex gratia payment. I'm sure his brokers do too.

Patrick

 

You don't know what you're insured for, until you try to claim.

 

In happier times...

Sent from my Pixel 3a using Tapatalk

 

I do thnk that the BVR's couplings are -unusual!

 

Gartell's Light railway uses a similar set up with 50mil hitch ball and a two-sockets-bolted- together link. It seems to work, and is presumably cheaper than a Jones-Calthrop or chopper type, but I can't see why it is better than a link-and-pin type, other than avoiding the risks associated with putting your hand in between two coupler pockets.

 

One thing that struck me with this type of coupling is that accurate alignment is required to get the socket to latch on the ball


Sent from my SM-A105FN using Tapatalk

 

Didn't a previous owner have a vested interest in either fitting towing equipment to road vehicles or selling towing equipment to garages? Or something like that???!!!

Will

 

Those ZBs are big engines for 15 inch gauge.

I do think the tank engines are better looking than the tender ZBs though.

 

Well, the tender ones actually look like, erm, ZBs...
https://www.flickr.com/photos/megaanorak/31958633327


Sent from my Pixel 3a using Tapatalk

 

The 'Overhang' is nowhere nearer the VofR Loco's though

 

Sent from my Pixel 3a using Tapatalk

 

Oops, mucked that up. It was supposed to be a comparison of the BVR loco "John of Gaunt" (formerly Thunderer) which has a VoR inspired outline, and an actual VoR loco from the same angle. Hopefully this time I'll manage it:


Sent from my Pixel 3a using Tapatalk