Wiremu* rang his insurer to specify an engagement ring on his contents policy. Five years later, the ring was stolen, together with other household items, in a house burglary. Wiremu’s claim was accepted, and the insurer said it wouldn’t pay more than the specified sum insured for the ring. Wiremu wasn’t happy as it cost more than this to replace the ring.
Wiremu said he’d understood the ring would be replaced, regardless of the specified value. But the policy stated the specified sum insured was the maximum the insurer would pay. The IFSO Scheme case manager listened to the phone conversation Wiremu had with his insurer when he specified the ring, and found the insurer had not misrepresented the cover.
Complaint not upheld.
*Names have been changed.