Shooting Insurance

[Cosd]

I'd like to approach some local farms to ask is if a friend and I can do some pigeon/rabbit shooting more local to where we live as we currently travel 60 miles away.

 

From What I've read it's best to be insured; Which insurance is the best to go for, which is most recognised?

 

Any advice on this and tips for aproaching farmers greatly apreciated

[Shootingman]

Join BASC.

[ROBLATCH]

i'm insured with the N.G.O half the price for the same cover as i had with basc

[webber]

You pay your money and take your choice; some are better than others. Its BASC for me.

 

webber

[hawkeye]

BASC for me as well

[lurcherboy]

All farmers will recognise BASC insurance and while you can save a lot of money with other organisations you run the risk of the farmer not being familiar with them and possibly saying no.

 

 

LB

[dazza]

another vote for BASC

[Cosd]

another vote for BASC :unsure:

 

 

So what is the annual cost for BASC insurance?

Did I read somehere on the forum that we get discounts as PW members?

[webber]

Sorry no discount for PW members, but have a look here.

http://www.basc.org.uk/content/join

 

webber

[petersclan]

do you have web address for N.G.O

 

many thanks

[David BASC]

All of the shooting organisations offer insurance of between £2 and £10 million.

 

BUT there are a few things that you should look out for.

 

Firstly, the main reason that a land owner will want to make sure you are insured, is to prevent them (the land owner) from being sued if something goes wrong. SO it is important that you check that your policy includes a clause called ' Indemnity to Principal'. This clause in the policy effectively insures the land owner under your policy, so if the land owner gets sued by someone else due to your negligence, then your policy would protect the land owner.

 

Secondly- check what is EXCLUDED from the policy. For example, one shooting organisation policy I know excludes the first £250 of any property damage claim. The vast majority of claims in shooting are for property damage.

 

One policy I know decided not to cover a guy when they found out that several years ago he had been charged with assult.

 

Another policy I know refused to pay a £2000 claim from a part time gamekeeper who injured a dog while feeding pheasants, as they said he was not using a farm vehicle for feeding the birds!

 

Please ask your association to give you a copy of what is called the Key Facts document. This is a policy summary and MUST include all the main EXCLUSIONS on the policy. It is a legal requirement for your insurer to give you this document BEFORE they take your money! If they will not or cannot give it to you , than my suggestion is to walk away- as you have no real idea of what you are buying.

 

Remember, insurance claims in shooting are VERY rare- because we are all responsible, level headed people (we would not have guns if we were not!) And to be honest the chance of any of you being the subject of a claim is very small indeed - probably much less than the chance of you having to make a claim on your motor policy for example. BUT surely you want to be safe in the knowledge that IF you make a claim you will not get any nasty surpises!

 

But given that the chances of making a claim are so small, perhaps your main influence on which membership organisation to join is which one one doing the most to keep your shooting safe...but that is another debate!

 

David

[Cranfield]

David you point out information from other Insurers that failed to pay out on claims, but the BASC has always resisted giving any information on claims they have paid, or rejected.

 

There is the ongoing urban legend that BASC's Insurers are not helpful when dealing with claims and do not pay out.

Until BASC are prepared to release some information, then your quoted examples of other Insurers activities seems rather hypocritical.

[Country Boy]

NO INSURERS ARE KEEN TO PAY OUT, HOWEVER YOU ARE INSURED, WHATEVER THE REASON FOR CLAIMING - YOU WILL HAVE TO FIGHT TOOTH AND NAIL WITH THE INSURERS AND PROBABLY ENLIST (AT GREAT EXPENSE) THE SERVICES OF A CITY SOLICITOR, EVEN MAYBE A BARRISTER.

 

SO ALL YOU SHOOTERS BE VERY CAREFUL, MAKE SURE YOU KNOW WHAT YOU ARE SHOOTING AT, THE TRAJECTORY THE BULLET OR CARTIDGE WILL TAKE AND DISTANCE IT WILL TRAVEL (350YDS FOR A SHOTGUN CARTRIDGE WITH A FOLLOWING WIND AT 45 DEGREES) DON'T POINT YOUR GUN AT ANYTHING YOU DON'T WANT SHOOT, LOADED OR NOT!

 

THE BASC UNDERWRITERS ARE NO DIFFERENT FROM T'OTHERS BUT THE BASC MAY OFFER ADDITIONAL HELP IF YOU DO NEED TO CLAIM.

 

CHEERS C.B.

Edited February 1, 2008 by Country Boy

[David BASC]

As you say Cranfield it is an urban myth! And I cannot remember ever resisting giving information on claims- examples please of my resistance?

 

Also, if anyone can give me details of any claim that BASC has rejected then I will investigate, and publish all the detials that I can.

 

CB is 100% correct in so far as all valid claims have to be paid - UNLESS there is an exclusion in the policy that you were not aware of. This takes me back to the point- get the Key Facts document from your Association or thier insurance provider and a copy of the policy.

 

You should not need to employ a lawyer to have your policy pay out to protect you. Indeed, your policy will often pay for a lawyer to defend you. The other person may well need to engage a lawyer to prove liability of course.

 

David

[Cranfield]

I am not suggesting you have refused to give any information, I am just repeating what has been said for some long time.

 

Just as a matter of interest, how many claims did BASC receive last year and how many were paid out ?

That will help bury the urban legend once and for all.

[David BASC]

Sorry if I mis-understood you.

 

OK, we get on average 60 claims a year and last year (2007) we paid out on around 100 claims - not all of them were claims made in 2007, some were from claims made in 2006,2005,2004.

 

The reason for this is that some claims take a long time to finalise- such as large personal injury claims, where it can take some time - several years in some cases, for the full extent of the injury / disability to be known. In these cases, what is known as interim payments will be made during those intervening years, to pay for nursing care, rehabilitation costs etc until the final extent is known and then a final payment is made to a level that is agreed by the insurance company lawyers and the injured persons lawyers - obviously all legal fees are also paid under the policy.

 

You may not be surprised to hear that on many claims the legal costs outweigh the compensation payment!

 

Property damage claims are much easier and are often settles within a matter of weeks. A broken widow or shot telephone line cannot get any worse, or better, once it has been broken. It is an easily defined cost and so out pops a cheque.

 

Claims rejected- 4 from memory, were 'rejected' because although an initial claim was lodged, the third party (the injured party) did not take it any further. Whether you would count this as a rejection or not I leave to you.

 

One was rejected because the third party could not prove that they had suffered any loss at all - although that case has recently been re-opened at my request, as the third party now claims they have proof.

 

A couple are being very strongly contested as it looks like the claimant is over inflating their loss- eg claiming they could not work when there is strong evidence that they could, and did, or another one where they are claiming loss of future earnings - - when there is no evidence for this at all - certainly not to the level they are claiming.

 

I remember once case, all the way back in '98 where the initial claim was for well over £250,000 - made up largely of loss of earnings from a self employed chap - but his accounts showed that he was earning (or certainly declaring) much less!

 

The larger the claim the greater the chance of it being investigated. I think 10% of all insurance claims are false (not shooting- ALL claims) All Personal injury claim are very closely monitored, as these always have the potential to be very expensive.

 

If you want I will post a summary of claims costs etc. I prepared a slide for a presentation about 18 month ago for a roadshow and would be happy (if I can find it) to post it here - just let me know.

 

Best wishes

 

David

[monkeyjaimz]

I joined BASC this afternoon

[gadgit]

David, I've just been on the site to see what is required as I now want to get the insurance sorted.

 

The BASC site says you are insured for all BASC activities.

 

So if I'm on my own, wondering round my mates farm (with permission) as this is not a BASC organised event, would I be insured? its not clear??

 

And......I've had difficulty, but did find in the end, the cost, and application form. (theres a lot on there)

 

 

All I want to know is that provided I'm authorised to shoot, I'm covered. I presume I have to insure the gun for theft or damage on my home insurance?

 

Thanks

 

Pat.

[webber]

Gadget

 

BASIC do not need to organise your shooting for you to be covered.

 

Hang gliding or sand yaghting are obviously not BASC activities, but shooting is. I trust that you get my drift.

 

 

 

webber

[David BASC]

Webber is spot on. The policy covers BASC recognised activities- shooting, fishing, gundog working/training, conservation, gamekeeping etc provide they are done on a recreational basis- there is not cover for commercial activities under the policy. It doe not have to be an event organised by BASC.

 

On the 'Join Here' page, when you click through to Join Now for the second time, there is a list of all membership categories and costs.

 

I take your point about the first Join Here page- it does look a bit cluttered. We are designing a new 'Join Here'' page that will (I hope!) look alot more clear.

 

Guns and kit are not covered ,as it is a liability policy only with a bit of personal injury cover thrown in.

 

As far as insuring guns for loss or damage, you may wish to ask your home contents insurer in the first instance , but make sure they cover goods away form the home and cover damage by internal explosion. Get it writing that they understand the cover applied to sporting firearms etc that will be used away for the home.

 

Alternatively you can insure them separately. BASC do not offer this service directly at the moment, but there is a company called Sporting Insurance Services who run a product called Gun Sure' they can give you a quote. I do not have their contact details to hand, but if you 'Google' then you will find them.

 

Best wishes

 

David

[Hubbertspeak]

One policy I know decided not to cover a guy when they found out that several years ago he had been charged with assult.

 

 

David

 

Charged or convicted? Charges don't usually come up... Presumably the bloke had failed to disclose his previous conviction(s), which the proposal form would have specifically requested. In my experience of dealing with Insurance claims (one-time loss-adjuster), one of the first things Insurers look for is an escape from paying the claim for justifiable reasons - non disclosure of a material fact gives them that reason, so a word of caution: don't think you can hide convictions or past claims - they will find out and they won't pay up when they do find out. Be honest and, although you may have to pay a slightly higher premium, at least you'll be covered when you need it. (BTW... how the heck did he get a SGC or whatever, when he had a charge/conviction for assault?!!! :blink: )

 

You should not need to employ a lawyer to have your policy pay out to protect you. Indeed, your policy will often pay for a lawyer to defend you. The other person may well need to engage a lawyer to prove liability of course.

 

David

 

I think Country Boy's point was that you might have to employ a lawyer to argue your case for the claim being paid in the event it is repudiated and no insurer is going to pay your lawyer's fees for that. All the policies I've seen specifically exclude costs incurred in submitting a claim (and hence fighting for it to be paid). What you're talking about is paying for a lawyer to defend you against a third party and that's different.

 

Hub.

[Cranfield]

Thanks for the information David, its always nice to have something to show people when they make unsubstantiated comments.

 

I have been a member of BASC for many years, going back to the WAGBI days and the Insurance is way down the bottom of the list of why I joined.

Its a pity they don't offer membership discounted of the Insurance cover, some of us that are well insured elsewhere would really appreciate that.

[David BASC]

Hub,

 

He was convicted of assult- sorry not to make that clear- and he was only looking for insurance to cover airgun shooting. I cannot see how an assult charge can be counted as a material fact in regard to a public liability policy, especially a conviction on a 17 / 18 year old who made a daft mistake / wrong place wrong time, who before and since has had a blemish free record.

 

Costs incurred in submitting or indeed substantiating a valid claim would be recoverable. Costs incurred trying to substantiate a claim that was not valid would not be recoverable. PL policies should cover both parties costs in the event of a successful claim.

 

Also, in most cases I have dealt with over the past 13 years (about 1000) the vast majority are not contested, as liability is admitted pretty quickly, hence the third party lawyers roll is more down to establishing the level of loss as opposed to proving liability in the first place.

 

I do not know how land ago you were involved in insurance, but under current rules the insurer has just 90 days to admit or deny liability, and there are plans afoot to reduce this even further. In days gone by there was no limit- which in my opinion was not fair on the person making the claim.

 

Cranfield,

 

I am glad that the insurance cover is way down the list of why you joined- so it should be- BASC is much more than just a provider of insurance. The insurance cover for members is enshrined within the BASC constitution- ie if you are a member you are covered up to the pint that you are no longer a member- so unless there is a motion and successful vote at AGM this will remain the case.

 

 

David

[Hubbertspeak]

David,

 

Nice intellectual argument.

 

A material fact is virtually anything an insurance underwriter wants it to be (or at least what he thinks will stand up in court). Non-disclosure of criminal convictions will always be considered a material fact in any brand of insurance, regardless of how long ago I practised insurance, since insurance is based on the fundamental principal of uberrimae fides – utmost good faith. If you have a criminal record, regardless of relevance to the insurance, you must declare it, or you risk voidance of your insurance at any time (usually when least convenient!). As an insurance representative, you cannot possibly advocate any other course of action.

 

I think (and Country Boy can correct me if I’m wrong) Country Boy and I were erring towards Physical Damage claims rather than Public Liability ones and, to an extent, you are correct regarding the latter. If, however, I considered myself to be liable for some PL damage/injury, and so did my solicitor, but my insurers did not, my insurers would not pay for my solicitors fees to argue against my own insurers (unless it went to court, and I won, of course, in which case that would be subject to judicial review, not policy wording) which I believe is the point Country Boy was making.

 

You know what? Unless you black ball me :blink: , I’ll still take out BASC membership, simply because I agree with Cranfield, that it’s not even the biggest reason to take out membership – it’s only a small part. But I’ll only ever consider insurance to be there for when the serious **** hits the fan, not for when some smart **** thinks he can make a buck :blink: .

 

Hub.

[russ91]

im with basc :blink: :blink: :blink: