Please note: Winter sports activities are insured subject to the appropriate premium having been paid, if using a recognised piste. Random ‘off piste’ winter sports activities will only be insured if with a qualified instructor or in a group of not less than 3 persons in possession of working communications or portable telephone. No cover for winter sports activities against local authority advice
This is a change from last year (I keep all documentation and checked) and, as far as I'm concerned, a deal breaker as sometimes it is just the missus and I off piste together.
Hopefully Dunx can clear this up, but if not then I'm in the market for new insurance.
Club Membership
It is still better than most other policys which require you to be with a guide.
What is it with insurance threads the past few days!!
Flickr
a lot of the other insurance out there will only cover all equipment up to ~£500. in that respect, the scuk insurance is in a class of it's own.
PM me. Suffice to say it's another club... but not a snowboarding one!
Flickr
• Big-foot skiing, cross-country skiing, curling, dog sledding, glacier skiing, ice skating, off-piste skiing / snowboarding, mono-skiing, skiing, recreational ski racing, ski touring (including where
ropes are involved for safety reasons) snowboarding, snowparks, snowshoeing, sledging, snow blading, telemark and tobogganing.
Searching through the rest of the document there are no exclusion clauses for off-piste.
I haven't purchased this yet (my SCUK cover takes me til the end of March), but unless something changes, looks like this will be the way I go.
My policy is even worse - doesn't even mention wintersports at all - but I've been assured by the broker that its covered. All it says is I mustn't knowingly endanger my life or partake in activity for which I don't have reasonable skills.
Deliciously vague. Could be interpreted as "you can go off piste if you're reasonably skilled rider and obey local avalanche guidance" - or perhaps "you can only go off piste if you are personally a fully qualified mountain guide".
Oh well, hope I never actually find out.
Less than £50 for a family of 4 for a year, covers you for your summer holiday aswell.
Off piste with no guide covered. £13 for a individual single trip.
Don't over pay for large amounts of luggage or equipment cover as you are probably covered on your house insurance already.
Had to make a claim last year and it was hassle free
a) started quoting me higher rates for my renewals that the price shown on the website
b) quietly slipped in an exemption for travelling to Cuba, slavishly following scummy American foreign policy after they were bought up by the fast-failing AIG group.
Even, more disgracefully, I've just notice that the Direct Insurance site is extremely misleading about this, as Cuba is in their online travel guide without any mention that you wouldn't actually be covered by their insurance.
Frankly, I wouldn't trust Direct Insurance as far as I could kick them.
Henry's has had a similar discussion going for some weeks
Facebook: www.facebook.com/leecasey
Google+: www.leecasey.com
I'm perfectly happy with my SCUK policy in all other respects, would just like to know that if I do venture off a pisted run and play between runs, or whatever that I am appropriately insured to do so.
In insurance terms, it's like being pregnant, or not. You cannot be 'a little bit' off piste.
I contacted TGIC regards my SCUK policy to see if I'd be eligible for a refund, as my group size was only going to be two in the end and I wouldn't be covered for off-piste.
They responded with:
As such the agreement is that you are covered to ski/board off piste providing you are accompanied and that you adhere to local safety rules and the remaining policy conditions.
In light of this would you like to keep this policy in place?
We are in the motions of amending the policy wording and updated the documents so on your next purchase your documents will be correct and current.
I have replied asking whether the new policy documents would affect my insurance, or whether the policy documents issued to me at the time of purchase would still be in effect.
Result!
Update: Just got off the phone for a quick conversation and the nice lady at TGIC explained to me that, I haven't traveled on the policy yet, so I can use the email she sent me as an endorsement should I need to claim. Meaning that I can go off-piste with just myself and my trip buddy on this coming trip as per the new wording that's soon to be updated on their site.
I'd get in contact with them yourself, for your own email/endorsement if you're also in the same situation and travelling soon in the meantime, though it was said that someone would contact the SCUK Don's with some information soon to post about it!
I got the email earlier today which is a very long time after the changes were made. Had I not been an active member of this forum I would have had no idea I wasn't covered off-piste with just one other person.
The wording they sent with the email still says that you must be in a group of at least 3 people so I've just emailed back asking them to clarify how they can change the wording after I have already paid for the policy, if they are in fact changing the off-piste cover to a minimum of 2 people, and whether this will apply to my policy if they are.
Flickr
They told me that the email they'd sent me (not the one everyone seems to be getting, one in reply to my question about a refund) could be used as an endorsement of the fact that I am allowed to use the 'new' policy wording which will be on their site soon. I doubt I'm getting any special treatment, so those with cover already in place should probably email them and ask directly themselves.
They can't change a contract, but I can't see (I'm no lawyer) why they can't agree in retrospect to provide cover where they previously weren't for free as the consumer doesn't lose out in any way?
Can't agree more though about the documents/changes and not updating people, Dunx posted on Jan 31st this year with the policy changes, so they've only been active for a single month and are being removed.. makes it seem a little like they didn't think it through fully.
At the end of the day, I'm just glad they've decided to change the policy wording to what they are and that I'll be covered for off-piste in a party of two, without having to look elsewhere!
"you are accompanied by, or accessible to, an experienced and/or suitably
qualified instructor or guide"
which isn't the wording the for the SCUK policy anyway!
If the 2-person unaccompanied conditions do apply retrospectively then I will be more than happy but not too happy with this so far, will wait and see what they have to say in their reply.
Flickr