Football club claims wording of policy clause ‘ambiguous’

Dunstable Town Football Club has filed a complaint with the Financial Ombudsman over what it believes is unclear policy wording on an HSBC policy underwritten by Allianz.

The club claimed in February for a collapsed roof and two stolen plasma televisions but was told that because it was underinsured, the claims settlement would be reduced. Its contents had a declared value of £16,100, but the value of the contents’ and tenants’ improvements was at least £31,000.

Gary Lane, head of claims consultant Insco which is representing Dunstable, said Allianz should not have reduced the claim because the underinsurance clause had ambiguous wording.

“As the sum of £16,100 [declared value] is not less than the cost of replacing the two [plasma] screens at the inception of the period of insurance, [Allianz] is not entitled to proportionately reduce our client’s claim,” he said.

But in a letter to Lane on 23 March, Allianz said: “Our policy wording is a standard wording used in the market and is well understood by brokers and policyholders . . . nobody could anticipate at inception what the value of damage that may or may not occur in the future will be.”