because of an unknown clause, his insurance refuses to compensate him in full

Francine and her husband are building a house in Auvergne. Victims of a construction site theft, they were only partially compensated by their insurance because of a common but little-known clause in insurance contracts.

Francine is used to double days. Since February she has not only been a childcare worker, she has also become Madame Bricolage. Indeed, with her husband, they build their own house, in Ravel, near Clermont-Ferrand. Work is progressing well, but in early August, in the middle of the night, burglars break into the site and steal windows, a bay window, and the front door. Parts just laid and installed.

The couple lodged a complaint for theft and then turned to their insurance for compensation. But if their house is well covered, their insurer, the AGPM, only offers them 1,000 euros out of the 14,000 damages. It’s the cold shower for the couple:

“For me, I was assured, I was calm. I said to myself, there is no problem, everything will be taken care of. But not at all…”, Francine explains to us.

“We are insured to the maximum. We would not have been at the maximum, what would we have had in fact? This is something that I do not understand: we are forced to take out insurance that we pay for every month, and when such a tile happens to us, we find ourselves up against the wall and we can’t do anything,” she laments to RMC.

A common practice

Francine immediately made a claim but again the AGPM refused to compensate further. Indeed, the insurance has the right not to reimburse it in full. The contract states that before the windows and doors are installed, they are considered furniture and are fully reimbursed in the event of theft. But the second these joineries are installed, they become what is called “real estate by destination” and in this case, it is not the same level of compensation.

This practice exists with many insurers. But Francine never knew, nor was told, when she signed her insurance contract:

“Our counselor didn’t even know about this article,” she explains.

“It’s their job to warn customers, especially in buildings where the materials are becoming more and more expensive. There will be more and more thefts, more and more people affected, and it would be nice to have more support, more explanations on all these guarantees that we can have at the level of insurance and that we insured do not know completely.

A goodwill gesture

The “RMC is committed to you” team nevertheless called the insurer, hoping for a commercial gesture. The AGPM was very responsive. Even if it is within its rights, it recognizes that there is a lack of consistency between the damage suffered and the amount of compensation.

She will therefore make a gesture: the couple will be compensated up to 9,000 euros, or ten times the original amount. The AGPM also undertakes to work on this famous real estate clause by destination in order to better compensate this type of claim.

Joanna Chabas and Elise Denjean with Maxime Martinez

Leave a Comment