Having insurance for your portable valuables can often be worth it, writes Georgina Crouth.
After attending a wedding at a country hotel, you wake up in your hotel room to find your property damaged due to a storm. It’s enough to cast a pall on a happy occasion. Who's to blame though?
Heinrich Reynecke wrote to me recently about his experience at a hotel in Muldersdrift.
He attended a wedding with his girlfriend, stayed over but awoke the following morning to find his iPhone dead – literally dead in the water after their room flooded during a heavy storm.
The hotel’s defence? It’s an act of God. After all, you can’t blame the hotel for the weather, or can you?
The hotel’s insurance will cover the damage but isn't willing to cover the excess, which is R2 500.
Reynecke wrote: “I went to bed on the left side of the bed closest to the front door. There was no bedside table, so I was forced to place my cellphone on the floor next to the bed.
"During the early hours of the morning there was a thunderstorm and rain (not a "freak storm", a thunderstorm which is normal on the Highveld). When I woke up later that morning to go the bathroom, I was walking in water and realised my phone was drenched, lying in the water.
“The rainwater ran into the room underneath the front door. Hertford Hotel was or is negligent and should be held liable by not making the basic space available (bedside table) for the client to place his property safely away from dangers like flooding. Furthermore, the hotel was negligent and should be held liable for not placing water-stops, ridges or gullies in front of the doors, knowing there would be potential for flooding during rains, which could lead to insurance claims due to either damage to the customers’ property or the hotel’s.”
The hotel though, believes it has done all it can – and its insurance will cover the damage, but Reynecke must pay the excess.
“Our insurers had initially repudiated the claim as the hotel was found to be not negligent," general manager Paul Rindel wrote. "They then agreed to settle the claim less the excess on an ex gratia basis due to the urging of our insurance brokers. Because the hotel was found not to be negligent, the claim was not agreed to be settled and thus the ex gratia offer.
“The storm was severe, (a one-in-100-year event) and the room has never flooded before. The guest made the decision to place his cellphone on the floor although there was a table and ledge upon which his phone could have been left overnight. The storm damage was completely fortuitous and as such it was deemed an accident. He could claim under his own all-risk policy.
“We, the hotel, have done everything in our power to assist our guest. We take an extremely dim view of our guest running to the media to gain satisfaction notwithstanding our attempts to assist him.”
To be clear, approaching the media to highlight a grievance is Reynecke’s right and my job as a journalist is to confront abuses. But while I endeavour to resolve as many complaints as possible, not all of them are going to go in the consumer's favour.
I spoke to Ria van Niekerk, an attorney in Centurion, about the matter:
“Acts of God are events that are the result of natural forces and which arise without human intervention (there’s no one to blame),” Van Niekerk told me.
“An act of God would fall under such insurance perils as storm, wind, flood, hail or snow, lightning, fire, earthquake, meteorite, or similar type of occurence.
“By way of example: in a recent incident, a number of corrugated iron roofing sheets were blown off of a building by gale-force winds. Some of the sheets subsequently caused damage to motor vehicles in a neighbouring property. One of the vehicles was uninsured and as such, the vehicle owner demanded compensation from the body corporate.
"(But) the cause of the loss is deemed an act of God and as such, there is no liability on the part of the body corporate. The damage to the vehicle may be claimed for against a motor policy.”
In this case though, the hotel cannot be blamed.
“Unfortunately, (I do not think) the hotel guest has a claim against the hotel. (It’s probably best that) the guest should accept the settlement offer from the hotel to settle the claim less the excess on an ex gratia, basis.”
Reinecke is not persuaded by Rindell’s response or the fact his claim is probably “dead in the water”.
“Wow, I don’t know whether to laugh or cringe. The arrogance! I was forced to pay the excess on my own just so that their insurance can pay out the claim, because they refused,” he said.
You can’t always win in these cases and even though the experience has cast a pall on the special occasion, sometimes, you really need to chalk such events down to a bad experience. Reynecke was offered a replacement phone – but he had to foot the bill for the excess.
* Georgina Crouth is a consumer watchdog with serious bite. Write to her [email protected]. Follow her on Twitter @Consumerstar