Hi, Matt

Had another chat with my home contents insurer about what the phrase "in use" really means. They have checked my cover again and the £2000 "personal belongings away from home" cover includes fire, theft and accidental damage to the following:

Tent pitched anywhere, whether attended or not;
Tent contents whether attended or not, (doesn't include cash, camera etc. unless you are in there with them). When pushed to be specific about kit in tents, they said cover would include standard camping and climbing kit like a couple of sleeping bags, sleeping mats, cookware & crockery.

Individual items of a value of £200 have to be specified, so that's the tent only at the moment, may include down bags in the future.

HTH

aren't "wild camps" generally illegal (if done without onwers permission).
check the insurance company's attitude to this for a possible not covered because you were engaged in an illegal activity.

Fair question Parky, but wild camping isn't illegal now in Scotland or many other European mountain areas. Even in England isn't it technically just part of the civil offence of trespass?

Matt / Parky

In that case, aren't we "trespassing" if we deviate from any PROW? So we're all engaged in illegal activity if we do so? So all insurance deals are off, potentially?

Wild camping is not illegal in the sense that it is proscribed by criminal law. This issue goes to rights of use and enjoyment of property and would normally be a civil matter not a criminal one unless there is deliberate destruction or damage to property.
Unless there is adequate notice that camping is not allowed, no offence is being committed but once a prohibition has been duly declared by the owner or his tenant, orally or by written notice, failure to heed is actionable via civil action and police assistance may be requested to remove you from the land in question.
Just think of all those "travellers" illegally parking their caravans wherever they take a fancy to.
How do you think they get away with it?

Because they're an official minority group?

So basically permission is implied unless specifically stated otherwise?

As regards PROWs, look at your RTR maps and you see you can deviate from them very extensively in many places. That doesn't include a statutory right to set up camp of course.

No BG but neither is prohibition unless declared adequately.

JJ, it is because they are not breaking criminal law and a civil injunction or some other judicial instrument is needed before they can be removed.

The bugger is that they never seem to have to pay legal costs.

Hmmmm

Didn't want to camp in a legal minefield.
Or a civil one, for that matter.

Very wise. It's always best to find out which land owners don't mind you camping before you do. If you leave no footprint many are OK.

Aye, Mac, but as a 'minority' they have a free representative on the council (paid for by the ratepayers) to speak out for their rights, as do Special Needs Children, for example. campers don't have this. That's what I meant.

Yes. My uncle used to champion their cause on the council and wouldn't have a bad word said about them.
We just didn't discuss it.
I have witnessed a particular "tribe" stripping and burning HT cable and dumping discarded white goods on the wauns near to my parents' home.

ok all, points taken...but then we're not insurance companies are we.

costs nothing to ask and check.

You're right there Parky - I've emailed the BMC this afternoon to ask them. I'll report back when they reply.

I just thought there was a fair chance that somewhere on OM there'd be someone who could say "It happened to me and they did/didn't pay up"

As usual Parky what you write makes perfect sense. An insurance company will use just about any obscure legal or quasi-legal reason to avoid pay out so it's always best to get these things sorted out up front and in writing if you can.

Given the wording you've printed Matt I'd say your kit wouldn't be covered unless there is a separate section specifically covering sports equipment (which your tent etc would usually be considered to be). Do check you're reading the correct section of your policy though cos the cover for personal possessions (jewellery, camera, stuff you'd usually carry around with you) is separate from both the usual contents section and any "extensions" such as sports equipment.

Many sports associations offer insurance to their members but you do get what you pay for, you can't assume that because it's the BMC your kit will be covered automatically - read and then ask, as you have done.

I was a loss adjuster in a former life and know the difficulties folk get into when their cover isn't all they thought it was.

Sorry to double post.

It's also worth noting that "all risks" insurance is never that. There are always things that are excluded from insurance policies simply because covering everything for every eventuality is too wide a remit for insurers. Do read the policy wording and make sure that what you want covered is actually covered for the things you want it covered for.

Thanks Suze,
Everything you say there makes good sense, but I do just wonder whether a sport-specific policy from the likes of the BMC will take a different view from a standard household or "package holiday" travel policy.

The main reason for having the policy is for rescue and medical cover and also third-party liability when participating in activities ranging from climbing to mountain biking to all forms of skiing. It also provides "standard" travel type insurance - delay, cancellation etc. The possessions element is a relatively small part really, but given that it's a policy tailored to participants in those type of activities you would hope, and might easily assume, that they'd recognise the specific circumstances that can occur like gear having to be left unattended.

Hopefully all will become clear if/when they respond.

Just received a reply from BMC re my query on gear cover on their policies. Overall I was quite encouraged by what they said, although there's clearly a bit of "wriggle-room" (which I guess is only to be expected).
The reply was a bit long to post it all, but for info in case anyone's interested here are the most salient bits...

"The 24 hour limit to obtain a police report for loss/theft does depend on circumstances....
....so for instance if baggage was lost at the airport, or hotel there is no real excuse for delaying this report...But as many BMC members spend days , weeks or even months in the mountains the Insurers would only expect such police report etc ro be obtained as soon as practicable. But you must explain fully on the Claims report form what the circumstances were, so that they understand this."

" "Taking proper care" - this is a normal clause of most material loss/damage policies and will vary from one circumstance to another. Again - this will be left to the discretion of the claims dept. if they have to decide whether you took reasonable precautions or not. So - leaving your stuff unattended at the foot of a route while you climb would be seen as "care-LESS". "

"The wording under Personal Possessions - Section 5, exclusion 1(i) - shows that ONLY "Ski, mountaineering, climbing, camping and SCUBA diving equipment" are covered whilst in use.....so if your tent is erected then it is " in use " and it and its contents would be covered. However - "taking reasonable care" may be seen as - leaving all the stuff inside the tent; zipping up the tent; even using a small padlock (- any intrusion would then = "forcible & violent entry"); and of course - NOT leaving valuables in the tent . And if you wandered off for a week leaving your tent etc. this would probably be seen as not taking proper care!!"


All in all I see this as a pretty pragmatic approach. I know it doesn't amount to a cast iron guarantee but it does seem to demonstrate an understanding of the circumstances surrounding outdoor activities.