Public liability insurance

[Sealine]

I've just had an interesting conversation with a couple of brokers about public liability insurance which I thought I'd share. I've just received renewal documents for my horse insurance and I noticed that public liability has been removed from my cover. The premium has also increased by over 40%. I spoke to my broker and to another broker to try to get a quote and I was told that a couple of the main underwriters have withdrawn from the horse market as they are losing money. Those that remain are no longer offering public liability. Both brokers advised me to join BHS or BD for public liability insurance. One suggested I look at Harry Hall instead as I only insure for vet fees for accidents. Just thought I'd mention it as it's worth checking any renewal documents particularly if your policy is with Peliwica Equine.

 

[blitznbobs]

I've just had an interesting conversation with a couple of brokers about public liability insurance which I thought I'd share. I've just received renewal documents for my horse insurance and I noticed that public liability has been removed from my cover. The premium has also increased by over 40%. I spoke to my broker and to another broker to try to get a quote and I was told that a couple of the main underwriters have withdrawn from the horse market as they are losing money. Those that remain are no longer offering public liability. Both brokers advised me to join BHS or BD for public liability insurance. One suggested I look at Harry Hall instead as I only insure for vet fees for accidents. Just thought I'd mention it as it's worth checking any renewal documents particularly if your policy is with Peliwica Equine.

Its why i always have bhs gold membership

 

[planete]

WHW offer much the same insurance as Harry Hall with Public liability insurance of 10 million.

 

[Tiddlypom]

Public liability cover with BHS Gold membership is up to £30 million.

 

[Highmileagecob]

I'm with NFU, but have never had vet fees covered, just a standard policy. This year they have reduced the value of my lad (he is rising 28 so fair enough), but everything else stayed the same.

 

[scruffyponies]

I use BDS, mainly becaue being insured (hypothetically) to drive a coach and 8 up the A34 amuses me.

 

[ycbm]

I use BDS, mainly becaue being insured (hypothetically) to drive a coach and 8 up the A34 amuses me.

Dare you!
.

 

[scruffyponies]

Dare you!
.

Nope. Not a chance. I did once ride down it on a pony who really didn't care that lorries were passing us at 60mph as we cantered the verge and jumped the drainage ditches. It was, to say the least, unpleasant.
In addition to the noise and filth, it's not until you're not in a car that you realise just how much glass, metal and plastic junk litters big roads. When they tidy up the accidents the only seem to take away the big lumps.

 

[PeterNatt]

The case below demonstrated that Horse Owners should have third party insurance to no less than £20,000,000 for each horse that they own.
This is the case:

In the 2003 case of Mirvahedy vs Henley the House of Lords rules that the animals act 1971 imposed strict liability (without the need to prove negligence) on the keeper of any animal with known dangerous characteristics or with 'ordinary' behaviours that might cause harm.
Thus the Animals act 1971 Section 2 (2) as now interpreted by the highest court in the land (House of Lords) says that animal owners are liable. This is as a result of the Mirvahedy v Henley case
There, the law lords held that under section 2(2)(b) of the 1971 Act the keeper of a non-dangerous animal was strictly liable for damage or injury caused by it while it was behaving in a way that, although not normal behaviour generally for animals of that species, was nevertheless normal behaviour for the species in the particular circumstances, such as a horse bolting when sufficiently alarmed; and that, since the accident to the claimant had been caused by the defendants' horses behaving in an unusual way caused by their panic, they were liable to him.

In a nut shell in the case Mirvahedy v. Henley, Henley's three horses were spooked in their field, even thought the case for negligence was throw out, the field was very well fenced and secure, they smashed through the fence, a hedge and bracken, and ran in blind panic for over a mile .....the horses owners were found to be liable for the injures caused by them to Mr Mirvahedy, his injures were life changing and all he was doing was driving his car along a road......we all need to make sure our horses are covered for injures/damage caused to an innocent person should the worse happen........

 

[ycbm]

The case below demonstrated that Horse Owners should have third party insurance to no less than £20,000,000 for each horse that they own.
This is the case:

In the 2003 case of Mirvahedy vs Henley the House of Lords rules that the animals act 1971 imposed strict liability (without the need to prove negligence) on the keeper of any animal with known dangerous characteristics or with 'ordinary' behaviours that might cause harm.
Thus the Animals act 1971 Section 2 (2) as now interpreted by the highest court in the land (House of Lords) says that animal owners are liable. This is as a result of the Mirvahedy v Henley case
There, the law lords held that under section 2(2)(b) of the 1971 Act the keeper of a non-dangerous animal was strictly liable for damage or injury caused by it while it was behaving in a way that, although not normal behaviour generally for animals of that species, was nevertheless normal behaviour for the species in the particular circumstances, such as a horse bolting when sufficiently alarmed; and that, since the accident to the claimant had been caused by the defendants' horses behaving in an unusual way caused by their panic, they were liable to him.

In a nut shell in the case Mirvahedy v. Henley, Henley's three horses were spooked in their field, even thought the case for negligence was throw out, the field was very well fenced and secure, they smashed through the fence, a hedge and bracken, and ran in blind panic for over a mile .....the horses owners were found to be liable for the injures caused by them to Mr Mirvahedy, his injures were life changing and all he was doing was driving his car along a road......we all need to make sure our horses are covered for injures/damage caused to an innocent person should the worse happen........

Has there ever been a horse related payout anywhere near £20m, Peter?

I think I'm satisfied that WHW £10m is likely to cover any accident my horse might cause.

There was a bill in 2007 to amend that act to reduce the liability of owners of non dangerous animals. I can't find wherher it went through or not, but there has been conflicting case law since, a notable one being injury caused by a horse rearing die to a heart attack.

https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm200708/cmbills/018/en/08018x--.htm
.

 

[Fire sign]

Have always wondered ... what happens if your 3rd party liability insurance is 1 million and your horse injures someone ....?
Does the injured party claim the £1 million off the insurance company and then go after you personally for more ?