Outsmart the thief trackers and alarms and insurance approval.

[Fisherman]

I was ready to order a tracker and alarm system from outsmart the thief
for the new van.
I read about them on MMM and their kit looked good.
But when I checked with the insurance company they were happy with the Thatcham grade 1 alarm, but not their tracking system. The insurance. company I use through AIB insisted on a S5 tracker, and that the whole system had to be Thatcham approved.
I am not for one moment suggesting that outsmart the thief don’t instal perfectly good systems, but they don’t comply with what some insures are looking for.
I have instead ordered a Phantom system from Trackershop which cost £1049 using their 5% discount code TRACKER5.
The lesson here is, if your insurers insist on a tracker/alarm system ensure that it complies with their requirements. Had I ordered the outsmart the thief system I would have paid £850 for a system which was not approved by my insurers….OOCH.

 

[Thistle]

Or maybe the insurance broker is owned by the same company that distributes the S5 or gets a nice bit of commission for recommending them.

Did you ask what the difference in premium was between the two systems, if it’s minimal or zero then best to go with the system you prefer imho

And obviously next year when you shop around for a better price you may be told a different load of BS.

i rate insurance brokers at the same level as estate agents and car salesmen!

 

[Fisherman]

Or maybe the insurance broker is owned by the same company that distributes the S5 or gets a nice bit of commission for recommending them.

Did you ask what the difference in premium was between the two systems, if it’s minimal or zero then best to go with the system you prefer imho

And obviously next year when you shop around for a better price you may be told a different load of BS.

i rate insurance brokers at the same level as estate agents and car salesmen!

I have checked comfort insurance they are the same.
Also I rate AIB very highly, I have always found them excellent to deal with.
And they could not have been more helpful anytime I have contacted them.
They immediately contacted the insurers on my behalf and forwarded the information to myself. AIB themselves did not state that the outsmart the thief system did not comply. The level of security required by the insurers is determined by the value of the van including its contents. When looking at the two systems the Phantom system is a better system offering better security, it can also be used with an app, the outsmart the thief system required the use of text messages. The price difference was only £200.
The reason I posted was to inform anyone who is having a system fitted for insurance purposes ensures that what they are paying for meets their insurer’s requirements. We can debate till the cows come home about insurers, and their brokers, but bottom line if I had fitted the wrong system and our van was stolen, we would not have been covered.

 

[izwozral]

Couple of years ago, I mistakenly ticked the box 'no tracker fitted', called the insurer next day to correct the information and expected a discount. Was told "it makes no difference" so I didn't get a discount!

Question: at what level of mh value does laying out over a £1000 on a security system and nearly £300 per annum for tracking cover, become a bit of a nonsense (for want of a better word) ?
If your mh is valued at, say around £100,000, yes, I can see some logic in fitting such a system.
However, if your mh is valued at, say around £50,000 or less, then perhaps a more physical anti theft devices such as a steering wheel lock, pedal lock, hepa locks etc would be a better cost alternative?
Combine the above with a cheap ebay tracker maybe?

Each to their own I guess.

 

[Fisherman]

Couple of years ago, I mistakenly ticked the box 'no tracker fitted', called the insurer next day to correct the information and expected a discount. Was told "it makes no difference" so I didn't get a discount!

Question: at what level of mh value does laying out over a £1000 on a security system and nearly £300 per annum for tracking cover, become a bit of a nonsense (for want of a better word) ?
If your mh is valued at, say around £100,000, yes, I can see some logic in fitting such a system.
However, if your mh is valued at, say around £50,000 or less, then perhaps a more physical anti theft devices such as a steering wheel lock, pedal lock, hepa locks etc would be a better cost alternative?
Combine the above with a cheap ebay tracker maybe?

Each to their own I guess.

When you add it all up the total value of this van will be north of £90,000 Ral.
People sometimes forget about the contents, all the extras added on etc.
My current van did not require a tracker just a cat 1 alarm.

As for the annual cost there are three options. £13.50 a month, £149 a year, or £499 one of payment for as long as you own the van. I will pay the £13.50 for a few months then consider my options.
But even if the insurers had not insisted on this I would still have wanted this level of security.

Phantom Sentinel S5 Tracker & Alarm

www.trackershop-uk.com

 

[wildebus]

I think there is a value "switch" with many underwriters which dictates if you MUST have a certain level security system. And I don't think it is a matter of a discount if you do and none if you don't, just no cover if you don't. Which is why you didn't get a policy discount by correcting that entry - your motorhome is probably under the value of it being required.

Personally speaking, if there was an option to check if I had extra alarms, trackers, etc, I always check the NO box regardless of if I did or not (unless mandatory need) as if you say you did and got broken into or stolen, can you prove it was working? will you get paid out unless you can?
Good for personal benefit and peace of mind, but to get no or nominal discount on insurance? Not for me.
(Again, it it was an absolute requirement, ok, but I am talking about optional requirements).

The "outsmart the thief" system does look very good and apparently has a 100% success rate if I recall right? Pain it doesnt tick the boxes (I understand the cost of getting approved can be more of a barrier than the quality of the actual system!)

 

[Johnfrw]

I was ready to order a tracker and alarm system from outsmart the thief
for the new van.
I read about them on MMM and their kit looked good.
But when I checked with the insurance company they were happy with the Thatcham grade 1 alarm, but not their tracking system. The insurance. company I use through AIB insisted on a S5 tracker, and that the whole system had to be Thatcham approved.
I am not for one moment suggesting that outsmart the thief don’t instal perfectly good systems, but they don’t comply with what some insures are looking for.
I have instead ordered a Phantom system from Trackershop which cost £1049 using their 5% discount code TRACKER5.
The lesson here is, if your insurers insist on a tracker/alarm system ensure that it complies with their requirements. Had I ordered the outsmart the thief system I would have paid £850 for a system which was not approved by my insurers….OOCH.

The phantom is a good bit of kit but, as no objection from our insurance company, we chose OSTT.
Thatcham systems are generally old tech and it's time insurance companies moved on

 

[Fisherman]

I think there is a value "switch" with many underwriters which dictates if you MUST have a certain level security system. And I don't think it is a matter of a discount if you do and none if you don't, just no cover if you don't. Which is why you didn't get a policy discount by correcting that entry - your motorhome is probably under the value of it being required.

Personally speaking, if there was an option to check if I had extra alarms, trackers, etc, I always check the NO box regardless of if I did or not (unless mandatory need) as if you say you did and got broken into or stolen, can you prove it was working? will you get paid out unless you can?
Good for personal benefit and peace of mind, but to get no or nominal discount on insurance? Not for me.
(Again, it it was an absolute requirement, ok, but I am talking about optional requirements).

The "outsmart the thief" system does look very good and apparently has a 100% success rate if I recall right? Pain it doesnt tick the boxes (I understand the cost of getting approved can be more of a barrier than the quality of the actual system!)

Yes I agree, and I would have been happy to go ahead with their system.

 

[Fisherman]

The phantom is a good bit of kit but, as no objection from our insurance company, we chose OSTT.
Thatcham systems are generally old tech and it's time insurance companies moved on

They have no fitters in Scotland yet they claim to be nationwide. I was having to travel from Scotland to Keswick to meet an engineer to install their system. I was wondering what would have happened had I had a faulty system, would I have had to travel down south again. Also I much prefer the idea of using an App to text messages, which is surely behind the times.
I am not having a go at OSTT, far from it.
I owned a security company for 30 years, installing commercial and domestic installations. We had to register with the SSAIB and install appropriate equipment in order to comply with insurance standards. Without this we could not fit monitored systems with a police response. I don’t know why OSTT don’t do likewise. Surely they are capable of installing Thatcham systems.
I think they’re systems suit they’re monitoring set up, and I wonder if their monitoring set up complies with European standards. The system I have chosen is installed by Trackershop, but monitored by Phantoms European standard monitoring, something I think insurers would be looking for.
I know what insurers are like, but when running a security business it’s important to meet their requirements, regardless of what you think of them or their requirements. OSTT lost an installation for not doing so, and I won’t be alone.

 

[barryd]

I think there is a value "switch" with many underwriters which dictates if you MUST have a certain level security system. And I don't think it is a matter of a discount if you do and none if you don't, just no cover if you don't. Which is why you didn't get a policy discount by correcting that entry - your motorhome is probably under the value of it being required.

Personally speaking, if there was an option to check if I had extra alarms, trackers, etc, I always check the NO box regardless of if I did or not (unless mandatory need) as if you say you did and got broken into or stolen, can you prove it was working? will you get paid out unless you can?
Good for personal benefit and peace of mind, but to get no or nominal discount on insurance? Not for me.
(Again, it it was an absolute requirement, ok, but I am talking about optional requirements).

The "outsmart the thief" system does look very good and apparently has a 100% success rate if I recall right? Pain it doesnt tick the boxes (I understand the cost of getting approved can be more of a barrier than the quality of the actual system!)

I've always done the same with vehicle insurance. Never tick the boxes for extra security if there is any doubt. I don't have a £90k vehicle though so maybe you have to have it.

 

[alwaysared]

I think there is a value "switch" with many underwriters which dictates if you MUST have a certain level security system. And I don't think it is a matter of a discount if you do and none if you don't, just no cover if you don't. Which is why you didn't get a policy discount by correcting that entry - your motorhome is probably under the value of it being required.

Personally speaking, if there was an option to check if I had extra alarms, trackers, etc, I always check the NO box regardless of if I did or not (unless mandatory need) as if you say you did and got broken into or stolen, can you prove it was working? will you get paid out unless you can?
Good for personal benefit and peace of mind, but to get no or nominal discount on insurance? Not for me.
(Again, it it was an absolute requirement, ok, but I am talking about optional requirements).

The "outsmart the thief" system does look very good and apparently has a 100% success rate if I recall right? Pain it doesnt tick the boxes (I understand the cost of getting approved can be more of a barrier than the quality of the actual system!)

I do the same, they don't need much of an excuse not to pay out. Nothing but legalised Mafia in my opinion.

Regards,
Del

 

[Fisherman]

I've always done the same with vehicle insurance. Never tick the boxes for extra security if there is any doubt. I don't have a £90k vehicle though so maybe you have to have it.

Exactly Barry, I have no choice. Without it I don’t get insurance.
But I would want a good system regardless of insurance requirements.

 

[Fisherman]

I do the same, they don't need much of an excuse not to pay out. Nothing but legalised Mafia in my opinion.

Regards,
Del

I think this depends on the insurers.
I have dealt with direct line for over 30 years now, and have always found them to be fair. My neighbour left his keys in his car whilst paying for petrol. His car was stolen, and although they could have refused to pay they did, and fully. And his premiums were hardly affected the following year. They may not be the cheapest but therein lies the reason why they are one of the fairest. I don’t really believe in generalisations.

 

[mark61]

I had to try a few insurance co's before finding one who didn't insist on additional items. I didn't want a new van messed around with and it had a factory fitted alarm.

Was only an issue when insuring as a MH, no one cared when it was insured as a van.

 

[Pudsey Bear]

As ever it is down to money, if you can afford a £100k van then it warrants spending for decent cover.

I'm not in that price bracket, but if I was I'd be looking at this outfits equipment, I've seen it in action on YouTube and it's impressive.

Tracker GPS GSM RF Self Powered | Best Award Winning Trackers

Automatrics supply the best GPS GSM RF vehicle tracker systems with Insurance and police approved certification for the Ultimate Security Protection

www.trackersecurity.co.uk

 

[Tonybvi]

I had Outsmart The Thief fitted to my last van several years back (a Mercedes based Frankia i7400 valued at over £100k). I called my insurer (Comfort) who at that time had no problems with accepting OTT as an approved system. Great piece of kit and immediate response from OTT as soon as I stupidly opened a door before disabling the alar!

 

[Fisherman]

As ever it is down to money, if you can afford a £100k van then it warrants spending for decent cover.

I'm not in that price bracket, but if I was I'd be looking at this outfits equipment, I've seen it in action on YouTube and it's impressive.

Tracker GPS GSM RF Self Powered | Best Award Winning Trackers

Automatrics supply the best GPS GSM RF vehicle tracker systems with Insurance and police approved certification for the Ultimate Security Protection

www.trackersecurity.co.uk

Looks really good, and it’s thatcham approved, so it would meet insurance requirements.

 

[Fisherman]

I had Outsmart The Thief fitted to my last van several years back (a Mercedes based Frankia i7400 valued at over £100k). I called my insurer (Comfort) who at that time had no problems with accepting OTT as an approved system. Great piece of kit and immediate response from OTT as soon as I stupidly opened a door before disabling the alar!

They don’t now Tony, I contacted them.
I have no doubt that what they fit is good, but sadly it’s what the insurers want that matters.

 

[Pudsey Bear]

Looks really good, and it’s thatcham approved, so it would meet insurance requirements.

The videos they show on YT are usually about a year later than the recovery as they can't publish them until the court cases are dealt with, it's amazing what some folk get up to and also how unhelpful the rozzers are sometimes.

 

[alcam]

Van manufacturers/dealers are surely responsible for making their vans insurable ?