Public liability insurance

Submitted: Wednesday, Mar 22, 2006 at 11:56
ThreadID: 32025 Views:1994 Replies:7 FollowUps:31
This Thread has been Archived
Am hoping you might be able to shed some light on a question I have. We will be travelling for 6 mths starting June, have sold the house and put our gear into storage. I've found it near impossible to get normal contents insurance for gear we will be taking with us in our camper trailer. Hence if you don't have contents insurance you don't have public liability insurance. What do people that travel permanently do about public liability insurance?? Do they just take a chance or..........
Back Expand Un-Read 0 Moderator

Reply By: Mike Harding - Wednesday, Mar 22, 2006 at 12:43

Wednesday, Mar 22, 2006 at 12:43
For Goodness sake...!

Take a risk - live life - don't worry about it.

Mike Harding
AnswerID: 162198

Follow Up By: Austravel - Wednesday, Mar 22, 2006 at 13:23

Wednesday, Mar 22, 2006 at 13:23
Could be right but I certainly wonder in todays age of litigation. There's a group of people just waiting for any chance to get a windfall at others expense. I guess it's like any insurance you hope not to use it.
0
FollowupID: 416889

Follow Up By: Michael ( Moss Vale NSW) - Wednesday, Mar 22, 2006 at 13:27

Wednesday, Mar 22, 2006 at 13:27
Mike, i guess its all relative to what you have, I guess everyone sees insurance as a necessary evil. If you have a lot, no one would want to lose it, if you only have a little, no one wants to lose all they have got. I guess individuals need to make a decision on how attached they are to what they could lose if they cant replace it. Michael
Patrol 4.2TDi 2003

Retired 2016 and now Out and About!

There's time to rest when you're dead,
Get out and do something instead!

Member
My Profile  My Blog  My Position  Send Message

0
FollowupID: 416891

Follow Up By: Austravel - Wednesday, Mar 22, 2006 at 13:30

Wednesday, Mar 22, 2006 at 13:30
That's my feeling, took me a damn long time to get to this point in my life. Would hate to lose it for the sake of not having insurance.
0
FollowupID: 416892

Follow Up By: Mike Harding - Wednesday, Mar 22, 2006 at 15:34

Wednesday, Mar 22, 2006 at 15:34
I'm confused. What aspect of your life/self/wife/vehicle/dog etc do you think you need PL cover for?

If it's just in case you hit someone/thing with your car and or trailer then your normal vehicle insurance should cover that - ensure you tell your insurance company your are now nomadic - I'm sure they will want more money from you!

But if (as I read from your post) you want PL cover in case (say) when fishing you injure someone with your fishing rod or your hat blows off and lands over the eyes of a driver in an open top car etc etc etc - then my suggestion is forget it - take the risk and enjoy life.

Mike Harding
0
FollowupID: 416921

Follow Up By: Austravel - Wednesday, Mar 22, 2006 at 15:53

Wednesday, Mar 22, 2006 at 15:53
Or someone trips over your gear, or hurts themselves pinching something, or ... or.... or...

Yep may sound over the top but I guess if all it costs to be covered for $20m is a hundred bucks then in this era I'd take it.
0
FollowupID: 416932

Follow Up By: PK Eildon (VIC) - Wednesday, Mar 22, 2006 at 16:40

Wednesday, Mar 22, 2006 at 16:40
I'm with you Mike. Insurance has a place, but life does not come with instructions, manuals or guarantees. The insurance industry seem to have been successful in convincing us you can insure against life for a minimal fee. Trouble is, the thing that turns around and bites you on the bum is invariable the thing not covered.
Get out there an enjoy it.
0
FollowupID: 416947

Follow Up By: Member - Brian (Gold Coast) - Wednesday, Mar 22, 2006 at 18:52

Wednesday, Mar 22, 2006 at 18:52
Up to your usual standard I see Mike..... the guy asks a question and instead of trying to answer...... you nail him!!!!!
sheeeesh!
0
FollowupID: 416980

Follow Up By: Mike Harding - Wednesday, Mar 22, 2006 at 20:12

Wednesday, Mar 22, 2006 at 20:12
I did answer - it's just that you don't like my answer.

As I see it he's trying to insure himself against "Life the Universe and Everything" and I think that's impractical and encourages others to believe there is such a utopian state.

We are fast turning into a namby pamby country - it's a damn good job all those early European explorers of Australia weren't seeking insurance for, certainly, otherwise we'd still be wondering if there really was an inland sea and probably waiting for AAMI to get back to us with a premium quotation in case the oxen kicked someone.

We need to TAKE RISKS! Societies which are so afraid of risk taking that they need to ensure there are none will stagnate and die - and so they should too.

Although there are some (many :) areas in which Willem and I do not see eye-to-eye I do admire his independent risk taking attitude – it’s the only way to live… anything else is but a slow death.

And, Brian, if you don’t like my attitude or the tone of my posts then don’t read them, I really don’t mind if you, and/or others, find me a pain in the butt – it ain’t going to change the way I am, I can assure you :)

Mike Harding

mike_harding@fastmail.fm
0
FollowupID: 417019

Follow Up By: Austravel - Thursday, Mar 23, 2006 at 11:33

Thursday, Mar 23, 2006 at 11:33
Mike,

I hung back responding trying to work out were your coming from but in the end decided your probably just a t@@ser. Are you telling me you don't have insurance on your vehicle, house, contents which all include P.L. ? I recall your being or have been in business: I'm sure you don't or havn't mitigated personal assest risk by using trusts etc. If your answer to all these is no then you've confirmed my assumption, if yes then it's no different to me trying to safe guard my assests in a time were litigation is growing. You know nothing of me and yet draw your conclusions based on me wanting insurance to cover what the vast majority of Aussies would have. Is it being weak to mitigate risk or just common sense. I for one don't wish to start from scratch again because I funded the retirement of a guy who won't take responsibilty for their own actions.

Early Aussies didn't really have either the assets to safe guard or the need. They took responsibility for their own actions and mistakes. If they did get kicked by someone's oxen they probably realised it was their fault for getting to close. Nowaday they would be seeking compensation from the owner. I don't say that's a good thing but society is not going to go back to that era even if you want it.

Yep I know a few so called independent risk takers also, some are close friends. It's not by choice they choose not to reduce risk it's due to cost. Though one elderly person I know is now questioning the decision as his home burnt down with no insurance. But I guess in your eyes at least he's not a namby pamby.

0
FollowupID: 417156

Follow Up By: Mike Harding - Thursday, Mar 23, 2006 at 12:37

Thursday, Mar 23, 2006 at 12:37
Bye Austravel. I would have been happy to discuss the issue but I have a rule that I don't debate on the internet with people who resort to abuse.

Have a good trip.

Mike Harding
0
FollowupID: 417171

Follow Up By: Austravel - Thursday, Mar 23, 2006 at 12:51

Thursday, Mar 23, 2006 at 12:51
Aaaah Mike if your going to have an attitude you'll have to grow a thick skin. Your post came across as arrogant, narrow minded, self opinionated and poorly justified. If you can't hack it don't start it. I'm all for opinions and suggestions but burr up with the added mix of attitude.

Though in reality my belief is you couldn't debate it, because you either do mitigate risk as most business people would, or you don't in which case..........

Checkmate.
0
FollowupID: 417175

Follow Up By: PK Eildon (VIC) - Thursday, Mar 23, 2006 at 12:57

Thursday, Mar 23, 2006 at 12:57
Austravel

1. You asked for an OPINION
2. You got an OPINION
3. You didn't like the OPINION - Discard it

Have the trip of a lifetime.
0
FollowupID: 417176

Follow Up By: robak (QLD) - Thursday, Mar 23, 2006 at 13:04

Thursday, Mar 23, 2006 at 13:04
Mike,

I think your talking about a diferent type of risk. We all take risks everyday and "living a little" by simply stepping outside our home, going camping, etc. The thing with those risks is that we get the benefit of taking those risks through a sense of accomplishemnt, adventure etc.

If I want to go rock climibing and fall and break my leg, I'll go to the hopsital, get it fixed and stumble around for a few weeks. Big deal.

Public liabilty insurance is to insure yourself against (what I like to call) other people's stupidity. In other words, somebody else takes a risk at YOUR expense and they get the benefits.

If some idiot runs around the campsite "living a little" and trips over your tent rope and breaks an arm you could be up for about $30 000 for the broken arm and ANOTHER $30 000 in lawyers and court costs.

Even if you are not at fault some lawyer is going to charge you enormous fees to argue your point in front of the judge.

Now, if Austravel has assets say of half a million dollars, that's a lot he could loose by somebody else "living a little". He could loose everything he has and may need to start again at zero when he returns from his trip. Why take that risk when you can insure against it relatively cheaply? Either by buying insurance or getting rid of your assets. (swiss account or moving your assets to somebody else)

R.

0
FollowupID: 417177

Follow Up By: Member - Brian (Gold Coast) - Thursday, Mar 23, 2006 at 13:40

Thursday, Mar 23, 2006 at 13:40
Ahhh guys..... c'mon.... you'll all get used to Mike.... he likes to liven things up with his opinions!!! LOL.....
No need to take it so hard, every now and then you'll end up agreeing with him on something. (Happened to me 3 times so far!)

A long time ago we as Australians stood by our decisions, for good or bad, for ight or wrong.

Now it's a matter of suing the pants off anyone you can.... It's not MY idea of fun, and a lot of people here will agree.

BUT!

It is the way of things at present.

For my part, I am staunchly (is that a word?) teaching my two sons the importance of taking responsibility for ones actions.

And also to have their backsides covered with insurance!

;-)

Just my opinion

Cheers

Brian
0
FollowupID: 417180

Follow Up By: Austravel - Friday, Mar 24, 2006 at 10:41

Friday, Mar 24, 2006 at 10:41
Brian,

"For my part, I am staunchly (is that a word?) teaching my two sons the importance of taking responsibility for ones actions.

And also to have their backsides covered with insurance! "

Couldn't agree more, it's the way I was also brought up, pity you've got to do it but in this day and age.....

Your right I've also agreed with Mike on occassions but this time I must have had a short fuse.

"For Goodness sake...!

Take a risk - live life - don't worry about it. "

Was his responce, now really if you want to comment like this then you've got to be a big boy and cop some flack everynow and again. No hard feelings to him directly as I really don't know him but if you give it you must be able to take it. It was pretty easy to read the non verbals with "For Goodness sake...! starting the opinion.

0
FollowupID: 417382

Follow Up By: Member - Brian (Gold Coast) - Friday, Mar 24, 2006 at 16:19

Friday, Mar 24, 2006 at 16:19
Austravel

Fully agree with you there mate!

cheers

Brian
0
FollowupID: 417426

Follow Up By: Mike Harding - Friday, Mar 24, 2006 at 18:01

Friday, Mar 24, 2006 at 18:01
I don't mind "copping some flack" Austravel - that regularly happens to me on this forum. However I'll not be insulted by you or anyone else - is that how you operate in daily life when people express opinions you don't like, do you tell them they're "tossers" too? You'd be getting a bit short of teeth by now if you did I suspect.

Mike Harding
0
FollowupID: 417439

Follow Up By: robak (QLD) - Friday, Mar 24, 2006 at 18:04

Friday, Mar 24, 2006 at 18:04
I wonder if you can get insurance for this type of thing?

But really, c'mon guys, don't worry about it.

:)
0
FollowupID: 417440

Follow Up By: Austravel - Saturday, Mar 25, 2006 at 19:47

Saturday, Mar 25, 2006 at 19:47
Glad you responded Mike. In reality what each individual regards as an insult is varied. I can tell you I took your comments as an insult (re-read you initial comments and think about it). You don't know me and while my question may have come across to you as naive or pedantic I can assure you I'm not. I have taken quite some time with many hurdles to get to the position I'm at and don't take kindly to those that belittle me. I afraid I took just that by your initial comment.

Secondly I've still got all my teeth. Working up from a blue-collar industry I've leant to call a spade a spade. I've no trouble with opinions but if your honest you'll admit (even if to yourself) you can burr people up, including myself, by speaking your mind. No dramas in you doing this but again you've got to have a thick skin if you do so.

Again, coming from a blue-collar industry I can call a spade a spade and move on, which I have. I've enjoyed your (other) previous comments and no doubt will continue to. If I've gravely offended you then I apologise, but you might like to reflect on your manner as well.
0
FollowupID: 417610

Follow Up By: Mike Harding - Sunday, Mar 26, 2006 at 14:37

Sunday, Mar 26, 2006 at 14:37
Look mate I’ve been doing this internet debating stuff since Bulletin Boards in 1987 and my hide is thicker than a rhinoceros’. I’ve argued with Rod Speed, Steve Waltz and Phil(lis) Alison and beat ‘em all and been called everything from a homosexual child molester to a mother f…… c… in the process – but it’s bloody pointless and only leads to the degrading of any newsgroup or forum into a contest as to which individual is prepared to be ruder and continue it longer than anyone else – sensible, serious and pertinent information falls by the wayside as egos take over. These days I refuse to accept abuse from _anybody_. If you can’t debate a point without abusing the other person then, as far as I’m concerned, you’re not worth discussing something with. You call me a tosser… what next? I call you a w@nker? What next? You call me a…?

Now: if you think “For Goodness sake” is a bit tough to handle then it’s just as well for you I didn’t say what I really think. If you can’t handle civil, although pointed, responses to your questions then I can only suggest you don’t ask them. After all it’s you who’s lauding the calling of a spade a spade. I often get the impression, on the internet, there are a lot of people out there who resent being challenged – it probably doesn’t happen to them much on a day-to-day basis.

I’m opinionated, outspoken and passionate but you know what…? I like me, pretty much, the way I am and I ain’t going to change for you or anyone else – that passion also gives me the drive to change things in society – which I have done once or twice. I’m a risk taker, I don’t seek insurance in anything I do but, by God, I enjoy life and don’t lie awake worrying about some crap I can’t control – in fact, for the past five years, my house has had no insurance at all. I probably should get some buildings insurance at least.

That’s me – take it or leave it – I don’t mind :) But if you don’t want to converse with me then either don’t or just abuse me – either will do the trick.

Once again: have a good trip.

Mike Harding

PS. A quote for you from; Ray Bradbury - 1954 – from his book; Fahrenheit 451
I hate a Roman named Status Quo! Stuff your eyes with wonder, live as if you'd drop dead in ten seconds. See the world. It's more fantastic than any dream made or paid for in factories. Ask no guarantees, ask for no security, there never was such an animal. And if there were, it would be related to the great sloth which hangs upside down in a tree all day every day, sleeping its life away. To hell with that, shake the tree and knock the great sloth down on his ass.
0
FollowupID: 417722

Follow Up By: robak (QLD) - Monday, Mar 27, 2006 at 09:23

Monday, Mar 27, 2006 at 09:23
who's Rod Speed, Steve Waltz and Phil(lis) Alison?
0
FollowupID: 417843

Follow Up By: Austravel - Monday, Mar 27, 2006 at 12:05

Monday, Mar 27, 2006 at 12:05
Mike,

I'm afraid your just not getting it and I can understand this by your last post. Even you admit your "opinionated, outspoken and passionate". This can be done without being arrogant. You can give advice, opinions and even decrees without belittling people. Your first statement started all this, there was no advice or debate just you sprouting your wisdom in a tone that can also lead to ("You'd be getting a bit short of teeth by now if you did I suspect.")

I couldn't care less how long you've been doing what you like to call debating or with who, I treat people how they treat me. You really need to have a look at how you come across. Though as you've already stated if others don't like it then tough so I guess your up for the consequences. “For Goodness sake is a bit tough to handle" naah you have no idea of my background, but it set the tone and then your surprised I said what I did!

"but it’s bloody pointless and only leads to the degrading of any newsgroup or forum" Absolutely right and for that I apologise to the readers of this forum. However is it worse than those that bait by your method?? You added no value to the discussion at all because of your emotive statement. Your statement wasn't challenging at all it was arrogant and belittling. Challenging I can accept the other I respond with same.

"I enjoy life and don’t lie awake worrying about some crap I can’t control" What amazes me is that with my simple question on mitigating risk that you know this. What it should tell you is that I worked damn hard through adversity to get were I am and I have no intention of loosing it no matter how slim the risk. This would be like myself thinking you are obviously incredibly rich to not take at least building insurance.

And thanks I intend having a great trip.
0
FollowupID: 417877

Reply By: Patrolman Pat - Wednesday, Mar 22, 2006 at 13:36

Wednesday, Mar 22, 2006 at 13:36
Would you not have public liability as part of your fully comp vehicle insurance?
AnswerID: 162210

Follow Up By: Member JD- Wednesday, Mar 22, 2006 at 14:06

Wednesday, Mar 22, 2006 at 14:06
Hi,
This is the way I would go!..just check first..I think there's public liability in there someware.
JD
0
FollowupID: 416897

Follow Up By: Austravel - Wednesday, Mar 22, 2006 at 14:20

Wednesday, Mar 22, 2006 at 14:20
Your right it's in with the car and camper. But, and this due to my limited understanding of insurance, I thought the public liability insurance would be specific to what it was paid under. Eg if paid with the camper you'd have cover for anything to do with the camper. Am I wrong?? If so great, I'm covered.
0
FollowupID: 416900

Follow Up By: Austravel - Wednesday, Mar 22, 2006 at 15:27

Wednesday, Mar 22, 2006 at 15:27
Just checked. It's as I said only cover for the specific item your covered under. Ie public liability under camper is for camper incident only.
0
FollowupID: 416916

Follow Up By: Patrolman Pat - Wednesday, Mar 22, 2006 at 19:06

Wednesday, Mar 22, 2006 at 19:06
Public liability insurance only covers you for any loss or injury you cause to others. It doesn't cover for loss of your own goods or damage to your goods etc. These would be covered under other sections of you warranty. Public liability insurance would be of little use IMO unless your trailer fell on top of someone which is highly unlikely. Your car insurance will almost certainly have an element of public liability cover included in the evnet that you hit someone whilst driving.
0
FollowupID: 416985

Reply By: GaryInOz (Vic) - Wednesday, Mar 22, 2006 at 15:23

Wednesday, Mar 22, 2006 at 15:23
Apparently OAMPS do coverage for the grey nomads (Winebagos etc).

Talk to a few companies that hire out campertrailers and see what they use.
AnswerID: 162232

Follow Up By: Austravel - Wednesday, Mar 22, 2006 at 15:28

Wednesday, Mar 22, 2006 at 15:28
Thanks will do.
0
FollowupID: 416917

Reply By: Alan H (Narangba QLD) - Wednesday, Mar 22, 2006 at 17:05

Wednesday, Mar 22, 2006 at 17:05
I think I read somewhere that in this situation people store excess gear in a shed at a relatives place and this enables them to get contents insurance (with PL) but I think they had to pay premium for minimum of $1000 contents.

Apparently this was much cheaper than simply buying a PL policy without a fixed address.

Hope you find a solution!!!
AnswerID: 162259

Follow Up By: Austravel - Thursday, Mar 23, 2006 at 10:20

Thursday, Mar 23, 2006 at 10:20
Thanks Alan will consider this if I can't get anything else.
0
FollowupID: 417142

Reply By: Sand Man (SA) - Thursday, Mar 23, 2006 at 00:00

Thursday, Mar 23, 2006 at 00:00
Austravel,

Here's how I see it.

Public Liability insurance is to protect the home owner, from someone else who comes on to your property, then injures themselves. Invited or not, they can then sue you as the home owner.

Now in your case matey, you have sold the home (property) so no one can injure themselves on it and sue you.

So, what you are now left with is that you will be travelling for 6 months on public property, or some other private property and if you have an accident, you can sue them:-)

You no longer need Public liability cover. Life's good isn't it?
Bill


I'm diagonally parked in a parallel Universe!

Member
My Profile  My Blog  My Position  Send Message

AnswerID: 162390

Reply By: Macca1 - Thursday, Mar 23, 2006 at 02:38

Thursday, Mar 23, 2006 at 02:38
Here it is guys:

Your personal legal liability that is on your house insurance policy covers you for personal injury or third party property damage, in the case of house cover it covers you in relation to an incident arising out of your ownership of the house and land and the contents policy covers you anywhere else in Australia. This is the general rule but some may vary slightly.

An example could be that you are staying at a caravan park and leave something on the ground and someone trips over it injuring themself. Providing you were negligent or legally liable (depending on policy wording) the policy may pay the damages, either out of court or as a result of a court decision. You may in fact have not caused it all, but this does not stop the third party suing you, which may not cost him anything as many lawyers offer no win - no fee charges to the plaintiff and take a percentage of the settlement. In your case, unless you have liability cover you'll pay from day one to defend the charges and you'll hope it doesn't get to the supreme court, because at rates of up to $50,000 a day (you do the sums).

My suggestion, go to an insurance broker and see if he can get a company to just give you the personal legal liability cover, currently you would pay about $35.00 a year in you house/contents cover, even if it costs $100.00 it's still cheap.

Your car/trailer insurance only covers third party property damage and bodily injury (depending on state) that is caused by those vehicles.

Cheers

Macca

AnswerID: 162403

Follow Up By: Austravel - Thursday, Mar 23, 2006 at 11:10

Thursday, Mar 23, 2006 at 11:10
Thanks Macca have done just that. I'm now waiting for them to come back to me with a price if they can offer P.L. by itself. In reality I think I'd be very unlucky to require it but if it's cheap why not cover for it. Don't want to start from scratch again.

0
FollowupID: 417149

Reply By: robak (QLD) - Thursday, Mar 23, 2006 at 13:07

Thursday, Mar 23, 2006 at 13:07
Austravel,

Have you tried companies for travel insurance. Like the insurance you get when traveling overseas?

generally through travel agents

R.
AnswerID: 162466

Follow Up By: robak (QLD) - Thursday, Mar 23, 2006 at 13:17

Thursday, Mar 23, 2006 at 13:17
Here try

covermore insurance

$35 to insure for $200 000 in Australia plus you get all the other benefits of travel insurance.

R.
0
FollowupID: 417178

Follow Up By: Austravel - Thursday, Mar 23, 2006 at 14:58

Thursday, Mar 23, 2006 at 14:58
Thanks robak,

May try them if my broker can't help.
0
FollowupID: 417198

Sponsored Links

Popular Products (13)