Moral dilemma, I don't think it's insurance fraud, but it does raise some issues.

[Stat Brother]

It was definitely lost, I'd rather have my wedding ring back than have to buy another.
The ring is 5 years old, white gold.
Looking around t'internet £1600 seems a lot to pay for such a ring.
Each site, I 'show highest first', there's about 3 I couldn't afford, then pages of rings I can.

I guess our policy and NEVER claimed before has gone in our favour.

 

[Stat Brother]

buy gold

That is plan B.

 

[Kylies Stunt Arse]

No way . Insurance is an indemnification ie it puts you back in the same financial position as you were in before the loss. If you paid £600 for a ring and show the reciept that is what you will be paid on. If you were to have obtained an independent insurance valuation that might be a differnt story. If the insurer realise they have overpaid you they are entitled to ask for this money back. However it is unlikely to do this to any great purpose except a cursory letter. Somwhere a rouge 1 has appeared from somewhere is the excess a £100 pounds by any chance?

It is technically fraud as you are aware you have been overpaid. But I'd just shut up about it if I were you, and enjoy you good fortune . Not Aviva is it?

It is indemnification to put you back into the same financial position but in the case of contents it is often replacement value that will be used otherwise you won't be in the same position. That said I don't imagine too many insurers would pay £1000 over the top of purchase value, especially if that isn't close to replacement value.

Market value will be used for cars and if you have bought a bargain you may get more back than you paid, but that will be rare.

Whoever your insurer is they've either made a mistake or their contents replacement policy/jewellery supplier is over generous.

 

[Deleted User X18H]

It is indemnification to put you back into the same financial position but in the case of contents it is often replacement value that will be used otherwise you won't be in the same position. That said I don't imagine too many insurers would pay £1000 over the top of purchase value, especially if that isn't close to replacement value.

Market value will be used for cars and if you have bought a bargain you may get more back than you paid, but that will be rare.

Whoever your insurer is they've either made a mistake or their contents replacement policy/jewellery supplier is over generous.

You should never be able to make a profit from an insurance claim. On a new for old basis the item could be replaced with a similar valued at today’s prices, depreciated in certain circumstances.

One of my settlements based on the receipted value of a gold chain made it into the Daily Mail not so long ago I think(well same company, values etc) and was upheld, not that the Mails involvement makes much difference. Joe Public is under a misapprehension that insurance companies are 'sell you gold.com' I think. Since gold prices have rocketed so have insurance claims. Check your policy many will require a receipt certainly a police report and perhaps a picture of you wearing the item, and of course a full description of how you came to lose the item.

Given the receipt was provided re the OP'S claim it is interesting how such an amount could have been paid out. The first advice carrys a clear indication of the items value. So a reserve would have been set of £600!

 

[Kylies Stunt Arse]

The point is that you're not making a profit if it will cost you much more than your original purchase price to replace the item, and as this is a personal item rather than a tv insurers tend not to turn up with a replacement ring but let the insured replace it themselves.

Is the gem card actually £1600 that is yours to spend or up to £1600 for you to use replacing the ring?

 

[Bozza]

You should never be able to make a profit from an insurance claim. On a new for old basis the item could be replaced with a similar valued at today’s prices, depreciated in certain circumstances.

In my scenario, the insurance company had to give me MORE than I'd spent on my car in order that I could replace that car with similar and not be financially disadvantaged. I didn't make a profit on the incident as I had to replace my stolen car.

 

[Seagull on the wing]

Can't you just by gold? It's still likely to go up in value with the state of the European economy, and is easy to sell.

Yes,Gordon Brown MP EX PM was very good at selling our gold....................................................cheaply

 

[Stat Brother]

Is the gem card actually £1600 that is yours to spend or up to £1600 for you to use replacing the ring?

I have 1 year to spend £1600 at affiliated jewellers, of which there are plenty.

 

[strings]

Honestly, if you have checked with the insurer that the payout is correct (which it sounds like you have), I would replace the ring and put the rest towards a nice watch. I like watches though.

 

[Stat Brother]

It might not have been fraud then, but it is now!.

Wifey found my wedding ring yesterday, what a day

Sadly, for me, she found it in the bottom of the 'sweetie jar'

As the 1.6k had been weighing heavily, none of it has been spent.

I say it should go back, Wifey says 'free money'.

Just to cloud it further Wifey called them on Friday to ask if we could have a cheque, (as we just aren't spending it). They said NO.