Risky

<p>I've been paying premiums on my property for a very long time. It was occupied by tenants until the first Saturday in February 2017. According to Outsurance the house is considered 'vacant' therefore the risk is to high for them to cover . . . which means that the risk is shifted to me, the client, who, by the way, is still paying premiums. There were 2 break-in and entries and twice to ***** the outside copper pipes during the following 3 odd weeks, I tried to explain that we put up curtains just before the tenants moved, the neighours were looking after the property, lights were switched on and off, agents taking potential buyers there. But Outsurance rejected my claim based on their opinion that the property was vacant. I am still waiting on them to elaborate on their definition of 'vacant' other than "lawful occupants left the house and no furniture". As inconvenient and uncomfortable as it is we have no choice but to sleep there now. And I am still waiting on confirmation that if anything should happen now, that Outsurance will pay such a claim or again play the 'vacant' card. I am utterly unhappy! I, like I am certain everyone else, have insurance for the peace of mind of knowing that your property is covered if you are not there. . . just be very mindful of clauses indemnifying Outsurance from any risks that you might think you are covered for. </p>