Forced Entry

[barried]

Last Sunday 1staff member was working at my sons factory. The gates to the factory yard were locked. While he was working in a building in the yard someone climbed the gates,hid in the factory and when he had locked up and left stole £3k of tools and went back over the gates.They got out of the factory through the personal door in the roller shutter doors. This can only be opened from the inside which is common on roller doors.
The insurance company are refusing to pay as there was no forced entry. Surely climbing over gates for access constitutes forced entry as every precaution was done to keep the premises as secure as is reasonably possible while working.
Would appreciate any advice barried

[EcclesCake]

What evidence do you have to prove that is what happened?

That is what your insurance company will be interested in.

[barried]

Thank you for your reply.
That is what the police think happened as there was no other way to get in as all doors and
windows were locked and they went out through the door in the roller shutter doors which they left open. That theory is what the crime number was given against. Barried

[Peter Pedant]

There is I think a back-story here. - Your son did the lock up, and then there was a theft. [ Any CCTV ?]. There has been a theft but no entry was forced. Clearly your son wont have sight of what his employer's insurance will and will not pay for.

I imagine your son's interest is that people have been pointing at him and whispering - to wit: he locked his pal in.

I am not sure he has to show he is not involved - all the has to show is that he obeyed his contract, and carried out his duties with due care. CCTV would be helpful for this.

So any advice is: ... hold on

unless your son OWNS the factory, in which case he needs to accept he should install CCTV

[Deskdiary]

This is a 'visible signs' condition. For theft to covered there must be signs of forcible violent entry to or exit from the premises.

Scaling a fence does not leave any forcible signs of entry. Using the door in the roller shutter to exit the premises does not leave any forcible signs of exit.

The insurance company are, I'm afraid, correct.

This isn't 'small print' - a visible signs condition in a commercial insurance policy is the rule not the exception, and has been for many many decades.

The purpose of the condition is so that walk-in thefts are excluded. If walk-in thefts were automatically insured, it would be open to abuse.

[Maydup]

Its an unfortunate situation, but the factory should either be locked completely or manned. The situation last Sunday sounds as though it was neither locked up or fully manned with proper procedures in place to protect the tools and therefore uninsured.