If you are with WOOLWORTHS Insurances, what has been your observations

and (hopefully not) experiences.

I have just spent a couple of hours combing thru their PDS and must admit

that I have reservations.

Their 10% applied to your everyday rewards for 11 0f the 12 months seems

attractive - but seems"too good to be true" in essence.

Brodie

We have it for the house and contents, have not had a claim, but we were limited as to where to go, although we are not in a flood zone ourselves, the postcode is, so premiums went up by a 1000%, so had to find someone who were cheaper, hence WW. If we didn't have a house loan, I doubt we would have insurance at all. We have lowered our house value by half to be able to afford it. Once a month we DO get 10% off our shop, so usually that's when we do a decent shop. Also has we have the WW Rewards card, we build up points, and get either a 10 or 20$ discount once per month on top of 4 cents a litre off fuel, usually we save the monthly discount until xmas, so we have up to $300 dollars ready for xmas shopping. Being with them is a pretty good deal so far

Watch this space.

A report yesterday suggested WW were trying to encroach on medical services in this country.

A doctor was interviewed and she suggested that it could not work.

My thoughts were that when before have these big companies been permitted to encroach into something that is very distant from their core business and then once the dynamics of the invaded industry has changed they sell it off and walk away to the detriment of us all.

Australia the duopoly country.

We seem to have very expensive insurance down under. On another forum in the UK, it is staggering how cheap insurance is for my Land Rover.

I suppose all we can do is bend as far enough as we are told to!

Bicyclecamper - I would suggest you look up the definition of "Underinsurance".  I assume that by lowering your sum insured by 50%, then you are quite happy to only accept 50% of any claim, irrespective of the amount of the claim.  If you are, then by all means half your sum insured, but don't suggest this to other people unless you know what you are talking about, but then again, this is common on this site. Some comments are laughable.

I didn't suggest it anybody else, it is what we had to do to afford insurance. If our rates hadn't gone up an extra $2000 in the last 3 years as well as a new sewerage rate, as the town just had sewerage connected , then we would have been able to keep up with the exhorbant rise in insurance costs, but that would only have been for a couple of years anyhow. You can't get blood from a stone. We are low income, and have costs of everything rising non stop. What we are paying now for insurance, with the low cover, is what we were paying 2 years ago for the normal cover. We just don't have the money to keep on paying higher charges especially utilities now.

Our house insurance in a Melbourne suburb is eye-wateringly high (along with the premium), but when you factor in a total rebuild and rental for the months that the rebuild will take it starts to look reasonable. We are also located in what used to be called a 100 year flood zone. It is now called "...a 1% Annual Exceedance Probability (AEP) flood event (being a flood event that has a 1% probability of occurring in any year)..." I suppose it is a clarification in some respects that now warns that it could happen anytime with a low probability...

had a claim........ for a car prang was hit in a pub parking area and no witnesses......all fixed and no fuss or problems at all woolies is OK in my book 

Be very aware that by "under insuring" any property you may as well have no insurance at all. Insurers will apply the 80% ruling if you were ever to have a claim. You must insure for at least 80% of the real replacement value to expect a full payout.
If you under insure the Insurer will consider that you are self insuring the balance of the value. Example; the property is worth $400,000.00 dollars in today's value to replace, but to keep your premium down you only insure the property for $200,000.00.
In the event of a total loss the Insurer will consider you were insuring half yourself, so the payout you would get would be half of the value you insured for...ie $100,000.00.

That is why reviewing insured values should be done every year, especially in the market we are in now. The reality is that the saving of a few hundred dollars in premium may well cost you a whole lot more in the event of a claim.
The 80% ruling may apply where ever you as a customer nominate an insured value.
Cars are always insured for "market value" so rarely get caught in that situation...but caravans, boats etc where you nominate a value, that is what you will get in the event of a total loss...

Do you have any reference for that? I would expect in the case of total loss they would pay out the $200,000. But if it was not a total loss then they would apportion the payout accordingly. So $100,000 damage and they would pay $50,000.

Cars are not always insured for market value. Mine is on agreed value, in which the insurer nominates the value. You can then negotiate a different agreed value with them with a small adjustment to premium. In the case of cars there is usually such a small premium difference it is not worth going lower.

Everyday Insurance from Woolworths

Woolworths acts an agent for The Hollard Insurance Company Pty Ltd.

The Hollard Insurance Company Pty Ltd is a wholly owned subsidiary of Hollard Holdings Australia Pty Ltd.

Hollard Holdings Australia Pty Ltd is a wholly owned subsidiary of the South African company, Hollard Holdings Pty Ltd.

Hollard Holdings Pty Ltd is a wholly owned subsidiary of the Netherlands company, IVM Intersurer BV.

I know next to nothing about The Hollard Insurance Company Pty Ltd except that, last year, Commonwealth Bank sold its insurance operations to The Hollard Insurance Company Pty Ltd.

And, The Hollard Insurance Company Pty Ltd also owns Real Life Insurance.

Real Life Insurance undertakes saturation advertising. Saturation advertising is very costly and all businesses pass on their costs to consumers, one way or another.

Also, unlike QBE Insurance, NRMA Insurance, Suncorp Insurance, et al, Real Life Insurance does not allow customers to arrange insurance cover online.

To quote their ad, "Customers simply answer a few underwriting questions over the phone."

I am suspicious that Real Life Insurance requires customers to phone the company so that the company has the opportunity to 'upsell' to the customer.

There may be millions of Australians who are happily insured with Hollard (Everyday Insurance from Woolworths, Real Life Insurance, Australian Seniors Insurance, RSPCA Pet Insurance and more) but I wouldn't insure with Hollard or any of its various brands. Hollard Insurance reminds me of FAI Insurance.