insurance

bladesman

could anyone recommend the best insurance to get and where to get it.

I have a 22 for rabbits and do a bit of lamping at night for foxes with a 223.

nipper67

join a gun club and get your ins with the NARGC this is approved by all farming associations and great cover

Cass

Country Side Alliance does individual coverage so no need for joining any club. This and the NARGC compensation fund would be the two major choices (if not only ones).

Without getting into a debate, i'm not sure how accurate the statement above is about all farmers/farming organisations approving of NARGC coverage.

Any farmer/landowner i know do not mind who provides it just that the person has it.

bladesman

is it essential to join a club?

Cass

If you wish to be covered by the NARGC compensation fund then yes. They do not do individual cover.

nipper67

to get ins from nargc you have to join a club and i am sure about farming ass and being in a club has a lot of pluses and is more assuring to farmers plus its part of your gun licence unless you have privet permission then the farmer is responsible for you

Cass

nipper67 wrote: »

............. and i am sure about farming ass ........

That all of them prefer NARGC insurance to any other type? How so? Not looking for a row or trying to start one. Simply curious as to how you are so sure? Is there stats somewhere that can be used to support this.?

.............. and is more assuring to farmers ........

90% of my permissions are as an individual, and there is not an issue with any of the farmers/land owners.

........... plus its part of your gun licence ...........

That you need insurance to get a license? Since when?

....... unless you have privet permission then the farmer is responsible for you

If you have no insurance there is a liability issue for the farmer/land owner. Permission, whether as an individual or through a gun club, is irrelevant. If the farmer gives you permission to shoot his lands then it's either your insurance (as an individual or through a club) or his that will be claimed on depending on which you have or what occurs.

homerhop

There is also IFA Countryside

http://www.ifacountryside.ie/

nipper67

nargc is approved by all farming ass i did not say it was the only one this is in your head as a land owner i nor any sane land owner would not allow any trespass on his or her land without some cover if you go onto land with consent i hope you tell the land owner that you do or do not have cover if you tell him you dont i dont think he will allow this would you i did not say you need ins for a permit but you need to be in a club or permission if you enter onto lands in sport you should protect the people that give us the freedom to do so this is the min to do nargc protects farmer and hunter this is what i say and its cheep keep the faith

bladesman

any idea of cost?

Cass

nipper67 wrote: »

nargc is approved by all farming ass i did not say it was the only one this is in your head .............

It being the only or not was never an issue has not been raised until you just done so. I asked you to show me how you know it is approved by all farming associations something which you never answered in the post above.

............ as a land owner i nor any sane land owner would not allow any trespass on his or her land without some cover ..........

As a "sane" landowner you should not allow trespass in any form.

...... if you go onto land with consent i hope you tell the land owner that you do or do not have cover if you tell him you dont i dont think he will allow this would you ............

I could not answer this. I have insurance, but i would not belittle those without it. I wonder how many people do not have some sort of cover. Most individuals are members of a club, range or on their own land and so would be covered by insurance. Those that are affiliated to none of these groups are free to source their own cover, however the NARGC is not an option to them. To "force" someone to join a club for insurance or cover, is a poor excuse. I know of three people personally, that are not, and never would be associated to a club. They shoot their lands (owned or with sporting rights) without being beholding to any club or group.

......... i did not say you need ins for a permit ...........

...... but you said above;

nipper67 wrote:

...........plus its part of your gun licence...........

............. implying that insurance is needed to obtain a firearms license. I also asked you to explain this above which you have not. If i have misunderstood your intent/meaning then please explain what you did mean.

........... but you need to be in a club or permission if you enter onto lands in sport. ........

Correct.

......... you should protect the people that give us the freedom to do so this is the min to do .......

Agreed.

............. nargc protects farmer and hunter this is what i say and its cheep keep the faith

They provide a program where a hunter/shooter will not loose their house should an incident occur. To what extent is up to the NARGC, and the level of cover their compensation fund provides. As for cheap. The average cost per person is €55 for cover from the NARGC. IFA provides the same cover for €30 - €35, and i believe (stand to be corrected) that the CAI for €45.

So by no means the cheapest and when compared to others stand as the most expensive. Add this to the fact that you cannot gain coverage as an individual and the NARGC compensation fund is only "attractive" to game clubs (possibly).


For the purpose of the OP's request IFA or CAI would seem a better fit.

Boiled-egg

Changed from NARGC to IFA this year and can't fault them. Id definately recomend them. Point to note NARGC is a compensation fund as opposed to insurance. (Not sure what the difference is but I'm lead to delive there is a difference)

deeksofdoom

Boiled-egg wrote: »

Point to note NARGC is a compensation fund as opposed to insurance. (Not sure what the difference is but I'm lead to delive there is a difference)

Anyone who has ever said that to me has never been able to explain the difference.

Suffice it to say the compensation fund is still underwritten by Lloyds of London, which basically means its guaranteed against failure. Its a compensation fund guaranteed with its own insurance policy, the compensation fund has to be guaranteed as this is law. - this is how I understand it as it was explained to me.

Taken from the NARGC website

NARGC Compensation Fund

Forced by spiralling rates for commercial insurance, in 1984 the National Association of Regional Game Councils formed its own scheme of self-protection for its Members and called it the "NARGC Compensation Fund". Opposition to the move was rife at the time, particularly from vested interests in the insurance world and to some extent Government also, no doubt ably fuelled by the self-same protagonists. However, the Association was determined to push ahead with its carefully thought-out plan and can now boast about having commenced something that has truly been a monumental success.

http://www.nargc.ie/compensation-fund.aspx

Boiled-egg

Deeks
As I said I don't know the difference between them. I don't even have an opinion on wheather insurance is better than compensation or not.
What I do know is the cost of being a member of either and the benifits of each. The IFA is better suited to me.

deeksofdoom

Boiled-egg wrote: »

Deeks
As I said I don't know the difference between them. I don't even have an opinion on wheather insurance is better than compensation or not.
What I do know is the cost of being a member of either and the benifits of each. The IFA is better suited to me.

I don't think it does make a difference, the idea of the compensation fund was to give a cheaper option for NARGC members, but the cost of insurance with the CAI or FAI is on par if not cheaper than the NARGC.

However the price of it doesn't come in to it coz you'ld need to be sure that your covered for what you want.

goz83

nipper67 wrote: »

NARGC is approved by all farming associations. I did not say it was the only one. This is in your head. As a land owner, I, nor any sane land owner would not allow any trespasser on his, or her land without some cover. If you go onto land with consent, I hope you tell the land owner that you do, or do not have cover. If you tell him you don't, I dont think he will allow this, would you? I did not say you need insurance for a permit, but you need to be in a club, or have permission if you enter onto lands. In sport, you should protect the people that give us the freedom to do so. This is the minimum to do. NARGC protects farmer and hunter. This is what I say and it's cheap. Keep the faith.

Never, in all my life, have I seen this much text, without any punctuation. Not a single full stop, comma, or capital letter to be seen. That's just lazy and makes the post a struggle to understand. I lost interest in the thread after the second line in this post.

I decided to be obessive and added puntuation, just in case anyone actually wanted to read and understand the post.

nipper67

cass you took what i said out of context and you said i implied some thing and as for not allowing some to enter any lands without cover is a no brainer and if you contact farming associations they will confirm about the nargc ins also for 55 euro you have third party and personal ins others are cheaper but what do they cover i do not know .nargc covers you for all types of shooting and your dog third party

Cass

nipper67 wrote: »

cass you took what i said out of context .......

How?

I tried to read what you wrote, explained what i did not follow and asked for further explanation. None has been forthcoming.

........... and you said i implied some thing ..........

I have implied nothing. Your inference is the issue.

............. and as for not allowing some to enter any lands without cover is a no brainer ..........

Then perhaps you could elaborate on your points above, and use the correct terminology.

......... and if you contact farming associations they will confirm about the nargc ins also for 55 euro you have third party and personal ins others are cheaper but what do they cover i do not know .nargc covers you for all types of shooting and your dog third party

Two things here;

1. NARGC is not insurance. Don;t care if they are " the same thing". When insured i like to know i have insurance.
2. You claim they are the most approved form of "insurance". I asked how you know this not a suggestion to get out the phonebook with instructions to ring every farming association and ask.

The NARGC fund is only available in certain circumstances, and for the purpose of this thread not the OP. Therefore other companies/groups would be a better suit.

deeksofdoom

goz83 wrote: »

I decided to be obessive and added puntuation, just in case anyone actually wanted to read and understand the post.

Your not as smart as you think you missed a capital 'I', I suggest you get over it. The boy just don't read good.

goz83

deeksofdoom wrote: »

You're not as smart as you think. You missed a capital 'I'. I suggest you get over it. The boy just don't read good.

Ah crap. I'm no english teacher, but I did try my best sir! I will go back and fix the "I" expecially for you. Just thought I'd fix some of yours while I was at it.

Nino Brown

Just a word of warning on the shooting insurance, in the event that a WMD lands on or near you, you're not covered!

"Nuclear, Chemical and Biological Exclusion – the effect of this is that insurers will not pay any claim for Personal Accident arising directly or indirectly from or connection with radioactive contamination or the discharge, explosion or use of a weapon of mass destruction whether or not employing nuclear fission or fusion or chemical, biological, radioactive or similar agents by any party at any time for any reason."

....They always shaft you in the fine print!

cavan shooter

There are interesting aspects of insurance that people need to research. For the record I have NARGC fund protection, but in the past I have had CAI protection. CAI is an insurance of last resort and it does not pay out for non permanent disability or loss of earnings. The fund is exactly that a fund, but its also insured against the maximum claim which off the top of my head is 10 million each and every claim within the EU. As a fisherman I am covered fishing with the fund and more importantly if my dog on a hot trail runs out in front of a BMW, whilst i am down a dog, the damage the dog does to the car is covered by the fund. I cannot comment on the IFA insurance package but I suggest you research it to see which is better.

I have had experience with claims through the NARGC and they pay up including the time off work, and no quibble when or if a dog does damage to sheep etc.

A shooting buddy of mine broke his ankle and was off work for 5 weeks he got paid a weekly sum, and was given a lump sum. The downside to the NARGC fund and again I know this personally is that to get into it, sometimes you have to get past 6 fingered, banjo picking, in breds. In fairness to the NARGC they acknowledge that this is a problem and are doing there best to encourage members to open their doors. Compensation fund membership is €50 + club membersip

Cass

cavan shooter wrote: »

Compensation fund membership is €50 + club membersip

I think this is the biggest point in all this thread. If the OP wants NARGC cover he needs to join an affiliated club. If he does not want to join a club then he has no option but to consider one of the others that give individual coverage.

Or do they now offer individual coverage?

cavan shooter

Cass wrote: »

I think this is the biggest point in all this thread. If the OP wants NARGC cover he needs to join an affiliated club. If he does not want to join a club then he has no option but to consider one of the others that give individual coverage.

Or do they now offer individual coverage?

No, still through the Club and id guess always will be.

Sparks

deeksofdoom wrote: »

Anyone who has ever said that to me has never been able to explain the difference.

As I understand it, a compensation fund (like the NARGC's or like Telecom Eireann used to use for its vehicles) is a private fund, ie. a big pot of money owned by a private group. Whereas an insurance company is a commercial fund. The rules and laws governing the two are different (insurers are covered by the Insurance Act, funds are not). Funds can insure for things that Insurers cannot (eg. the NARGC will pay out if you are out hunting and swap guns with a friend and you're then injured, even though you were breaking the law at the time; an Insurer cannot do that) -- but on the other hand, the State underwrites all Insurers with the Insurance Compensation Fund maintained by the High Court (why the HC maintains it, I don't know).

Sometimes, a fund is the better choice; sometimes an insurer is. Basicly, you have to evaluate your needs, read the fine print, make your choice and caveat emptor. Do anything else at your own peril...

Suffice it to say the compensation fund is still underwritten by Lloyds of London, which basically means its guaranteed against failure.

Er, no. That's not what that means, and you really need to read the fine print. It means that should any individual claim be more than the fund has available, then lloyds' insurance covers it. It does not prevent the fund running dry from (say) a string of multiple claims, nor from bad investment of the funds by those managing it, and no insurer in the world would ever give coverage like that, it'd be madness to do so.

That being said, it's not like that's a weakness that commercial insurers don't share; just look at AIG. It's just that insurers have the state to fall back on in Ireland.

deeksofdoom

Sparks wrote: »

Er, no. That's not what that means, and you really need to read the fine print. It means that should any individual claim be more than the fund has available, then lloyds' insurance covers it. It does not prevent the fund running dry from (say) a string of multiple claims, nor from bad investment of the funds by those managing it, and no insurer in the world would ever give coverage like that, it'd be madness to do so.

So say if the fund was wipped out by a string of mishaps, would the NARGC have to sort out alternative insurance arrangements for its members?

Would it then be just basic cover like contryside ireland, but then no cover for your dog if he gets knocked down. You loan your gun to someone etc....

Sparks

deeksofdoom wrote: »

So say if the fund was wipped out by a string of mishaps, would the NARGC have to sort out alternative insurance arrangements for its members?

I don't know if they'd have to, you'd have to check the fine print. Usually there's a clause in there to say that if things go horribly pear-shaped, that the insurance is wound up and that's the end of it. And I'd imagine that their lloyds insurance would mean that the payouts they were legally obligated to make to anyone claiming at that time would be covered (but after that, the coffers would be empty and it's not lloyd's job to refill them, so they'd have to cease insuring, at least temporarily).

But this isn't the sort of thing that could happen overnight without people knowing about it - you'd get at least some warning.

Would it then be just basic cover like contryside ireland, but then no cover for your dog if he gets knocked down. You loan your gun to someone etc....

Until the fund or something like it could be restarted, yeah, you'd be back to either CAI or the IFA. But there's no sign of that happening now, and it's as possible for it to happen to an insurer as to a fund (and as unlikely too).

homerhop

another thing to consider, with a fund it is at the discretion of those over it to the amount of compensation that is paid out.

deeksofdoom

homerhop wrote: »

another thing to consider, with a fund it is at the discretion of those over it to the amount of compensation that is paid out.

But surely thats the same as an insurance assessor, you write your car off their not going to give you what you paid for the car.

Tommy87

I read in the annual nargc magazine lately that their payouts are way higher than the countryside alliance. They had a side by side list of payouts by both. I can't remember them all but some were-- loss of eye/limb €100000 vs€17000. And a big one I thought was if your temporarily disabled you get €350 a week with nargc and nothing with countryside alliance.

People think accidents will never happen them, there is an article in the magazine about a chap in Galway that had a shooting accident, he lost his leg eventually. Now he can't work in his chosen field. He wrote the article himself. If that happened me I'd rather the €100000 rather than €17000.

bladesman

glad I opened this thread!!

I've learnt a lot so far,even improved on my spelling and grammar!

Wont be joining a gun club so it looks like the countryside alliance is for me even with the lower payouts mentioned by the previous contributor.

Anyone have experience of payouts with IFA?
I presume I dont need to actually be a farmer to get insurance with them.