Results 11 to 20 of 36
Thread: Questions and Answers
-
30-03-2017, 11:44 #11
- Join Date
- Aug 2015
- Location
- Cape Town
- Posts
- 159
Re: Questions and Answers
Hi. That was before Paul had his meetings/discussions with Gunsure. They have since corrected this statement in writing. This is the email I received earlier this week:
Good day
Please note i have escalated the query to senior management and have been advised that you are correct in saying you can use a section 16 fire arm for self defense, Kindly note that all cases are case managed in order to determine if it was a lawful or legal shooting.
Legal shooting as per policy wording is, an incident of discharging a legally registered firearm by the owner, with a valid competency certificate (under the Firearms Control Act).
I do apologize for any inconvenience this has caused
Kind Regards
-
30-03-2017, 11:50 #12
- Join Date
- Mar 2017
- Location
- Johannesburg
- Posts
- 28
Re: Questions and Answers
Good Day Aspoestertjie69
Thank you for your message. Our policy has since changed.
We do cover a self-defence event with a section 16 firearm. All sections are covered as long as the shoot was lawful and done with a licensed firearm that you listed with us.
We will have to get back to you regarding a copy of our policy. We will be in touch during the course of the day.
Regards
Gunsure
-
30-03-2017, 11:52 #13
- Join Date
- Feb 2013
- Location
- GP
- Age
- 48
- Posts
- 3,870
Re: Questions and Answers
So to use a case that we all know very well. The Oscar case. It took many months to determine whether he was guilty or not and there are many that still feels that the verdict was wrong. In such a case would he be covered? Now we have a lot of detail but when this saga started and SAPS wanted to charge him what would the verdict be?
My concern is that if SAPS are used to determine if it was a lawful shooting then by default you would not be covered if you get charged or am I missing something.
When it comes to insurance where the fact that you are covered or not may well be life or death (unable to support family). I would venture that giving cover based on historical facts (no criminal record/violent behavior) would be better indication of the nature of the person, than based on some future event that may take 5 seconds in a high stress situation.
Approaching the insurance ombudsman is definitely a recourse that you have. Unfortunately it takes some time and if you don't have the right legal counsel while waiting for the ombudsman to decide the decision may well be to late.
-
30-03-2017, 11:55 #14
Re: Questions and Answers
Bail should be easy, as the insurer can recover it quickly. As long as the insured attends court, bail will be repaid.
As to lawfulness, unlawfulness, the insurer will have to work on civil burden of proof, and not criminal like the SAPS do, so it shouldn't be dependent on the outcome of the case.Sent electronically, thus not signed.
-
30-03-2017, 11:57 #15
- Join Date
- Feb 2013
- Location
- GP
- Age
- 48
- Posts
- 3,870
-
30-03-2017, 12:19 #16
- Join Date
- Jan 2015
- Location
- PTA
- Posts
- 183
Thank you rian i only saw the related post now which basically awensers quite a few of the most important questions. Only thing that needs to be sorted is pointing of the firearm and posibly the fact that you can only use your firearm when SHTF.
http://www.gunsite.co.za/forums/showthread.php?80856-GOSA-vs-Gunsure&p=1156891#post1156891
-
30-03-2017, 13:11 #17
- Join Date
- Aug 2012
- Location
- South Africa
- Posts
- 4,478
-
30-03-2017, 13:26 #18
- Join Date
- Dec 2015
- Location
- Eastern Cape
- Posts
- 1,034
Re: Questions and Answers
Hi Gunsure, Would a person be covered or not in the following scenarios?
Scenario 1. A is a licensed FA owner and a member of Gunsure. He visits Bwithout his FA. In the driveway they are hi-jacked. B shoots back with his FAand is wounded. A pick up the FA of B and shoot back at the BG.
Scenario 2. A is a licensed FA owner and a member of Gunsure. He visits Bwithout his FA. In the driveway they are hi-jacked. They overpower the 1stBG and the 2nd BG is shooting at them. A picks up the 1stBG unlicensed/illegal FA and shoots back with unlicensed/illegal FA.
-
30-03-2017, 13:55 #19
- Join Date
- Mar 2017
- Location
- Johannesburg
- Posts
- 28
-
30-03-2017, 15:25 #20
- Join Date
- Dec 2014
- Age
- 65
- Posts
- 167
Re: Questions and Answers
This just seems like another insurance rip off.
You get arrested and they ask the local police if you are guilty, the reason they arrest you is that you are suspected of a crime.
SO NOW YOU SIT IN JAIL.
This seems like GunSure will just hide behind some local policeman with no understanding of the law and look for any way to get out of covering you. Where does an insurance company get the right to judge you in advance of a qualified judge, without all the facts having been presented and verified.
PS I have posted their insurance document in the GOSA-vs-Gunsure thread, with assistance, please go and read this in it's entirety, then you can decide for yourself.
It think that this insurance cover has a long way to go before it will have any purpose other than collecting money.
Bookmarks