Riots and damage compensation

[Harry Bloomfield]

Edit: Mrs Doubtfrye is trying to claim that this weeks event’s would be classed as something a other than a riot, and is claiming that the out of date ABI guidance note referring to civil commotion or political disturbances, would be reason to deny claims under the RCA2016.

He/she/it, is a well known troll of the forum - the main aim of which is to test your patience. Do not get drawn in.

 

[denso13]

I've been trying to answer this since you posted it,

Where does the act “clearly state claims for political disturbance or civil commotion are not covered.”

Please paste the link.

and it only mentions that riots are covered. You won't get a law saying what isn't covered.

 

[Mottie]

and it only mentions that riots are covered.

Isn't that what this thread is about?

 

[Charlie George]

Put it on ignore

 

[Mrs Ten Names]

That’s my point, they are not. You’ve got the wrong end of the stick here.

you mean the government or SoS doesn't, as rule, claim that the Act doesn't cover specific situations?

Mrs Doubtfrye is trying to claim that this weeks event’s would be classed as something a other than a riot, and is claiming that the out of date ABI guidance note referring to civil commotion or political disturbances, would be reason to deny claims under the RCA2016.

No I'm not trying to claim anything of the sort. I'm saying it's very possible that is what could happen.
Time will tell.

I am saying that the event of this week would be covered by the definition of a riot and therefore would be covered.

Unless they fall under a different category.

There is no reference to civil commotion or political disturbances for inclusion or exclusion from the act.

Exactly, It doesn't cover any claims if the events are judged to be civil commotion, political disturbance, terrorism or war.
In fact, if they are judged to be damage caused by break away groups, the damage may also not be covered by the Act.

 

[Mrs Ten Names]

He/she/it, is a well known troll of the forum - the main aim of which is to test your patience. Do not get drawn in.

I did say it's been a good natured discussion so far.
Then the usual culprits arrive.
All in quick succession.

 

[Mottie]

Then the usual culprits arrive.

They arrived in #3 and gave completely wrong information.

Not exactly correct. Large corporations, local authorities, water boards, etc are not obliged to have insurance because they are considered to have sufficient funding to meet any claims.
So their buildings and property, etc may not be insured. They have to withstand the loss.

Not in the case of riots they don’t which is what this thread is about.

 

[kingandy2nd]

I've been trying to answer this since you posted it,



and it only mentions that riots are covered. You won't get a law saying what isn't covered.

lol, mate you’re arguing the same side.

It only applies to riots. If they're re-categorised as political disturbances, the compensation scheme doesn't apply.

The above is what I was challenging by providing the latest legislation, and why I was asking specifically about those items and where they were referenced.

Mrs Doubtfyre kept coming back to this point and using the out of date Abi commentary as their evidence.

And you do get law about what’s not covered, it’s there in the legislation! Less that 12 people for example.

 

[kingandy2nd]

Exactly, It doesn't cover any claims if the events are judged to be civil commotion, political disturbance, terrorism or war.
In fact, if they are judged to be damage caused by break away groups, the damage may also not be covered by the Act.

Now you are just trolling

 

[denso13]

Isn't that what this thread is about?

I'm not sure anymore...

 

[kingandy2nd]

I've been wondering about who would face the eventual bill, for all of this damage, to private property, so I did a bit of research, and - we all pay.

If insured, the insureco, can claim from the police. If not insured, the police pay anyway. We of course, fund the police, so the cost comes out of the public purse.

Riot Compensation Act 2016

An Act to repeal the Riot (Damages) Act 1886 and make provision about types of claims, procedures, decision-making and limits on awards payable in relation to a new compensation scheme for property damaged, destroyed or stolen in the course of riots.

www.legislation.gov.uk

So in summary for this thread Harry, yes you are spot on. A lot of the damage that’s been caused in the last week or so riots (as defined by the Public Order Act of 1986) will be paid out via the Riot Compensation Act of 2016, which will ultimately be paid by taxpayers (or funded through government debt).

The rest of the 6 pages is semantics or people arguing out of date information or edge cases as to why it might not be paid under RCA 2016.

 

[noseall]

I see the riot/thug arm of the RWR targeted a library. Probably frightened and didn't understand what it was.

 

[denso13]

why I was asking specifically about those items and where they were referenced.

They aren't referenced at all, but you keep asking. I think you are jumping about a bit here but never mind.

 

[Mottie]

Himmy will ALWAYS take a thread off topic and start quoting the most bizarre examples once you catch him out.

 

[kingandy2nd]

I see the riot/thug arm of the RWR targeted a library. Probably frightened and didn't understand what it was.

Yep. Scum.

Feel free to donate everyone, I know I have.

Donate to Books for Spellow Lane, organized by Alex McCormick

Our city is a sad place at the minute, much like the rest of the country. But it makes me heartb… Alex McCormick needs your support for Books for Spellow Lane

www.gofundme.com