Price comparison: Pikl vs Guardhog

Published 21st November 2017

For this comparison we’ve taken one of our competitors, which also provides insurance for the sharing economy.

  • While this competitor appears to offer different pricing for each customer based on location, number of bedrooms in the property and the amount being charged to the guest per night, Pikl has fixed pricing for each customer, regardless of those factors.
  • Guardhog charges by the day only, meaning the prices in the table below – taken from the three example properties on its homepage as at the date of publishing – are simply multiplied to arrive at figures for each letting duration.
  • Pikl offers insurance by the day as well, but also has a range of packages that can be bought for use throughout the year, including full annual policies. This system ensures our customers only pay for what they need.
  • The biggest difference in cover is that Guardhog includes an element of cover for standard household risks (though this is not fully comprehensive in comparison to a standard home insurance policy). This appears to makes the assumption that your main home insurer is either unaware of your hosting activity on Airbnb or other platforms, or that they will void your policy due to this hosting activity. This additional cover is what would appear to cause Guardhog’s prices to be higher than Pikl’s; however, it is imperative that you inform your home insurer about your hosting activity. The consequences of not doing so could be serious — see below for further details.

Price comparison

 

1 night

35 nights

90 nights

All year

Guardhog

Pikl

Guardhog

Pikl

Guardhog

Pikl

Guardhog

Pikl

3 beds, north-west London

£4.86

£2.00

£170.10

£39.99

£437.40

£49.99

£1,773.90

£79.99

Studio flat, Manchester

£1.08

£2.00

£37.80

£39.99

£97.20

£49.99

£394.20

£79.99

2 beds, Cotswolds

£2.64

£2.00

£92.40

£39.99

£237.60

£49.99

£963.60

£79.99

 

Cover comparison

 

Pikl

Guardhog

Policy excess/franchise

Main policy excess £250*; theft franchise of £500, which means claims are only paid if they exceed £500

Main policy excess £250; Whole policy franchise of £1,000, which means claims are only paid if they exceed £1,000

Accidental damage to buildings and contents by a guest

Yes

Yes

Malicious damage to buildings and contents by a guest

Yes

Yes

Theft by a guest of building and contents

Yes

Yes

Public liability for injury to guests

Yes

Yes

Legal expenses to pursue or defend legal claims

Yes

No

Key/replacement locks

Yes

Yes**

Alternative accommodation

Yes

Yes

Fire and explosion caused by a guest

Yes

Yes

Escape of water/oil caused by a guest (e.g. burst pipe)

Yes

Yes

Standard home insurance claims events, e.g. storm, flood, subsidence, heave, collision, theft (not by guest)

No***

Yes

Cover for investigations by HMRC

Yes

No

Identity theft

No

No

*Main policy excess is £250; other excesses may apply for specific claims – see our policy summary for details.

**Most key/replacement lock claims are less than £1,000. While Guardhog provides cover, it also has a main policy franchise of £1,000.

***Pikl cover works on the basis that you inform your home insurance provider that you let your property and they agree to continue to cover you for claims not caused by guests. This way Pikl does not need to provide cover that duplicates your home insurance, which keeps your policy price competitive. See the box below for further details.

The above comparison of cover shows you what Pikl offers against what one of our competitors offers as at the date of publishing. Guardhog does not publish on its website the policy sums insured or cover limits. It might be that these vary with each quote. You can compare these with Pikl’s policy summary when you select the relevant product.

Important ­— it is vital you inform your main home insurer about your intention to let your property or room on Airbnb or similar sharing platform. Even with separate insurance in place to cover Airbnb or similar activity, many providers will have a requirement to make claims first through your main home insurance policy, to ensure their is no dual insurance in place. If you have not informed your main home insurance provider this could lead to claims being declined due to lack of disclosure about your hosting activity. Declined claims are recorded on the Claims and Underwriting Exchange (CUE) database and could lead to future issues in securing insurance.

At Pikl we will only ask you to go through your home insurer if there is some element of doubt as to the cause of an incident, such as a fire, where the cause needs to be determined or where it is unclear if an element of dual insurance may exist.

The take-home message? Always inform your home insurance provider about your home-sharing plans in advance.