Search studies, brands and more…⌘ KExplore research

Evidence · Home and contents insurance

Every question, every answer, every source

Explore all 372 home and contents insurance questions and the 1,476 answers saved on 11 October 2026. Read the original responses and download the tables behind the study’s comparisons, sources, sentiment and factual checks.

questions
372
answers saved, of 1488 planned
1476
consumer situations
12
named regions
16
AI platforms
4

01

Every question, with its answers

Each question went to the four AI platforms. All were collected with a New Zealand setting. Open a question to read every captured answer in full.

Showing 20 of 372 questions

Show all 372

02

The tables behind the study

Every figure on the study page comes from these tables. They are CSV files, which open in any spreadsheet.

  • Questions

    questions.csv

    One row per question, with its exact saved wording.

    Question ID, source references, question, consumer situation, named regions, question group and collection setting

    372rows

    Download questions (CSV)

  • Answers

    answers.csv

    One row per captured answer, with its full text.

    Answer ID, question ID, platform, collection setting, consumer situation, named regions and full answer

    1,476rows

    Download answers (CSV)

  • Sources by answer

    sources.csv

    One row per website recorded as a source of an answer.

    Answer ID, question ID, assistant, collection setting, website and publisher type

    9,014rows

    Download sources by answer (CSV)

  • Checks against primary sources

    checks.csv

    One row per stated assertion checked, for one platform.

    Check, question and answer IDs, assistant, exact passage, verdict, primary-source finding, URL and date

    97rows

    Download checks against primary sources (CSV)

  • Consumer recommendation coding

    consumer-recommendation-coding.csv

    One row per reviewed provider role in a consumer-selection answer.

    Answer ID, question ID, consumer, platform, provider, role, counted recommendation, exact passage and conditions

    659rows

    Download consumer recommendation coding (CSV)

  • Consumer selection membership

    consumer-selection-membership.csv

    One row per answer in the matched consumer-selection comparison.

    Answer ID, question ID, consumer, platform, question group and full text; twelve home and twelve contents selection questions, with missing captures preserved

    94rows

    Download consumer selection membership (CSV)

  • Ongoing support coding

    support-coding.csv

    One row per reviewed named-provider role in an eligible support answer.

    Answer ID, question ID, consumer, platform, provider, role, support-preference decision and exact passage

    75rows

    Download ongoing support coding (CSV)

  • Ongoing support membership

    support-membership.csv

    One row per answer in the actual consumer-support group.

    Answer ID, question ID, consumer, platform, question group and full text; acquisition validation is excluded

    71rows

    Download ongoing support membership (CSV)

  • Regional recommendation coding

    regional-recommendation-coding.csv

    One row per reviewed provider role in a region-named selection answer.

    Answer ID, question ID, named consumer region, platform, provider, recommendation decision and exact passage

    1,017rows

    Download regional recommendation coding (CSV)

  • Regional selection membership

    regional-selection-membership.csv

    One row per answer in the matched regional comparison.

    Answer ID, question ID, named consumer region, platform and equal-comparison membership; four home and three contents platform answers per region

    112rows

    Download regional selection membership (CSV)

  • Insurer sentiment

    insurer-sentiment.csv

    One row per unique saved claim about an insurer in a selection answer.

    Claim, question and answer IDs, insurer, saved stance, exact passage and original-answer offsets

    3,828rows

    Download insurer sentiment (CSV)

  • Recorded source URLs

    source-urls.csv

    One row per recorded answer, website and URL association.

    Answer ID, question ID, platform, website, URL, source records and presence in the captured answer text

    13,048rows

    Download recorded source urls (CSV)

  • Matched consumer platform membership

    platform-membership.csv

    One row per answer in the identical-question platform comparison.

    Answer ID, question ID, product, consumer and platform; 22 identical questions per platform

    88rows

    Download matched consumer platform membership (CSV)

  • Matched regional platform membership

    regional-platform-membership.csv

    One row per answer in the identical-question regional platform comparison.

    Answer ID, question ID, product, region and platform; 31 identical questions per platform

    124rows

    Download matched regional platform membership (CSV)

Use these tables to trace findings back to the original questions and answers. The full text of each answer is also on this page, under its question.

03

Read in full and checked

Some answers were read in detail or checked against official sources. Those appear on the study page, beside the findings they support.

ChatGPT · New Zealand

Our last contents claim was rejected because of a limit we didn't know about. How can we check whether a new policy has the same catch?

The safest way to check whether a new policy has the same hidden limitation is to test the exact constraint that caused the previous rejection before you rely on the new policy.

A policy can look more permissive while still retaining a restriction in its fine print, eligibility criteria, exceptions, or enforcement rules. The key is to turn the previous rejection into a specific test that the new policy must pass.

A practical way to check

  1. Find the original rejection reason. Identify the exact limit that was exceeded or the condition that made the content ineligible. Save the rejection notice and the relevant policy wording.
  2. Find the new policy's authoritative wording. Check the full policy, not just the announcement or summary. Look for numerical limits, exclusions, definitions, exceptions, and cross-referenced rules.
  3. Compare the two policies side by side. Check whether the old limit has been removed, increased, redefined, or retained elsewhere.
  4. Test a borderline example. Use the type of content that was rejected, changing only the feature that triggered the rejection. If possible, get written confirmation from the policy owner before publishing or submitting it.
  5. Keep evidence. Record the policy version, effective date, relevant clauses, test results, and any written clarification.

Use a simple pass/fail checklist

I know the exact reason the previous content was rejected.

I have the complete new policy and its effective date.

I checked definitions, exceptions, thresholds, and linked policies.

I tested the new policy against the same borderline example.

I have confirmation of any ambiguous restrictions.

0 of 5 checks completed

Reset

This approach is consistent with New Zealand's Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet's Policy Quality Framework, which supports systematic assessment and review of policy advice. Policy quality | Department of the Prime Minister and Cabinet (DPMC)

I can help you check the new policy directly. Which platform or organisation rejected your last content, and where is the new policy published? If you share the rejection message and the new policy link or text, I can compare them and identify any remaining limits, exceptions, or loopholes that could cause another rejection.

Ask anything

ChatGPT can make mistakes. Check important info.

Captured 11 October 2026

Gemini · New Zealand

Our last contents claim was rejected because of a limit we didn't know about. How can we check whether a new policy has the same catch?

When a previous claim is rejected due to an unforeseen restriction, checking a new policy or content claim proactively requires shifting from looking at what you want to say to looking closely at how boundaries, definitions, and qualifiers are constructed.

To find out whether a new policy or claim template shares the same hidden catch, use a systematic pre-check framework:

1. Perform a "Stress-Test" on Definitions

Policies and platform guidelines rarely fail outright; instead, they trip you up on narrow technical definitions.

  • Identify critical terms: Look at every noun and verb in your claim (e.g., words like guarantee, unlimited, safe, clinical, exclusive).
  • Find the glossary: Locate the definitions section or policy guidelines document. Check if the platform or governing body defines those words differently than standard dictionary definitions.

2. Isolate the "Hidden" Exclusions and Scope Limits

Restrictions are rarely hidden in the main headline claim; they live in the qualifiers and disclaimers.

  • Look for conditional triggers: Scan for phrases like “subject to,” “except where,” “limited time,” or “valid only under.”
  • Map out the boundary: Ask yourself: Under what exact scenario would this claim become false? If that scenario is common or easy to trigger, the policy has the same catch.

3. Review the Substantiation Standard

Many claims are rejected because the type of proof required doesn't match what the policy demands.

  • Check the evidence threshold: Does the new policy require independent testing, expert backing, or specific documentation?
  • Compare proof to promise: Ensure that the data or evidence you hold directly supports the broadest possible interpretation of the new claim, not just a narrow subset of it.

4. Conduct a "Worst-Case Interpretation" Review

Regulators, platforms, and reviewers evaluate claims based on the impression given to the average audience, not your internal intent.

  • The literal test: Read your new claim strictly literally. If someone took it in the absolute most extreme way possible, would it violate the policy? If yes, the catch is still there, and the wording needs tightening.
Ask Gemini

Gemini is AI and can make mistakes.

Captured 11 October 2026

AI Overviews · New Zealand

Our last contents claim was rejected because of a limit we didn't know about. How can we check whether a new policy has the same catch?

AI Overview

To check if a new contents insurance policy has the same hidden limit, you need to review the Policy Wording (also called the Product Disclosure Statement or Policy Guide) before you sign up. Do not rely solely on the summary page or quote breakdown.

Here is exactly how to spot these restrictions and protect your items:

1. Scan the "Policy Limits" Section

Every policy has a section detailing the maximum amount paid for specific categories, regardless of your total sum insured.

  • Look for "Special Limits" or "Sub-limits": This is where insurers cap payouts for high-risk items.

  • Commonly limited categories in NZ: Jewelry, watches, bicycles, cameras, collections (stamps/coins), tools, and musical instruments.

2. Check "Per-Item" vs. "Category" Caps

Understand how the limit applies:

  • Per-Item Limit: The maximum paid for a single item (e.g., up to $2,500 per piece of jewelry).

  • Category Limit: The maximum paid for all items in that group combined during one claim (e.g., up to $5,000 for all jewelry combined).

3. Review the Definition of "Unspecified" Items

Most standard policies cover general belongings up to the total policy limit, but require you to specify (register) items that exceed a certain value. Check the exact dollar threshold where an item transitions from "standard contents" to requiring individual listing.

How to Compare Policies Direct

Use this checklist when reading the policy wording of a new provider:

What to look for Where it is usually hidden What to do if your item is worth more
Jewelry & Watches Under "Special Limits" Ask to list them as Specified Items
Bicycles & Sports Gear Under "Exclusions" or "Limits" Check if covered while in use away from home
Home Office / Tools Under "Business Tools" Verify if the cap covers your remote-work gear

If you find a limit that is too low, you can usually pay a slightly higher premium to specify the item on your policy certificate, which removes the standard cap for that specific item.

To help you find the exact wording or alternative options, could you tell me:

  • What type of item caused the claim rejection (e.g., jewelry, electronics, bicycle)?

  • Which insurance companies you are currently looking at?

  • Roughly how much the item is worth?

Ask anything

Captured 11 October 2026

Google AI Mode · New Zealand

Our last contents claim was rejected because of a limit we didn't know about. How can we check whether a new policy has the same catch?

To avoid being caught out by hidden limits or unexpected exclusions on a new policy, you need to dig past the marketing summary and interrogate the fine print. Under New Zealand consumer standards and guidelines from the Insurance Council of New Zealand (ICNZ), insurers must disclose these terms, but they are often buried in specific sections of the contract.

Here is how you can check a new policy for hidden caps, sub-limits, and restrictive clauses:

  • Review the Policy Wording and Schedule: Do not rely on the high-level brochure or website summary. Pull the full legal Policy Wording document and your specific Policy Schedule , which outlines the exact limits applied to your tier of cover.

  • Scan the Sub-limits and Benefit Caps: Look beyond the total maximum sum insured. Policies often cap individual categories (such as single-item limits for electronics, jewelry, or specific types of damage). Check if there are per-event, per-item, or annual sub-limits that fall below your expected claim size.

  • Examine the Exclusions Section: Read the fine print detailing what is explicitly not covered. Compare these exclusions against your previous policy or market competitors to spot unusually broad carve-outs, gradual damage clauses, or restrictive definitions.

  • Check the Operational and Temporal Windows: Look for strict reporting or notification timeframes (how quickly you must notify the insurer after an incident occurs) and any mandatory conditions precedents, such as maintenance requirements or security baselines. [QuoteHub NZ]

  • Ask Direct, Written Questions: Call or email the insurer or your broker with a hypothetical scenario matching your previous rejection. Getting their interpretation in writing provides a clear baseline of how they intend to apply the policy in practice.

  • Reference the Fair Insurance Code: Ensure the provider subscribes to the Insurance Council of New Zealand (ICNZ) framework, which binds them to clear, transparent communication standards and fair handling under the Fair Insurance Code.

If you can share what type of contents or claim category you are insuring (e.g., high-value collectibles, electronics, or general household goods) and what the previous limit issue was , I can help you pinpoint which specific clauses to look out for.

Ask anything

Captured 11 October 2026