Sky Protect - IS it a must have?

[DorsetJon]

Hey Guys,

We've got a few friends who have Sky Q and Glass systems,and have been asking us IF having Sky Protect is a necessity,to ensure their set ups were covered/protected.

I've told them that no,I dont think it is.

As for us here at home,we still run two Sky HD boxes,so will continue to keep our Sky Protect policy going,whilst we are still rockin' our HD boxes.

[TimmyBGood · Accepted solution]

@DorsetJon 

Different issues for different systems.

Sky Q boxes are loaned, and Sky replaces them FOC for hardware failure (and fixes dish issues, although theoretically that's not covered) : Protect subscribers are supposed to get faster attendance though.  Sky advises Q hardware should be insured by the user against theft and accidental damage because any such loss can be charged for at the non-return rates.  The same advice on insurance is true for Sky Stream pucks since February 2023: pucks acquired before then are owned by the user.

Glass televisions are sold with a two year warranty which has now expired for early adopters: outside that they are expensive to replace after system failure and impossible to repair for screen impact, so Protect might well be appropriate (particularly as accidental damage isn't covered even when under warranty, and full purchase loan repayment remains applicable for an unusable set)

Sky+ / Sky+ HD boxes were sold, and late model hardware is easily and cheaply available second-hand, but only Sky Protect subscribers now get Sky 'engineer' attendance for reception issues.

Standard 'Building & Contents' insurance should cover fire, theft and accidental damage (although potentially with a substantial excess), but typically not out of warranty failure