Your browser isn't supported
It looks like you're using an old web browser. To get the most out of the site and to ensure guides display correctly, we suggest upgrading your browser now. Download the latest:

Welcome to the MSE Forums

We're home to a fantastic community of MoneySavers but anyone can post. Please exercise caution & report spam, illegal, offensive or libellous posts/messages: click "report" or email forumteam@. Skimlinks & other affiliated links are turned on

Search
  • FIRST POST
    • YorkBluenose
    • By YorkBluenose 6th Sep 17, 5:58 PM
    • 11Posts
    • 0Thanks
    YorkBluenose
    New Driver "Black Box" Car Insurance - Concurrent Policies
    • #1
    • 6th Sep 17, 5:58 PM
    New Driver "Black Box" Car Insurance - Concurrent Policies 6th Sep 17 at 5:58 PM
    Hi

    I would really appreciate any views on the below scenario, which pertains to "New Driver" car insurance, of the type for which a discounted premium is given for attaching a "black box" device to the car to monitor driving style:

    1. Son passes tests. We purchase a "black box" policy to give him comprehensive cover on the family car. Install device easily. He's happily now driving. Great.

    2. Few weeks later, daughter passes test. Great.

    3. Now, the same insurer, for reasons not clear, will not sell a similar policy to cover my daughter. They claim technical limitations of the black box device, as it is unable to differentiate between drivers. I get that, but the policy also requires that a driver MUST also log on via an app to explicitly identify themselves prior to commencing each journey. Without such, their insurance is invalidated. Ergo, the insurer does know exactly when when the insured is driving the car.

    4. Insurer then also advises their device must be connected all times, regardless of who is actually driving the car. Be it someone they insure....or someone they don't.

    So the outcome is that we are unable to get a similar policy for my 'new driver' daughter, as i) sons insurer won't sell one and ii) going to another provider would require us to alternate between the black box devices provided by the two different providers.

    None of the above was either made clear, or could be inferred, from the KeyFacts documentation, etc., that was provided prior to the purchase 'cooling off' period elapsing.

    Surely this is a distortion of free market principles as my daughter is prevented from purchasing a "black box" policy, unless we buy her a differnet car form that used by my son (not an option btw!).

    I'll be taking it to the Obudsman, in part out of curiosity, but foremost due to the practical inconvenience of being unable to get a New Driver policy for my daughter and thus likely being forced to pay hundreds extra for her to have a "non black box" policy.


    Many thanks for your thoughts.
    Last edited by YorkBluenose; 06-09-2017 at 6:02 PM.
Page 1
    • rs65
    • By rs65 6th Sep 17, 6:56 PM
    • 5,279 Posts
    • 2,505 Thanks
    rs65
    • #2
    • 6th Sep 17, 6:56 PM
    • #2
    • 6th Sep 17, 6:56 PM
    Surely this is a distortion of free market principles as my daughter is prevented from purchasing a "black box" policy, unless we buy her a differnet car form that used by my son (not an option btw!).
    Originally posted by YorkBluenose
    Free market principles allow you to cancel the policy and find a policy/provider that suits your needs.
    • Quentin
    • By Quentin 6th Sep 17, 6:57 PM
    • 33,268 Posts
    • 17,201 Thanks
    Quentin
    • #3
    • 6th Sep 17, 6:57 PM
    • #3
    • 6th Sep 17, 6:57 PM
    To take this to the ombudsman for their adjudication you first need to make a complaint to the insurer and await their reply (or 8 weeks if they ignore you) before being able to escalate to the FOS.
    • YorkBluenose
    • By YorkBluenose 6th Sep 17, 7:08 PM
    • 11 Posts
    • 0 Thanks
    YorkBluenose
    • #4
    • 6th Sep 17, 7:08 PM
    • #4
    • 6th Sep 17, 7:08 PM
    To take this to the ombudsman for their adjudication you first need to make a complaint to the insurer and await their reply (or 8 weeks if they ignore you) before being able to escalate to the FOS.
    Originally posted by Quentin
    already started that.
    • YorkBluenose
    • By YorkBluenose 6th Sep 17, 7:10 PM
    • 11 Posts
    • 0 Thanks
    YorkBluenose
    • #5
    • 6th Sep 17, 7:10 PM
    • #5
    • 6th Sep 17, 7:10 PM
    Free market principles allow you to cancel the policy and find a policy/provider that suits your needs.
    Originally posted by rs65
    Indeed, and inevitably will be the forced outcome, for which I will, unfairly IMO, incur a cancellation fee for a product that did not, again IMO, make some fundamentals clear in its KeyFacts.
    • rs65
    • By rs65 6th Sep 17, 7:40 PM
    • 5,279 Posts
    • 2,505 Thanks
    rs65
    • #6
    • 6th Sep 17, 7:40 PM
    • #6
    • 6th Sep 17, 7:40 PM
    Indeed, and inevitably will be the forced outcome, for which I will, unfairly IMO, incur a cancellation fee for a product that did not, again IMO, make some fundamentals clear in its KeyFacts.
    Originally posted by YorkBluenose
    Did you tell them when you took it out that you would need to soon add another young driver?
    • YorkBluenose
    • By YorkBluenose 6th Sep 17, 8:19 PM
    • 11 Posts
    • 0 Thanks
    YorkBluenose
    • #7
    • 6th Sep 17, 8:19 PM
    • #7
    • 6th Sep 17, 8:19 PM
    Did you tell them when you took it out that you would need to soon add another young driver?
    Originally posted by rs65
    No. Why should I ? I have never encountered a situation in which purchase of a car insurance policy would prevent another individual from taking out a policy on the same car at a future date. Two 'new drivers' requiring simultaneous insurance on the same car cannot be an unreasonable scenario, surely ? But evidently it is in the eyes of this insurer, and one that they prohibit with their policy yet make absolutely no mention of it in their KeyFacts.
    • rs65
    • By rs65 6th Sep 17, 8:46 PM
    • 5,279 Posts
    • 2,505 Thanks
    rs65
    • #8
    • 6th Sep 17, 8:46 PM
    • #8
    • 6th Sep 17, 8:46 PM
    So the outcome is that we are unable to get a similar policy for my 'new driver' daughter, as i) sons insurer won't sell one and ii) going to another provider would require us to alternate between the black box devices provided by the two different providers.
    Originally posted by YorkBluenose
    I'm no expert on these but can you not get your daughter such a policy from another provider? Why would you need to alternate - wouldn't both boxes run but each child's app says who was driving?

    If the insurer can't do it for technical reasons I doubt neither you nor the ombudsman can force them. So then what outcome do you want - fee free cancellation to go elsewhere.

    From a moneysaving viewpoint, multiple policies can't be the answer surely.
    • rs65
    • By rs65 6th Sep 17, 8:47 PM
    • 5,279 Posts
    • 2,505 Thanks
    rs65
    • #9
    • 6th Sep 17, 8:47 PM
    • #9
    • 6th Sep 17, 8:47 PM
    No. Why should I ? I have never encountered a situation in which purchase of a car insurance policy would prevent another individual from taking out a policy on the same car at a future date. Two 'new drivers' requiring simultaneous insurance on the same car cannot be an unreasonable scenario, surely ? But evidently it is in the eyes of this insurer, and one that they prohibit with their policy yet make absolutely no mention of it in their KeyFacts.
    Originally posted by YorkBluenose
    Are they prohibiting it or just saying their technology can't cope?
    • YorkBluenose
    • By YorkBluenose 6th Sep 17, 9:25 PM
    • 11 Posts
    • 0 Thanks
    YorkBluenose
    Are they prohibiting it or just saying their technology can't cope?
    Originally posted by rs65
    I sense its a deficiency with their tech, although I am unclear why i) they need the black box installed all the time, irrespective of who is driving, and ii) why they can't differentiate between drivers given the need to login before each journey.

    They can't prohibit another policy, but the moment I unplug their device, their policy becomes invalidated. Hence, only one New Driver can be insured for the car. I need to research offerings from other providers, there must be a company willing to insure both drivers and gain the income from two policies,

    cheers
    • YorkBluenose
    • By YorkBluenose 6th Sep 17, 9:31 PM
    • 11 Posts
    • 0 Thanks
    YorkBluenose
    I'm no expert on these but can you not get your daughter such a policy from another provider? Why would you need to alternate - wouldn't both boxes run but each child's app says who was driving?

    If the insurer can't do it for technical reasons I doubt neither you nor the ombudsman can force them. So then what outcome do you want - fee free cancellation to go elsewhere.

    From a moneysaving viewpoint, multiple policies can't be the answer surely.
    Originally posted by rs65
    That's the crux of my problem. Yes, I can get a policy for my daughter from another provider, but they will want their black box fitting. Can only fit one box (it goes in the 'OBS' port for which there is only one in the car). And whilst simply swapping one out for the other as determined by who's driving would not be too onerous, the current insurer insists (for reasons unknown to me) their device is installed at all time, regardless of who's driving.

    I appreciate I can't force them to change this. The solution is cancellation without incurring any charge and I find another insurer happy to sell two policies.

    cheers
    • rs65
    • By rs65 6th Sep 17, 9:37 PM
    • 5,279 Posts
    • 2,505 Thanks
    rs65
    I take it you have a policy and your son has a separate one at the moment so you are looking for a third. Would it not be cheaper for one normal policy? (I am no fan of black box policies)
    • rudekid48
    • By rudekid48 6th Sep 17, 9:41 PM
    • 2,034 Posts
    • 3,522 Thanks
    rudekid48
    Admiral or Direct Line by any chance?
    All matter is merely energy condensed to a slow vibration, we are all one consciousness experiencing itself subjectively, there is no such thing as death, life is only a dream, and we are the imagination of ourselves.
    • glentoran99
    • By glentoran99 6th Sep 17, 9:42 PM
    • 4,822 Posts
    • 3,828 Thanks
    glentoran99
    That's the crux of my problem. Yes, I can get a policy for my daughter from another provider, but they will want their black box fitting. Can only fit one box (it goes in the 'OBS' port for which there is only one in the car). And whilst simply swapping one out for the other as determined by who's driving would not be too onerous, the current insurer insists (for reasons unknown to me) their device is installed at all time, regardless of who's driving.

    I appreciate I can't force them to change this. The solution is cancellation without incurring any charge and I find another insurer happy to sell two policies.

    cheers
    Originally posted by YorkBluenose

    Think its easy enough explained, Means the policy holder cant just unplug it and go for a joyride
    • takman
    • By takman 6th Sep 17, 9:54 PM
    • 2,825 Posts
    • 2,359 Thanks
    takman
    I sense its a deficiency with their tech, although I am unclear why i) they need the black box installed all the time, irrespective of who is driving, and ii) why they can't differentiate between drivers given the need to login before each journey.

    They can't prohibit another policy, but the moment I unplug their device, their policy becomes invalidated. Hence, only one New Driver can be insured for the car. I need to research offerings from other providers, there must be a company willing to insure both drivers and gain the income from two policies,

    cheers
    Originally posted by YorkBluenose
    As rs65 said; why do you need to unplug their device?. What's stopping you having both fitted ?
Welcome to our new Forum!

Our aim is to save you money quickly and easily. We hope you like it!

Forum Team Contact us

Live Stats

868Posts Today

6,572Users online

Martin's Twitter