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
    • groke
    • By groke 30th Nov 17, 3:43 AM
    • 30Posts
    • 1Thanks
    groke
    Taking out a new policy - do I need to mention claims that were never acted upon?
    • #1
    • 30th Nov 17, 3:43 AM
    Taking out a new policy - do I need to mention claims that were never acted upon? 30th Nov 17 at 3:43 AM
    I'm looking at building and contents insurance for my mum.

    She angrily cancelled her last policy, after ringing up to report a stolen bike, which it turns out wasn't covered under her policy.

    So now she has no insurance at all.

    Do I have to declare this to the new insurer? There was never a claims process, so can she be said to have made a claim?
Page 1
    • paddyandstumpy
    • By paddyandstumpy 30th Nov 17, 6:37 AM
    • 915 Posts
    • 409 Thanks
    paddyandstumpy
    • #2
    • 30th Nov 17, 6:37 AM
    • #2
    • 30th Nov 17, 6:37 AM
    If the question asked is "have you suffered any losses or had any claim in the last X years" then yes you need to declare it, as a loss still occurred.

    You may find the claim has been entered into the CUE database as repudiated, in which case a simple search by any new insurer (which they most likely will do) will flag it up.

    Best disclose it, however if the claim was refused put £0 payout.

    Was the refusal of the claim fair?
    • groke
    • By groke 30th Nov 17, 12:23 PM
    • 30 Posts
    • 1 Thanks
    groke
    • #3
    • 30th Nov 17, 12:23 PM
    • #3
    • 30th Nov 17, 12:23 PM
    Well, it just wasn't covered. The bike was stolen from the shed (which was covered, along with the contents) but the policy didn't cover bikes at all, even if stolen from within the house. It seems strange though, that she'd end up with a policy that specifically excluded bikes, when she bikes to work every day and has done for about 30 years. I think maybe it was mis-sold. It's a minefield out there.

    I did mention the bike getting stolen though - better safe than sorry. Thanks for your advice
    • agrinnall
    • By agrinnall 30th Nov 17, 12:55 PM
    • 18,688 Posts
    • 14,407 Thanks
    agrinnall
    • #4
    • 30th Nov 17, 12:55 PM
    • #4
    • 30th Nov 17, 12:55 PM
    More likely mis-bought than mis-sold.
    • dunstonh
    • By dunstonh 30th Nov 17, 1:00 PM
    • 89,851 Posts
    • 56,508 Thanks
    dunstonh
    • #5
    • 30th Nov 17, 1:00 PM
    • #5
    • 30th Nov 17, 1:00 PM
    . It seems strange though, that she'd end up with a policy that specifically excluded bikes, when she bikes to work every day and has done for about 30 years.
    Bikes are often an optional extra.

    I think maybe it was mis-sold.
    Of course she was. With the bulk of household insurance self-bought without advice, it has to be that she was missold. She couldnt possibly have mis bought instead.
    I am an Independent Financial Adviser (IFA). Comments are for discussion purposes only. They are not financial advice. Different people have different needs and what is right for one person may not be for another. If you feel an area discussed may be relevant to you, then please seek advice from an Independent Financial Adviser local to you.
    • Aretnap
    • By Aretnap 30th Nov 17, 1:41 PM
    • 2,840 Posts
    • 2,338 Thanks
    Aretnap
    • #6
    • 30th Nov 17, 1:41 PM
    • #6
    • 30th Nov 17, 1:41 PM
    Well, it just wasn't covered. The bike was stolen from the shed (which was covered, along with the contents) but the policy didn't cover bikes at all, even if stolen from within the house. It seems strange though, that she'd end up with a policy that specifically excluded bikes, when she bikes to work every day and has done for about 30 years. I think maybe it was mis-sold. It's a minefield out there.
    Originally posted by groke
    As alluded to above, miss-selling is only a possibility if she took advice on the sale (eg from a broker or an IFA) and she was advised to buy this particular product - in which case the adviser has a responsibility to ensure that the product is appropriate for her.

    If she bought it direct from the insurer, over the internet or over the phone (as is the case with the vast majority of home insurance), then it's the buyer's responsibility to choose a policy that meets their needs. Cycle cover is usually an optional extra on home insurance policies, and I'm fairly sure that I've always been asked "would you like to add cover for any bicycles?" on the policies I've bought (having an expensive bike myself it's something I tend to check).
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

4,965Posts Today

10,390Users online

Martin's Twitter