When filling in a quote for car insurance do you lie on your renewal price?

raskazz

greco wrote: »

It is not a material fact.

OK, please explain how it is not material, given the definition of a material fact? I'm very happy to wait until the football has finished!

It is not right to simply label it a negotiation tactic - negotiation on price is fine - but in this case the insurer has specifically asked a question, the answer of which will affect its judgement on what premium to offer.

I think I must reiterate - I agree with you in as much as it's doubtful that an insurer would actually use this to void a policy, simply because of potential repercussions in terms of bad publicity. But it's still a breach of utmost good faith. I'm sure if another accident happened with the same magnitude of the Selby rail crash, and the policyholder had made such a misrepresentation when setting up his policy, the insurer would raise this argument.

FlameCloud

greco wrote: »

A proposal fprm or ASoF is the basis of the contract. What part of that don't you understand?

greco FCII

Brilliant, throwing around qualifications now! I've got a gold in 100m swimming from when I was ten, can I count that?

raskazz

FlameCloud wrote: »

Brilliant, throwing around qualifications now! I've got a gold in 100m swimming from when I was ten, can I count that?

What about my Silver Cycling Proficiency badge?

Ian_W

Hey guys, it's great for us mere mortals to watch you insurance folks throwing your Teddy's out of the pram!

I'm with dux001 and would never use lies in those circumstances and wouldn't have much time for those who do. :cool:

However, the quote given about material facts relates to a prudent underwriter, just how prudent would s/he be to offer a lower premium based on an unsupported claim to a lower premium from another insurer? Not very IMHO, as I'm reading "prudent" to relate to risk - rather than customer retention or market share!

It also relates to influencing the underwriter when in my, albeit limited, experience the decision would be a commercial one decided by call centre staff without reference to an underwriter. On the basis, I assume, that there is a tolerance within the initial quote where a discount would be viable but beyond which it wouldn't.

Still, it would be interesting if an insurer did void a policy on these grounds to see how the FOS would apply TCF to a lying customer and an imprudent underwriter! Oh, the irony of it!

raskazz

Ian_W wrote: »

However, the quote given about material facts relates to a prudent underwriter, just how prudent would s/he be to offer a lower premium based on an unsupported claim to a lower premium from another insurer? Not very IMHO, as I'm reading "prudent" to relate to risk - rather than customer retention or market share!

But that is the whole reasoning behind utmost good faith - the insurer knows none of the material facts until he is presented with them by the proposer. Thus, just as he relies on the proposer to give accurate and honest answers to all the other questions, he also relies upon the proposer to give accurate and honest answers to a question on the terms offered elsewhere in the market.

I think the prudent underwriter would be concerned with all aspects of managing the pool of risks - which would clearly include commercial considerations including retention and market share. Hence why underwriters for direct insurers do set criteria on renewal and new business discounts for staff selling policies over the telephone.

Ian_W wrote: »

It also relates to influencing the underwriter when in my, albeit limited, experience the decision would be a commercial one decided by call centre staff without reference to an underwriter. On the basis, I assume, that there is a tolerance within the initial quote where a discount would be viable but beyond which it wouldn't.

Yes, but the call centre staff will be following the rules on discounting which have been determined by the underwriter, just like they do for any other material fact.

cogito

I filled in a confused.com quote form and there's a question about the current premium but it's not obligatory and you can just scroll past. It still comes up with quotes so if they don't insist on an answer it doesn't look to me as if the information is material.

When I've rung up for quotes in the past, I've been asked what my renewal premium is and refused to say. I still got my quote.

I think raskazz should stick to cycling.

raskazz

cogito wrote: »

I filled in a confused.com quote form and there's a question about the current premium but it's not obligatory and you can just scroll past. It still comes up with quotes so if they don't insist on an answer it doesn't look to me as if the information is material.

When I've rung up for quotes in the past, I've been asked what my renewal premium is and refused to say. I still got my quote.

I think raskazz should stick to cycling.

Come again? If you are implying that at some point I stated or even intimated that you must answer a question regarding your best alternative quote then you either haven't read the thread or have not understood it, because I did not. All I have stated is that given the generally accepted definition of a material fact, you should not give a dishonestly low answer to that question if asked. Furthermore, I've mentioned at least twice that it is pretty unlikely that an insurer would actually void a policy due to such a breach. Perhaps you should take up cycling yourself?

TighterThanTwoCoatsOfPain

any of you folk actually in insurance or know someone who is??

First of all, i'll say i am NOT advocating anyone lie about a material fact. (ie where you store the car, no claims bonus, years had license, miles driven, main driver, modifications, points, accidents etc etc..)

The value you put in that box is for market research in order to back up the claims of "50% of people save £100 or more with xyz". Seriously, it doesnt change the risk the underwriter is pricing up. To suggest anything like that is quite frankly hillarious!

FlameCloud

raskazz is a motor underwriter, I am a fraud investigator. So yes, we do know quite alot about insurance.

The value you put in isnt for market research, as some people here have found out- it will alter the price given depending on what you put in. That, makes it a material fact, and lieing about it can void the policy, whether or not you want to believe it.

MDE

Just to try and put this thread back on track.....

Yes I have knocked £20 or so off my cheapest price when getting other quotes. I still often find that the quotes I then get aren't any cheaper than the original so it doesn't seem to make a huge, if any difference!

And if you do want to play qualifications, then 10x GCSE, 3x A Level, BA (Hons) Business Management with Communications, PGCE, MA (Education).

I've also got cycling proficiency, multiple scout badges, ECDL and CLAIT.

None of them make a difference to my premium so maybe we should stop getting childish about it.