material non disclosure

marques72

hi mate dont know if you could help me or put me in the right direction i had a golf gti 1.8 turbo it was nicked outside my yard on the 31st of january this year i obtained a crime ref no after informing the police and also notified the insurance company now they voided my claim and refused to pay because they said i did not tell them the car was modified. I have contacted the FOS and presently awaiting an adjudicator do you know of any cases that have been sorted that are similar to mine.

I took the policy out on the internet and answered NO to the questions asked if there have been any alterations or modifications made to the car because I bought the car from the garage it had tinted windows and alloy wheels which I did not think were modifications initially when I took out the policy but which the insurance company are saying these are modifications and thats why they are refusing to pay out.[/quote]

dunstonh

Tough one.

There is accidental non-disclosure and intentional non-disclosure. The former tends to be in cases where you wouldnt reasonably know or remember. The latter is when its on purpose.

You may get away with alloy wheels (unless they are some obvious style that is not manufacturer) but tinted windows is unlikely.

The FOS is fairly clear on how they rule on this and they have published guidelines for the insurers to follow. However, it really depends on whether they believe you or not and the extent of the tint. If its a heavy dark tint then its going to be hard for you. If its manufacturer level tint then that works in your favour. If alloys are clearly third party then again, works against you.

marques72

The insurer / intermediary is Esure in my opinion I think the word "modification" is ambiguous not clear. I believe the question is not prominently placed or asked in the right way. It does not explain what fully constitutes a modification and does not explain in full detail what is required as an alteration. The wording of the question is short and precise and not elaborate enough in my opinion and that was why I did not answer "YES" to the question. I answered the question in good faith and to the best of my knowledge. In addition I never called the insurance company when I took out the policy I took the policy out on the internet.
Personally I think the insurance company are trying to pull a fast one but that is my own opinion who knows what the FOS will decide just got to keep my fingers crossed.
The issue is presently with the FOS and I have been allocated an adjudicator and I am just awaiting their decision. This whole ordeal has left me really stressed and has put me off buying another car or driving again in the foreseeable future. I think I will be better off using the public transport as sole means of travel.

raskazz

Having checked esure's website, esure doesn't ask a question, it asks you to make a declaration, which is:

"I confirm that:

My car has not been modified from the manufacturers specifications"

It appears at a clear point in the quotation process and you must select 'yes' in order to continue the process, so I disagree with your opinion that it is not 'prominent' enough. At face value it also seems pretty clear in its wording.

Your reason for giving the answer that you did seems to me to be fairly weak. You're saying that you thought that question was unclear at the time and yet you gave an answer to it without any attempt to clarify it? That the question does not define what a modification is but you decided to give a definite answer to it anyway? Even though the online script at the last moment before purchase states:

"I understand that any wrong or incomplete information could mean a claim is rejected or reduced or even that my contract is void and I am treated as being uninsured"

Did you make any effort to check whether your car had been modified before answering? If you did not then you were bordering on 'reckless' non-disclosure. I can see how alloy wheels made by the car's manufacturer could be overlooked, but the tint - did you really think that the car came with tinted windows as standard?

You also have a problem in that even if one does acknowledge that your non-disclosure was inadvertent, generally the FOS rules that the action to be taken to be taken in such cases is a 'rewriting' of the policy (i.e. the insurer calculates the premium that it would have charged had it known all the information, then deals with the claim subject to the difference being paid). As esure simply do not cover modifications, calculating this is impossible as it would not have accepted your risk at any price

I also presume that esure asked you for an explanation before voiding the policy - exactly what explanation did you give to esure for the non-disclosure? As that is crucial - it will be the whole basis of esure's actions.

LinasPilibaitisisbatman

marques72 wrote: »

The insurer / intermediary is Esure in my opinion I think the word "modification" is ambiguous not clear. I believe the question is not prominently placed or asked in the right way. It does not explain what fully constitutes a modification and does not explain in full detail what is required as an alteration. The wording of the question is short and precise and not elaborate enough in my opinion and that was why I did not answer "YES" to the question. I answered the question in good faith and to the best of my knowledge. In addition I never called the insurance company when I took out the policy I took the policy out on the internet.
Personally I think the insurance company are trying to pull a fast one but that is my own opinion who knows what the FOS will decide just got to keep my fingers crossed.
The issue is presently with the FOS and I have been allocated an adjudicator and I am just awaiting their decision. This whole ordeal has left me really stressed and has put me off buying another car or driving again in the foreseeable future. I think I will be better off using the public transport as sole means of travel.

Come on then post a picture of your car

I bet its blatantly obvious its not manufacturer spec

Far too many people commiting downright fraud when it comes to modifications and then trying to claim the innocent

If it was just alloys I might have sympathy but everyone with any common sense knows that black out tints are not standard spec

uktyler

How did the insurance company know the car was modified?

If it was stolen they will not have had a chance to view the car.

Did you try to claim extra money for the modifications?

marques72

Well I made the declaration on the basis that in my view the car had not been modified from the manufacturers specifications. I wrote to the garage to obtain a full description of the car because I did not have that at my disposal when I first purchased the car. Now the problem is they provided me with the factory specification of the car but said since the car was a second hand car and had three previous owners it seems that one of the previous owners was responsible for the alterations to the car and that they were unable to contact the owners due to the data protection act.

The windows were totally blacked out either they were really light tints if any at all and the alloy wheels were santa monica VW wheels so I honestly thought they were standard as I am not an expert on cars. I just went to the garage paid for the car and drove away.

I honestly thought what constituted a modification was things like changes to the bodywork as esure asked on the website in my opinion that would be things like body kits, spoilers etc. I also thought a modificaion was things that were done to enhance the performance of the engine like dump valves, and chips to the engine etc. I thought my vehicle did not fall into this category and that was why I answered NO to the questions asked.

I personally think they need to just pay out seeing that I thought the car was not modified but they are totally and utterly stubborn. They have no problems or quarms taking your money every month but when a problem arises with making payment for a claim they try to wriggle out of the situation. Anyway I will be taking the matter to court and see what happens then.

uktyler

marques72 wrote: »

I am not an expert on cars.

IAnyway I will be taking the matter to court and see what happens then.

Good luck, I don't think you will win. If you didn't know you should of asked them. The terms and conditions clearly state modifications need to be declared, you did not do this.

I still don't know how the insurance company know that it was modified?

Was the car recovered after the theft?

marques72

no the car has not ben recovered when i was trying to make the initial claim they asked me to describe the car to them and I told them what the car had like alloy wheels, tinted windows and they came back to me and said all those things were modifications and then they voided my claim. I was telling them just incase my car was found. I have been to the citizens advice bureau and they said the case is in my favour so lets see what happens.

mog_ktfc

A Golf GTI would have come with alloys as standard, has done for years, so even if they are after-market VW ones I cant really see that this holds up as a modification. Tinted windows are also a possibility on manufactured cars, thet are increasingly common in fact, but you dont say how oldf the car is. Even if it was doen afterwards if it had been declared I dont see that it would have affected the cost of insurance, it doesnt make it quicker or more likely to be stolen.

However, in isnurance terms ignorance is not a defence, if you dont know then you need to ask. Insurance is not like other cotracts the owner is on the purchaser to reveal the facts, not on the insurance company to ask.

marques72

Ok so do you think I have got a case then because its not that I was ignorant I did not declare it because in my eyes they are not modifications I thought everything came as standard on the vehicle.