Insurance co "robs" mother of 4 of her car

hachette

My friends’ car caught a fire during the night while parked outside her house on the 4th of Jan2008. The police where called but she never find out how and why it had happened. The Insurance Company were informed the next day or though they took the car away they not give any report what happened either. The car was worth around £8000. It was bought and given to her eldest son by her estranged husband few months back and registered in her son’s name. Originally he held an insurance policy in his name as he was the prime driver. My friend (his mum) had her own car at the time but subsequently her car had broken down and was no longer repairable. She has three more kids’ twins of 10 years old and 13 year old all with a medical condition as well as herself who has a very bad back problem. The car was absolutely essential to her life so she started using her son’s car on daily basis therefore became a prime driver of his car. In the circumstances her son telephoned the broker and informed them that he wishes to pass the ownership of his car to his mum as she drives it everyday and therefore take up a policy in her name as a prime driver and him as a second driver. I believe he has told them that the car is still registered in his name as a keeper (by the way he still lives with his mum) . They have accepted all this and issued her with an insurance policy for that car. That was on 8/11/07. Her son was told that he should register his car to his mum name and he has done so. . So transfer document was sent but they take up to six weeks to arrive. Car catches fire on 4th Jan 08. The claim is made and months pass by and insurers are not paying out..
During all that time they request to see registration document. She could not provide this as it was sent to DVLA and not come back yet. She therefore provided them with a New Keepers part of the log book but that was not sufficient for them to consider the claim. She has made numerous phone calls to DVLA asking for a log book but was told that her insurance company informed them that she is no longer in possession of this car therefore they can not issue her with a log book.

We came to a “no go” situation. The insurance company will not pay out without seeing the log book and DVLA will not issue one and subsequently had lost the original form of transfer. She was asked by DVLA in March to request for a copy. So form was filled again but despite of that registration document had not arrived to this date. However when her son send off for a copy in March he could not remember the date he had originally put on transfer and the date he entered was 20/12/07. Now the insurers on the basis of that copy provided by DVLA refusing to pay out for her car as date of transfer showes 20/12/07 not 8/11/07 when she took over the policy. In June she had asked me for my help. I wrote letters and made phone calls regarding her claim and also got nowhere.

On 17/7/08 after yet one more call to the insurers not returned I thought enough is enough I made a claim against Chaucer insurance on her behalf on line. We got a solicitor, she was awarded legal aid. We thought this can be decided by court. The solicitor takes an advice from barrister who tells us we have no chance of winning this case. Apparently the insurers defence is that you must be a registered keeper and owner of the car at the time you take up a policy. So why did they insure my friend knowing that at that time the car was still registered in her son’s name. They query that the transfer was dated 20/12/07, but the accident did not happened until 4/1/08. Does this mean that if nothing had happened for a years on these basis she would not really have been insured at all? We are not giving up. Taking up a second opinion as soon as possible plus requesting the transcript of the conversation with the insurance brokers when whey issued my friend with a policy is our next step. Any advice would be very much appreciated.

silvercar

Get a letter of deadlock from the insurance company and put in a complaint with the Financial Services Ombodsman.

dunstonh

Has a formal complaint been raised with the insurer?

and can you use the default font or a larger font next time as that is really hard to read.

LinasPilibaitisisbatman

One they have not robbed a car, they have simply questioned the legality of the policy due to possible fraud.

I certainly believe they have very good reason to suspect it, there is no point in getting ombudsman involved etc

You need to go to the DVLA and get them to fix their error thus making the policy enforcable, without this they have every right to reject the claim.

Tbh I dont think you will do it, as your claims seem very suss

raskazz

The legal advice that was given is correct. In order for your friend to claim indemnity for the fire she had to have an 'insurable interest' in the car - ie she must show that she had a financial interest in the vehicle (i.e. that she owned it), and that she benefited from its continued existence.

Under the strict application of the law the insurable interest must be present not only at the time of the loss but also at the time that the policy is incepted.

Your friend has no legitimate claim against Chaucer as the insurer - the title of the thread is inaccurate and unnecessarily inflammatory.

Your freind may have a legitimate complaint against the broker, but this will depend on exactly what was said when the policy was quoted/incepted, and what details of ownership were showing on the proposal form or statement of insurance.

She could raise a complaint with the broker. If they cannot resolve the complaint to your friend's satisfaction then she can refer the complaint the Financial Ombudsman Service.

hachette

Fact one. She was the prime driver of that car therefore according to the policy she had to be the policy holder.

Fact two. The insurers are still holding her car eleven months later.while they admited they do not suspect any faul play as to the fire. So they have the car and not paid out for it therefore "rob" is suitable title to my thread.

Fact three. The son did pass the the ownership to her on the date the insurance was put in her name.

Fact four. DVLA lost the original transfer send by the son.

We did take legal action against Chaucer insurance but the solicitor's barrister told us we have no chance of winning on the basis of the dates.

Ombudsman now have agreed to take this case over and also we are awating the tape of the conversation that took place when the insurance was put in his mum's name.

LinasPilibaitisisbatman

hachette wrote: »

Fact one. She was the prime driver of that car therefore according to the policy she had to be the policy holder.

Fact two. The insurers are still holding her car eleven months later.while they admited they do not suspect any faul play as to the fire. So they have the car and not paid out for it therefore "rob" is suitable title to my thread.

Fact three. The son did pass the the ownership to her on the date the insurance was put in her name.

Fact four. DVLA lost the original transfer send by the son.

We did take legal action against Chaucer insurance but the solicitor's barrister told us we have no chance of winning on the basis of the dates.

Ombudsman now have agreed to take this case over and also we are awating the tape of the conversation that took place when the insurance was put in his mum's name.

Fact One - she also had to have an insurable risk and a financial stake in the vehicle - she cant proof she did, if she can then she has a claim.

Fact Two - If she asks for the car back she will get it back, once they pay the costs already sunk by the insurer to recover it etc

Fact Three - Any proof of this?

Fact Four - Its convenient this isnt it?

The Ombudsman can look at the case all they want but it isnt going to change the law or facts of this case.

hachette

This site seems like we are fighting the insurers themselves here rather that getting any advice. Will not bother to post here for advice any more.

asea

Cheerio!

You asked for advice & you got it. No point in flouncing just because you didn't like what you heard - doesn't really help your cause to be honest.

hachette

Cheerio too! Rude and obnoxious is how I would describe some postees on this site.

hachette

Asea , God knows what your have been thanked for 2,199 times.

May be you work for Chaucer insurance.