interesting article/answers

1956

hi
interesting article worth a read( if long)re what is happening within the insurance industry and the costs involved, also if you think about doing some of the following!
" Insurance fraud costing cash strapped Britain £1.6 billion a year.
As the credit crunch wrangles on insurers are seeing evidence of increasing underwriting fraud costing honest motor insurance customers around £55 each per policy2.
In a desperate attempt to slash the price of motor insurance premiums people are declaring false information perhaps unaware that their insurance may be invalid as a consequence.
Simon Warsop director of motor pricing at Norwich Union said
As the largest insurer in the UK we're at the forefront of the fight against fraud for the benefit of our honest customers.
We have systems in place to identify policies that are bought using fabricated data, so when declaring information for an insurance quote it's essential that customers have supplied accurate information to ensure they have adequate cover in the event that they need to make a claim.
Fortunately, the majority of our customers are entirely honest and provide accurate, fully disclosed information when they call or go online for a quote.
However, there are dishonest people that risk invalidating their insurance by giving incorrect information in a bid to get cheaper motor insurance.
17/12/08
Hi in response to the replies, I am sorry for incorrect post, I am more of a reader than poster on this forum and I did not realise I was braking Forum Etiquette, and copyright.
Ian w- I took the white spacers out to not make it so long! Maybe a mistake.
Also sorry to those who will not see the full post, but I have edited it as per jonboy scsfc request to a paragraph! Which if I could have done in the first place I would but I work in insurance not journalism so takes some thing away from the post say the least!, I did say and its clearly visibly it was long and it appears to be “little tedious” to read
1956

Ian_W

It was very informative and I've thanked you for that - but it's also quite difficult and not a little tedious to read something as long as that in forum format - lines too long and not enough "white space".
A lot of readers will give up part way through - could I suggest [as per the Forum Etiquette to the right of the page] that you post a link in future with articles of that length?

Take care over copyright. Use excerpts and links rather than copying long text. This site asserts copyright on all comments posted on the board.

Atermis

fraud claims stand out very easily, usually because they far are too greedy.

JonBoy_SCFC

Ian_W wrote: »

It was very informative and I've thanked you for that - but it's also quite difficult and not a little tedious to read something as long as that in forum format - lines too long and not enough "white space".
A lot of readers will give up part way through - could I suggest [as per the Forum Etiquette to the right of the page] that you post a link in future with articles of that length?

i agree, complete nightmare to try reading that - if someone could summarise in one short paragraph would be appreciated:beer:

cogito

Atermis wrote: »

fraud claims stand out very easily, usually because they far are too greedy.

In which case, the insurers throw them out so in those situations, they don't actually get defrauded.

In the article, Simon Warsop gives a number of examples of cases where motorists gave wrong information to insurers. This came to light following accidents and the claimants were left carrying the cost - not the insurers. So again, the insurers weren't defrauded.

We get used to insurers banging on about how much fraud costs them. There is no doubt that fraud occurs through staged accidents etc but insurers always seem to be able to quote remarkably exact figures about the cost of fraud - in this article a figure of £1.6bn is given. My question is - how do they know? I suspect that the answer is that they don't but no one ever seems to challenge them.

Atermis

for the example of a fronted policy, the insurer could still have some liability under the RTA , where they would have to pay any third party claim.

The costs of that claim will be attributed to fraud.

JonBoy_SCFC

Atermis wrote: »

for the example of a fronted policy, the insurer could still have some liability under the RTA , where they would have to pay any third party claim.

The costs of that claim will be attributed to fraud.

not according to raskazz and LinasPilibaitisisbatman - they think the insurer regularly succesfully sues the insured for the 3rd party costs, even making them bankrupt in some cases:rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl: :rotfl:

Quote

Atermis wrote: »

fraud claims stand out very easily, usually because they far are too greedy.

Eh?

Let's look at that figure again, insurance fraud fans.

ONE POINT SIX BILLION POUNDS

FlameCloud

I'd wager that I have more experience dealing with this type of claim than any one else on here.

Fraud is very very easy to spot if you know what you are doing.
Fraud is very very hard to prove if you want to do anything about it, thanks to the FOS's new guidelines on how to defraud insurers.

dacouch

A plastic peanut is awarded to Flamecloud...(How retro are plastic peanuts)

dacouch

Flamecloud have you picked up on the post on here this thread that is somewhat dodgy?