Ever hear of additional passenger insurance?

Mooey65

Hastings car insurance just called by misses and told her then passengers in her car can not make a claim if she has a bump. They told her she needs to buy additional passenger insurance?

Iv never hear of this before .

If she is fully comp and the car is insured as a 5seater am sure shes covered for four passengers?

Please help if you can?

olly300

Never heard of this. I thought that was the legal point of having third party insurance i.e. it covers third parties against accidents caused by the driver.

Further explanation:
http://www.moneymadeclear.fsa.gov.uk/products/insurance/types/possessions/motor_insurance.html

Third party – this is the minimum legal requirement and covers you if you injure a third party, including passengers or their property, but does not cover damage to your own vehicle.

Looks like they are trying to sell a useless product.

Do you feel like raising a complaint to the FSA?

mattymoo

The passengers can always claim from the driver if the driver has been negligent. Nothing that Hastings say can alter that fact - it's basic English Law (tort of negligence) and all motor policies have to cover it.

What they might be trying to sell is some kind of non-negligent injury cover that covers medical expenses or pays out a set amount, e.g. £5k on death, £5k on loss of limb. Usually these type of things are a waste of money.

Most road traffic collisions usually involve a negligent act or ommision so a passenger will always have a legal right to sue, either the driver of the vehicle they were travelling in or another road user.

mattymoo

Just had a look on Hastings website and could not see any mention of this, however, I didn't go down the quote process so it might appear there.

I did notice that Markerstudy are one of their panel insurers. Mooey - check to see if your policy is underwritten by them. If it is, you should be aware that they exclude fire damage caused by arson. This is the subject of another thread on this board - it is a very unfair condition imo.

raskazz

I think mattymoo is spot on. I'd wager a large amount that it is someone trying to sell a personal accident extension - badly.

Mooey65

Thanks people hastings is the insurer and its just a extra payout so we don't need it.

We called up to day to swap cars over and there at it again, Telling us we need it.

raskazz

Mooey65 wrote: »

Thanks people hastings is the insurer and its just a extra payout so we don't need it.

We called up to day to swap cars over and there at it again, Telling us we need it.

They will always try to sell ancillary products such as extended personal accident cover as it is a much higher margin product than the actual motor insurance.

mattymoo

It does rather sound like the product is being mis sold though.
Mooey - I assume they didn't go so far as to say it is a legal requirement but they appear to infer passengers cannot claim if they do not have this add on.
It also sounds like at least 2 sales people have said this to you now so it does not suggest someone is misunderstanding / talking BS at their end. It sounds like a scripted sale item to me.

I think I'd be tempted to make a formal complaint to the FSA in your position.

raskazz

mattymoo wrote: »

It does rather sound like the product is being mis sold though.
Mooey - I assume they didn't go so far as to say it is a legal requirement but they appear to infer passengers cannot claim if they do not have this add on.
It also sounds like at least 2 sales people have said this to you now so it does not suggest someone is misunderstanding / talking BS at their end. It sounds like a scripted sale item to me.

I think I'd be tempted to make a formal complaint to the FSA in your position.

That is a good idea actually.

Anyone remember this?

http://www.fsa.gov.uk/pubs/final/hastings.pdf

Paragraphs 2.63 to 2.65 suddenly look interesting again...

Astaroth

Not sure that it is miss selling.... they have said your passengers arent covered and they arent explicitly covered.

If you are liable for an accident then naturally they can sue you for their injuries and assuming you havent somehow invalidated your insurance then they will receive a payout from your insurers.

If for example you were involved in a case of being hit by an uninsured driver or a hit and run then the MIB may payout for your passenger or they may not but your insurance company wouldnt touch them.

My guess is that they are trying to flog a personal accident policy for passengers but havent heard of the practice before.

mattymoo

Thanks Raskazz.
Astoroth - its the inference that passengers will not be able to claim in the event of an accident that I have an issue with. Passengers are always innocent parties (unless they've attempted to take control of the vehicle) so have a valid claim against the negligent party, whether this is the driver of the vehicle they are travelling in or a third party.