Motor insurance mess-up, legal implications :(

dacouch

If I were you I would still insist the Insurer listens to the calls to see if they confirmed your husband was covered to drive other cars. After all this is what has led to the problem and you also mentioned they were charging you extra to include this cover. If they have physically charged extra (It would be unusual) then if they have not provided it they should be refunding you the extra premiums and arguably the pound costs.

wontfallforit

dacouch wrote: »

If I were you I would still insist the Insurer listens to the calls to see if they confirmed your husband was covered to drive other cars. After all this is what has led to the problem and you also mentioned they were charging you extra to include this cover. If they have physically charged extra (It would be unusual) then if they have not provided it they should be refunding you the extra premiums and arguably the pound costs.

Yep - will do. We're awaiting the transcripts from the insurer, but we just don't have the urgency that we had a few weeks ago. We've been 'lucky' with the police, and don't want to rock the boat in that respect, but for the price of a few stamps, we're happy to play hell with the insurers.

starrystarry

Hi...glad to hear there was no permanent damage done. Just a shame you had to have several weeks of hassle and worry.

As dacouch said, the driving other cars extension is usually a freebie so I'd be surprised if you've been charged extra for it. Definitely worth shopping around at renewal I think. It's worth paying a few extra quid to be with a decent company to avoid problems like this.

adamc260

Driving other cars is to be used for emergencies only... not the daily commute or to pop down the shops. People mis-understand the purpose of DOC and use it as though your a named driver. However, if your partner has confirmed with his insurers on various occasions that he has DOC you should ask for a SAR (Subject access request) usually 10GBP via your insurer and they will send you a log of all calls/notes and that should clear up the mystery. They can't delete calls so it should be there

dacouch

adamc260 wrote: »

Driving other cars is to be used for emergencies only... not the daily commute or to pop down the shops. People mis-understand the purpose of DOC and use it as though your a named driver. However, if your partner has confirmed with his insurers on various occasions that he has DOC you should ask for a SAR (Subject access request) usually 10GBP via your insurer and they will send you a log of all calls/notes and that should clear up the mystery. They can't delete calls so it should be there

Where does it state on any policy that it is to be used for emergencies and if this is the case what is the defintion of an emergency to an insurance company

adamc260

It's what the industry work under and what all good sales teams should advise. The definition of an emergency is granted a hard one to define and therefore a lot of insurers choose to remove the DOC extension.

dacouch

But no Insurance company (To my knowledge) put in their policy that DOC is for emergency use only. It's an urban myth that is quite often quoted on MSE by posters, if people keep posting it and it's not corrected the urban myth lives on

wontfallforit

dacouch wrote: »

But no Insurance company (To my knowledge) put in their policy that DOC is for emergency use only. It's an urban myth that is quite often quoted on MSE by posters, if people keep posting it and it's not corrected the urban myth lives on

My insurer stipulated by telepone that the clause is for 'occasional' use (to which I thought what the hell are they going to do - surveill my daily usage? ), yet in writing it simply states "use of other vehicles, provided there is 3rd party ins. in place in it's own right", etc. No mention of 'emergency'.

But I've never had a problem in that respect - 99% of the time I only drive my own car, and when caught short, my certificate states loud and clear what I can and can't do. OH is now officially a named driver on my insurance (which caused the police even more confusion...until they had the sense to look at the date from which he was insured)

Quentin

adamc260 wrote: »

It's what the industry work under and what all good sales teams should advise. The definition of an emergency is granted a hard one to define and therefore a lot of insurers choose to remove the DOC extension.

All scaremongering.

It doesn't matter what a good or bad salesman tells you, it's what the policy says that matters, and none mention "emergency" regarding DOC!

And the majority of mainline insurers haven't removed it at all (Norwich Union/Aviva did, but as no-one major followed them they quickly reinstated it.)