Car Insurance-didn't advise of previous claim and now charge being backdated

KJones78

I received my car insurance renewal letter and on checking the details realised that a claim my husband (a named driver on my policy) had previously made on his own insurance was not included, I called to advise my insurer who advised they would now backdate this and recalculate my premiums from December 2008 policy onwards to recoup the costs-as my premium would've been higher had I advised them. I'm sure I told them when I renewed last year and they do not have a recording of the call to confirm either way, they say its down to me to check all the details when I receive the paperwork-as I have done this time! I did not purposefully withold this info to get a cheaper premium-otherwise why would I tell them this time?! Also presumably had I made a claim in the past 2 years this would've come to light and my policy would effectively have been considered void and they wouldn't have paid out anyway? I've done some research and am writing an official complaint letter to the insurer and can then after 8wks pursue with the financial ombudsmen-I just wondered if anyone has come across anything similar and know if I have a case or not? They are now chasing me for owed money!

Quentin

You do owe them as the premium you paid was based on your incorrect information.

You say why would you tell them if you didn't do it on purpose - but that's irrelevant - they seem to be accepting you didn't do it on purpose anyway, as all they want is the money you owe them, and seem happy to keep you on as a customer. (Which is to your advantage as the alternative would be they felt you deliberately mislead them and cancelled your policy making it difficult and expensive for you to get any cover in future elsewhere. That will still happen if you don't pay them what you owe them.

What research has led you to believe the FOS will come down on your side? If he does, then we all will start missing out bits of our history to get cheaper premiums!

jonesMUFCforever

OP stop wasting your time and the ombudsman - you will get knocked back.
Pay up and shut up is my advice.

alanfp

Unlike our charming Man U fan, I agree with the logic in your post, and that they would have refused to pay out in the event of a claim. Therefore, they took a premium from you but would have provided no cover - I suggest you write to them asking what would have happened, and assuming their answer is that the ins would have been void, claim your premium back from them.

I suggest you just ignore their request (or invite them to sue you...we all know what would happen in that case - nothing).

Funny how they can't find the tape of the call, isn't it. (see my similar post of 30/12/10). It's a case of your word against theirs, and based on my previous experience, even though I don't know you from Adam (or Eve) I would believe you rather than them. Remember that for them to recover any monies from you in any legal hearing, the burden of proof would be on them, I believe.

alanfp

Quentin wrote: »

What research has led you to believe the FOS will come down on your side? If he does, then we all will start missing out bits of our history to get cheaper premiums!

No, it will make ins companies keep better records.

mikey72

You are right to make an official complaint, inform them that if you do not agree with their response, you will be taking the complaint to the FOS.
Don't let them cancel your existing policy, or sadly you will have to declare that for the future. In that aspect they have got you over a barrel.

dacouch

alanfp wrote: »

Unlike our charming Man U fan, I agree with the logic in your post, and that they would have refused to pay out in the event of a claim. Therefore, they took a premium from you but would have provided no cover - I suggest you write to them asking what would have happened, and assuming their answer is that the ins would have been void, claim your premium back from them.

The Insurer would have paid out for the claim and would have requested the appropriate back dated premium

TSx

dacouch wrote: »

The Insurer would have paid out for the claim and would have requested the appropriate back dated premium

Exactly, they will have underwriting criteria - providing you still meet those criteria, all they can do is ask for an increased premium - they wouldn't be treating customers fairly if they could just void a policy whenever a fact came to light, it has to be something which would have resulted in the business not being underwritten in the first place.

I'd write a letter, maybe look for a goodwill gesture since you could have comparison shopped if you'd known of the increased premium, but ultimately, you've not really "lost out". By all means try and get some back, but don't expect a massive amount of sympathy

vusys1

i agree with Mickey, but iam only commenting on what is currently going on with DL, where undisclosed (knowingly or unknowingly) claims, convictions etc, which have generated an additional premium. Where PHs are complaining the AP is being written off for the previous years and apparantly the FOS is coming down on the side of the PH as they were previous contracts etc and can only charge on the current policy. Iam not saying this is way all companys deal just this one at the moment.

ILW

mikey72 wrote: »

You are right to make an official complaint, inform them that if you do not agree with their response, you will be taking the complaint to the FOS.
Don't let them cancel your existing policy, or sadly you will have to declare that for the future. In that aspect they have got you over a barrel.

They will be within their rights to refuse renewal, this can lead to all sorts of problems as you will have to declare it on any future applications. In the end I think OP would be better off to just pay up and make a point or reading the paperwork in the future, after all they have lost nothing.

alanfp

Originally Posted by dacouch
The Insurer would have paid out for the claim and would have requested the appropriate back dated premium


If that is indeed the case, I apologise and accept I was wrong - I'd be interested to hear anyone's first hand experience of such a case. They themselves certainly stress that "you may not be covered" in such circumstances.

Unfortunately, all I have to go on is things that I read in the paper like the insurer who refused to pay out a death benefit for a woman who got hit by a train on a level crossing, because she hadn't declared that she had previously been a smoker (it was in all the papers a year or two ago). They didn't make the payout and then ask for a few hundred £ extra in underpaid premiums.
Or the insurers who took payment protection premiums on loans when the insured could never have claimed....I'm afraid the insurance industry's 'previous' is coulouring my view.