Would not disclosing colour change make insurance void in an accident

vaio

Makes no difference to the OP……..

As long as an insurance policy exists for the van then they will pay out (if they then decide to invalidate it for the colour change then they can recover what they paid the OP from the policy holder).

If no policy exists on the van then the OP will get paid by the MIB (who will then be able to recover what the OP got paid from the uninsured driver)

Owain_Moneysaver

Clifford_Pope wrote: »

In what way is the colour material?

Some colours are more or less visible than others, which affects the probability of being involved in an accident. Insurers are also entitled to load premiums on a vehicle that is Raging Red compared to one that is Granny Green or Fogey Fawn.

A sign-written vehicle may be more likely to be broken into for tools or materials.

It is a fact on which the insurer relies when making his decision whether to insure or not. As such it must be disclosed, as insurance is a contract uberimmae fides (of the utmost good faith).

TSx

Owain_Moneysaver wrote: »

Some colours are more or less visible than others, which affects the probability of being involved in an accident. Insurers are also entitled to load premiums on a vehicle that is Raging Red compared to one that is Granny Green or Fogey Fawn.

A sign-written vehicle may be more likely to be broken into for tools or materials.

It is a fact on which the insurer relies when making his decision whether to insure or not. As such it must be disclosed, as insurance is a contract uberimmae fides (of the utmost good faith).

However the FOS guidance on non disclosure would indicate that unless it was reckless or deliberate non disclosure then they should merely adjust the premium to the one they would have charged had they had the full information.

They are entitled to cancel the policy (with a full refund) if they would not have insured the vehicle had they had the full information. I suspect (although I'm not certain) it is quite unlikely any insurer refuses to quote on the basis of vehicle colour.

The sign writing is a different issue though.

Also, I'm prepared to be corrected, but I believe the third party section would still payout even if there was an issue with the policyholder.

thegirlintheattic

It is classed as a modification and so could void his insurance if he hasn't declared it.

mikey72

Owain_Moneysaver wrote: »

Some colours are more or less visible than others, which affects the probability of being involved in an accident. Insurers are also entitled to load premiums on a vehicle that is Raging Red compared to one that is Granny Green or Fogey Fawn.

A sign-written vehicle may be more likely to be broken into for tools or materials.

It is a fact on which the insurer relies when making his decision whether to insure or not. As such it must be disclosed, as insurance is a contract uberimmae fides (of the utmost good faith).

I've never been asked the colour. Ever.
All my quotes are done on a generic car, I only put in the registration number when I actually take the quote as the insurance on the day I pay.

magpiecottage

thegirlintheattic wrote: »

It is classed as a modification and so could void his insurance if he hasn't declared it.

The insurer is still required to meet the claim under the Road Traffic Act 1988 (S148, I think).