elephant.co.uk adding claims to my policy on their own - any help?

Lorian

zoeleigh wrote:

I have been getting quotes the last few days, I have made a claim last year but in the bit where you have to put what sort of claim there are all different options and I am unsure which one applies so have clicked different ones on different sites.

OK, I understand. I've done that sort of things lots of time and never suffered any pproblems. Not sure if you test it with accident/conviction and then sign up without it though (presumably like the OP).

impy78

It's nothing to do with other people entering your details for insurance, it a collective database used by all insurance companies to prevent insurance fraud.

However, the info on there would appear to be wrong, so you NEED to contact Admiral, as that is who the information has come from, and therefore, they are the only ones who can remove it.

MarkyMarkD

Astaroth wrote:

Could call back, stay calm, polite and non-sarcastic and see if a different call centre agent takes a different tact.

It's tack not tact - why do people get these two confused?

MarkyMarkD

Regarding the original post, I can see exactly why Admiral are doing this.

Is it not obvious to you that the most likely scenario is that a person who has had accidents or convictions looks for quotes including these details correctly disclosed, then realises that the impact on their premium is too great, and decides to fraudulently obtain insurance without disclosing the details?

As not all insurers share their claims and conviction information, it is quite reasonable for them to share the information provided when obtaining a quotation and their terms and conditions legitimately provide for them to share data with other insurers for the prevention of fraud.

It is quite unusual for people to entire entirely fictitious claims or convictions "just to see what the impact is" and I can accordingly see why Admiral are choosing to ask you to prove that you are not hiding the facts.

Another class of person who will possibly experiment with pricing insurance with and without claims is someone who's had an accident, but isn't sure whether it's financially worthwhile for them to claim or not. In this circumstance, it's STILL necessary to disclose the accident even if no claim resulted.

speerest

Lorian wrote:

Tell us the whole story. Why would someone who never had a car before and never had the accident enter into a website that they had?

Lorian - I am telling the whole story. As you can see many people are experimenting with the insurance web sites. I needed to know if making a claim would make a £10 or £300 difference to a policy. As I said, I was not familiar with the UK system since I come from another country.

speerest

impy78 wrote:

It's nothing to do with other people entering your details for insurance, it a collective database used by all insurance companies to prevent insurance fraud.

However, the info on there would appear to be wrong, so you NEED to contact Admiral, as that is who the information has come from, and therefore, they are the only ones who can remove it.

Actually, they have said that this is because the claim was entered on the Admiral web site in order to get a quote. I have never ahd any kind of insurance in the UK so this is not a mixup of details, real claims etc. They are saying that since I entered a claim when looking for a quote, they regard this as a fact.

speerest

zoeleigh wrote:

Tell them to shove their insurance and go elsewhere.

If the next insurers say the same then don't admit that it was you, say someone else must have entered your details.

I would gladly do so, but even if they add the "claim" they are cheaper than everyone else. The premium will just go up by £20.

Of course, I have lost much more money in opportunity costs (I value my free time a lot more) but I am chasing this because it is unfair, not the money. I am sending them a letter today and I will let you all know what their reply is.

mattymoo

IIRC Admiral and Elephant are part of the same company. Might be wrong though. It would explain how they picked up the details - highly likely they share information internally.
In one respect it is a good thing they have spotted this. In the past, insurers have often only got around to checking the CUE databases when the policyholder makes a claim. This is called underwriting at the claims stage rather than at policy inception and was done to save costs. The ombudsman frowned on this practice though.

Little_John

Elephant are a pain in the !!!!, I used confused.com to search and a few others elephant wern't the cheapest but they were a company that I had heard of and were only £10 more so I gave them a call and they offered me a NCD for 3 claim free years of company car use making my policy £1200 oposesd to £1800 with most other places.

I got a letter from my former employer stating I had made no claims for the past 3-4 years and they said it was fine to scan the letter and email it to them which I did. A few weeks later I received another cover note stateing 7 days cover that morning I also passed a police check point and was pulled over for no insurance. they checked and found i did have insurance but there were many others who lost their cars in this bout of checks. They decided that the scanned file wasnt enough without telling me and decided not to give me my NCD and increased my payments by 50%

I ended up gettng a 2nd letter from my employer and having to email and post it to them. Total shambles of a company I won't be renewing with them even if it costs me more.

timbouk

Surley a case for the insurance ombudsmen???