Car Insurance Voided, Disputed Liability - Who Can Act on My Behalf?

Lentilist

A car of mine was driven into by a bus a couple of months ago.

I had fully comprehensive insurance and asked my insurers to deal with it. Subsequently the insurance company voided my policy apparently because I split my time between two addresses and they did not know about the alternative (and irrelevant for their purposes) address - something I have since made a complaint about.

Unfortunately, I understand from the bus company's claims management company that the bus driver is not admitting liability.

I've been told that I can't use a claims management company myself because I have no applicable legal expenses cover due to the voided policy.

Can anyone suggest how I might sort out the disputed liability without an intermediary acting for me?

dunstonh

I had fully comprehensive insurance and asked my insurers to deal with it. Subsequently the insurance company voided my policy apparently because I split my time between two addresses and they did not know about the alternative (and irrelevant for their purposes) address - something I have since made a complaint about.

Due to your non-disclosure the insurer should follow FOS guidelines. If they feel your non-disclosure was intentional in an attempt to pay a lower premium they can void the policy. If they feel it was accidental, they should not void the policy unless they would not have offered cover had they been aware of the facts at the start. If they would have offered cover but it would have cost you more then they can deduct that from any claim settlement paid to you or if no claim settlement, you need to pay the difference.

I've been told that I can't use a claims management company myself because I have no applicable legal expenses cover due to the voided policy.

You can employ a legal services company but you end up footing the bill if it doesnt work for you and they dont work on a no win no fee basis. [Or look for no win no fee.]

InsideInsurance

How urgent is resolving the claim? Assuming there is no injury claim you legally have 6 years so if it isnt urgent to you and you've already exhausted other avenues then it may be a case of waiting for the complaint over your insurance being voided to be resolved first if you are confident of winning the complaint.

As you say, no win no fee types or credit repairs/hire are unlikely to be interested as they already know there is a dispute on the case unless they think it is a clearly winnable case but unless there are independent witnesses then it is unlikely to be so.

The penultimate option is to argue it out yourself. What is the dispute actually over? If any accident happened? What the circumstances are? Who's responsibility it is?

You can employ a legal services company but you end up footing the bill if it doesnt work for you and they dont work on a no win no fee basis.

Even if it does work out for the OP, if it is a small track case then legal fees are normally inadmissible and so if it is small claims court levels then even if they fought and won their legal fees wouldnt be covered.

Lentilist

Basics of the accident - I was stationary at a very busy junction in heavy traffic, a bus drove into and along side of me. Wasn't able to get a witness to stop - just too busy. Bus was fitted with CCTV which could have clearly shown I wasn't moving and it was, but this is realistically a dead-end. It is, however, fairly clear from the damage that bus drove into me and not vice versa. No injuries, no damage to the bus (it was already battle-scarred), cost of repairs is a bit over £1k.

I'm happy to take it as far as court on principle (quite amazed the bus driver is not admitting liability) but if there's an easier option I'd prefer it. My concern is that it is simply me against their accident management company.

As for "non-disclosure" - if I insure a car at a permanent address, where it is usually kept, what is not disclosed? The question of other addresses was neither asked nor alluded to. Obtaining cover since and disclosing each linked address I have (as I'm told I must) has led to most people at the other end of the phone thinking I am some sort of con-artist or criminal - you would think it was the strangest thing in the world.

dunstonh

As for "non-disclosure" - if I insure a car at a permanent address, where it is usually kept, what is not disclosed? The question of other addresses was neither asked nor alluded to. Obtaining cover since and disclosing each linked address I have (as I'm told I must) has led to most people at the other end of the phone thinking I am some sort of con-artist or criminal - you would think it was the strangest thing in the world.

What you describe is a common fraud. So, it is understandable they view you with suspicion.

raskazz

dunstonh wrote: »

What you describe is a common fraud. So, it is understandable they view you with suspicion.

I presume the lower risk address was disclosed to the insurer. Funny that eh?

Lentilist

raskazz wrote: »

I presume the lower risk address was disclosed to the insurer. Funny that eh?

Actually, it depends on the company quoting - some quotes cheaper, some more expensive.

It is however quite preposterous to suggest that it would be worth invalidating an insurance policy for the sake of potentially saving (or wasting) a few quid. Of course, I could have just said that this particular car would usually be kept where it wasn't, but I can't really see why anyone would do that.

As to viewing someone with more than one address as a fraudster ...

malc_b

I don't understand the insurer's position. There is usually just one address on a car policy. I've had the same thing with my daughter. Notionally she still lives at home but mostly she live at her boyfriend's place. When I raised this with the insurers they said where is the car usually kept overnight, the boyfriend's, so that is the address on the policy. If, as you have said, the car is usually at the address you gave then how can that be grounds to void the policy.

FYI, I had to declare the boyfriend's as a "holiday home" since the policy documents etc. still need to come to her home address. But the question asked is "where is the car usually kept". If you answered that truthfully then they have no ground to void the policy.

mikey72

You've started the complaint, refer it to the FOS if they still won't pay.

The onus is on the insurer to ask the right questions, such as you home address, where the car is parked, usually they don't ask for a second address.

dunstonh

It is however quite preposterous to suggest that it would be worth invalidating an insurance policy for the sake of potentially saving (or wasting) a few quid. Of course, I could have just said that this particular car would usually be kept where it wasn't, but I can't really see why anyone would do that.

So why do tens of thousands of people do it each year?

olly300

Lentilist wrote: »

As for "non-disclosure" - if I insure a car at a permanent address, where it is usually kept, what is not disclosed? The question of other addresses was neither asked nor alluded to. Obtaining cover since and disclosing each linked address I have (as I'm told I must) has led to most people at the other end of the phone thinking I am some sort of con-artist or criminal - you would think it was the strangest thing in the world.

I'm sure that 3 of the insurers I've been with in the past 5 years, and 2 of them are well known names, have allowed me to put another postcode where my car is sometimes kept at on my insurance policy.

If you had asked a few insurers before you took out your policy you would have found one that covered you for more than one postcode.

If your life isn't standard then you need to ask financial institutions questions as like price comparison sites they make assumptions about people.

I should add in my case my additional postcodes didn't make a difference to my premium.