VOID Car Insurance

starrystarry

crodge25 wrote: »

I have read several articles and most of them state that deliberate fraud the premium does not have to be returned

That's the important word, it doesn't have to be returned. The insurer is entitled to retain the premium if the non-disclosure was fraudulent but they don't have to. Just because they didn't retain your premium doesn't mean they don't think it was fraudulent.

I deal with non disclosure (on different types of policies but the prinicples are the same) and I've never retained the premiums on a voided policy. Seen plenty that were clearly deliberate/fraudulent though.

vaio

raskazz wrote: »

This is not true, In the case of inadvertent non-disclosure the insurer can void the policy if it would not have accepted the risk had the true facts been known. As per:

http://www.financial-ombudsman.org.uk/publications/ombudsman-news/46/46_non_disclosure_insurance.htm

"Where there has been inadvertent non-disclosure or misrepresentation, we expect insurers to rewrite the insurance. This should be done on the terms they would originally have offered if they had been aware of all the information. In some cases this may result in a proportionate payment; in others it may result in no payment at all. This is because the inadvertently-withheld information would, if disclosed, have led to the firm declining the application altogether."

Yep, that's why I had "generally" in my post coupled with the assertion from the OP that his insurer would have accepted the risk had they known the true facts

Parking_Trouble

So if the OP has inadvertently not disclosed the DR10 (thinking it was spent) and if the full premium with DR10 disclosed was £1300 and he only paid £800 then there is a chance that the FOS would decide that the OP should pay 5/13 of £9,000 plus the full £1,300 premium? Which my schoolboy maths calculate as £6,838

dacouch

Also something for the OP to bear in mind, when working out quotes to see if they would have accepted him / roughly what premium it would have been (As others have pointed out their criteria may have changed etc etc). Is that when running quotes through, he needs to adjust his age to that when he took the policy out along with the correct no claims bonus and also make the DR10 conviction the same age as it would have been when he took the cover out.

Me thinks the premium on the above information could be significantly higher.

MarkyMarkD

£4,762 according to my maths! You've done 8/13 not 5/13.

Still a very substantial amount to pay out.

I also don't see the FOS regarding failure to disclose a DR10 as inadvertent. It is not like a £30 speeding fine 4 years ago - it is a serious conviction. How much effort is it to get your driving licence out of your wallet/pocket/handbag before applying for an insurance quote/policy?

mikey72

dacouch wrote: »

Also something for the OP to bear in mind, when working out quotes to see if they would have accepted him / roughly what premium it would have been (As others have pointed out their criteria may have changed etc etc). Is that when running quotes through, he needs to adjust his age to that when he took the policy out along with the correct no claims bonus and also make the DR10 conviction the same age as it would have been when he took the cover out.

Me thinks the premium on the above information could be significantly higher.

Then again, insurance has increased dramatically over the last couple of years, so it may not be.

As to the percentage/pro rata payout, if it was felt it was inadvertently not disclosed I thought it was more common for the FOS to allow the insurer to withhold the difference in premium they would have charged had all the facts been disclosed initially, not to settle for a pro rata payout.

dacouch

mikey72 wrote: »

Then again, insurance has increased dramatically over the last couple of years, so it may not be.

As to the percentage/pro rata payout, if it was felt it was inadvertently not disclosed I thought it was more common for the FOS to allow the insurer to withhold the difference in premium they would have charged had all the facts been disclosed initially, not to settle for a pro rata payout.

If the OP has not run the quote through with the correct dates, the difference in premium would normally be a lot more than the general price increases.

The OP has not given exact dates of which month & year they took out their cover with Hasting orginally and the month & year they received their conviction. So I'm guessing cover was taken out 2011 if cover was originally taken out in 2010 or earlier it would be even worse.

Parking_Trouble

MarkyMarkD wrote: »

£4,762 according to my maths! You've done 8/13 not 5/13.

Still a very substantial amount to pay out.

I also don't see the FOS regarding failure to disclose a DR10 as inadvertent. It is not like a £30 speeding fine 4 years ago - it is a serious conviction. How much effort is it to get your driving licence out of your wallet/pocket/handbag before applying for an insurance quote/policy?

Schoolboy error!

A substantial sum but considerably less than the OP is faced with.

They might not view it as inadvertent but there is enough debate on here to prove that people don't always understand Rehab of Offender act and the length of time before an offence is considered spent.

The OP is entitled to try any legitimate way they can to reduce the bill so not for us to judge what the FOS will say - they look at each case individually and we don't know all the facts.

Some posters early on this thread had him banged to rights and suggesting he should be reaching for the chequebook. I think the truth is that there is small ray of hope and the advice should be to contact the FOS. I found them helpful and they will raise the complaint on your behalf with the insurer/broker.

Parking_Trouble

dacouch wrote: »

If the OP has not run the quote through with the correct dates, the difference in premium would normally be a lot more than the general price increases.

The OP has not given exact dates of which month & year they took out their cover with Hasting orginally and the month & year they received their conviction. So I'm guessing cover was taken out 2011 if cover was originally taken out in 2010 or earlier it would be even worse.

Where there has been inadvertent non-disclosure or misrepresentation, we expect insurers to rewrite the insurance.

Does this mean the insurer will work all this out for the OP if the FOS recommend it?

Whichever way they work it out it surely means less than £9k.

dacouch

Parking_Trouble wrote: »

Where there has been inadvertent non-disclosure or misrepresentation, we expect insurers to rewrite the insurance.

Does this mean the insurer will work all this out for the OP if the FOS recommend it?

Whichever way they work it out it surely means less than £9k.

It means, if the Insurers or FOS decide it was inadvertent they will reissue the Insurance on the basis they would have originally if the correct information had been declared. This would be any changes in excess, premium etc etc.

However if they would not have accepted the OP as a client had they known about the DR10 then they're entitled to void the policy.