Car Insurance Quote - Do I have to declare Windscreen cracks?

sho_me_da_money

Coming up for renewal and wondered if I needed to declare any windscreen claims?

I've been told I don't but I need some confirmation please?

Curerently with Swiftcover and have been told I had two options with Windscreen claims:

1. Register the claim, pay the excess and forfeit a years worth of NCD
2. Protect the NCD and pay it outright myself.

I've opted for 1 and therefore sacrificed by NCD reward for this year.

Surely, I dont have to register this as a claim when renewing my insurance right? That would result in a double shafting - a) Lost NCD AND b) premium raised.with a new insurer.

sho_me_da_money

http://uk.answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20071026010847AAvT2iW

With respect to forfeiting a years worth of NCD for a windscreen claim, I think its pretty cack as it is not so clear when reading this:

http://www.swiftcover.com/carinsurance/policy/no-claims-discount/

Yes it says the world REDUCE but it does not mention anything about forfeiting a year. That said, there are other sections on the site that DO make it clear.

I wonder if I could fight against the ambiguity of the statement in the link above.

In the past, I have successfully won a claim against Quinn Insurance where my MOT was 6 months out of date and they refused to indemnify me referring to their policy wording. I was able to argue the rule of Contra-Preferentum and won without it even reaching an Ombudsman.....

Quentin

sho_me_da_money wrote: »

Surely, I dont have to register this as a claim when renewing my insurance right? That would result in a double shafting - a) Lost NCD AND b) premium raised.with a new insurer.

Yes, you do have to disclose all claims! (And of course each claim involves a loss of NCD unless you pay extra to protect it)

sho_me_da_money

Quentin wrote: »

Yes, you do have to disclose all claims! (And of course each claim involves a loss of NCD unless you pay extra to protect it)

I paid the extra for Windscreen cover at the time of taking out the insurance policy.

If this is indeed a claim, then why do I have to pay any extra with a seperate excess? Why not just include it as part of the main policy? What was I paying the extra for?

mildred1978

sho_me_da_money wrote: »

I paid the extra for Windscreen cover at the time of taking out the insurance policy.

If this is indeed a claim, then why do I have to pay any extra with a seperate excess? Why not just include it as part of the main policy? What was I paying the extra for?

You made a claim under an optional part of the policy. That doesn't mean it wasn't a claim!

You have to declare it.

sho_me_da_money

mildred1978 wrote: »

You made a claim under an optional part of the policy. That doesn't mean it wasn't a claim!

You have to declare it.

Rather than declare it, I will generatre a quote via a comparison site and save it on the site of the Insurer I'd like to go with.

I'll then call them and confirm if any windscreen claims are relevant and if note, Ill get them to make notes on my account to that effect..

I still think I can dispute and win against SwiftCoiver regarding their NCD penalty though.

Quentin

sho_me_da_money wrote: »

What was I paying the extra for?

To get your windscreen repaired at a reasonable price were you to make a claim!

Despite what you have read elsewhere on the net, this is a claim, and failure to disclose it could allow an insurer to void your policy in the event of any claim in future (meaning that you won't get any damage paid for, and if you injure a third party, you will be pursued by your insurer to reimburse them).

Quentin

sho_me_da_money wrote: »

I still think I can dispute and win against SwiftCoiver regarding their NCD penalty though.

Waste of time.

They set out clearly what they do regarding NCD if you make a claim in their policy.

sho_me_da_money

Quentin wrote: »

Waste of time.

They set out clearly what they do regarding NCD if you make a claim in their policy.

I beleive some sections are clearly defined however, the one I linked you to, is NOT clearly defined.

Whats to say I read the wording in the link above when taking out the policy only to be brought back to reality at the time of claim? Their wording is not consistent and will be held against them under the rule of CP.

Worth a pop. God loves a tryer.

Quentin

The policy bit you are looking at says NCD is not reduced following a glass claim.

That is correct - they don't "reduce" it, as explained elsewhere in the policy!

sho_me_da_money

Quentin wrote: »

The policy bit you are looking at says NCD is not reduced following a glass claim.

That is correct - they don't "reduce" it, as explained elsewhere in the policy!

That's what I am saying.

I am aware it says not REDUCE however, 'not reduce' does not mean 'not increase'. The policy should state something like:

"NCD is not reduced however, accrual of any NCD will be affected".

In the Quinn Direct case, the policy stated:

"A valid MOT certificate is required where necessary".

I was able to win on the grounds of two words in that clause "Where Neccessary".

Ill give it a whirl and let you know.