police impounded sons car

Faith177

But what about if the GF failed to disclose material facts?

mikey72

Faith177 wrote: »

But what about if the GF failed to disclose material facts?

They can follow the procedure to void insurance after the insured has failed to declare material facts.
That probably doesn't allow them to tell a third party moments after being informed by the same third party of unknown, possible hearsay, without initially checking the details with the insured, then starting the procedure to notify them the policy will be voided unless they explain the queries they are raising.

forgotmyname

Lots of material facts missing.

On what grounds did the insurance cancel the policy?

Whats the daily charge? And whats the car worth? Is it still in the pound?

Faith177

The police dealing are hardly some random 3rd party though are they. I can understand your point if Joe Bloggs from XYC rang but a Police Officer with a badge number is a very diffrent story.

I know whose word I would trust more.

They may be writing to the insured as we speak to confirm the reasons behind the cancellation which they can do

mikey72

Faith177 wrote: »

The police dealing are hardly some random 3rd party though are they. I can understand your point if Joe Bloggs from XYC rang but a Police Officer with a badge number is a very diffrent story.

I know whose word I would trust more.

They may be writing to the insured as we speak to confirm the reasons behind the cancellation which they can do

Are your sure you're not getting the police mixed up with god there?
But you have an ideal way to dispense with the court system.

vax2002

Insurance is in force until it is cancelled in writing.
Thats the law.
However, we dont know what he told the police, if the car was secure and parked when the police arrived, he should have stayed out of the way.
If he admitted driving without insurance, the car will be seized.

mikey72

vax2002 wrote: »

Insurance is in force until it is cancelled in writing.
Thats the law.
However, we dont know what he told the police, if the car was secure and parked when the police arrived, he should have stayed out of the way.
If he admitted driving without insurance, the car will be seized.

You haven't actually read any of this thread, have you?

Faith177

It was my understanding that if the policy is declared null & voided then they are off cover straight away with the letter to follow

dacouch

Faith177 wrote: »

The police dealing are hardly some random 3rd party though are they. I can understand your point if Joe Bloggs from XYC rang but a Police Officer with a badge number is a very diffrent story.

I know whose word I would trust more.

They may be writing to the insured as we speak to confirm the reasons behind the cancellation which they can do

As Mikey has said, Insurance is a contract which is also bound by the Road Traffic Act.

An Insurer cannot cancel a policy over the phone on the say so of a third party even if they're the police.

The only way is to void the cover which would involve gathering the facts including checking the information from their policyholder (Usually a letter of explanation from the PH). They would then have to work out whether the non disclosure was deliberate etc and would have to communicate with the policyholder.

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

mikey72

Faith177 wrote: »

It was my understanding that if the policy is declared null & voided then they are off cover straight away with the letter to follow

Only voided if they follow the procedure, otherwise they could void your policy whenever you try to put a claim in. And they need a reason, not hearsay from a third party, to even start the process. And also the policewoman said "cancelled", not "voided"