Claim Rejected by AXA

TSx

vaio wrote: »

sorry, I think they can, my reading of the link in post #3 is.......

If the non disclosure is ruled as innocent then the insurer has to pay whether or not they would have given cover had they known the true facts.

If it's ruled as inadvertent then they have to pay but only if they would have offered cover had they known the true facts.

ICOB as above seems to say they same (or even more) but there might be a get out clause elsewhere

Innocent means the mistake is the insurers in terms of the ambiguity o the question asked, or if it's something they should know.

Inadvertent is when the PH doesn't intend the none-disclosure but does without malice and often involves a policyholder being careless in taking out the insurance - for example, not reading the assumptions before agreeing to them.

I would have thought this would be inadvertent as the insurer has made it clear in the assumptions they do not insure leased cars - if the policyholder didn't read these (assuming they are highlighted separately from the standard terms and conditions) then it's not AXA's fault.

vaio

maybe, but with £18k at stake I'd certainly be arguing for innocent and, if rejected, I'd take it to the FOS

As for ambiguous, the fact that the online T&C http://www.axainsurance.com/car/policy-wording/2_1_88_CarPolicyWording.pdf contain this.....

......If you have bought your car under a finance or hire purchase agreement, or are leasing it, any money owed to the company or bank involved will be paid directly to that company or bank first and any balance of the agreed settlement sum will then be paid to you......

certainly throws doubt on the argument that they don't insure lease cars so then we are down to a simple mistake about owner/RK on the proposal, starting to look more innocent by the minute

mattg10

Thanks for this!! I have collated alot of evidence and prepared a letter back to them, I had the insurance in place for 2 years and genuinely would not have bothered had I known the situation, obviously i want to be covered for things such as this and would have paid whatever, i went through compare the market.com, the AXA quote was not the cheapest i just recognised them so went with their quote and paid in full, renewal was immediate and I have NEVER been contacted by them, asked questions or received policy details through the post. they were available on line but not forced on me to read (as i would have if posted!)

I am partied on the lease agreement as a guarantor. not sure what else to do other than request they re consider which i have done.... thanks for the replies.

dacouch

Sally_A wrote: »

Thanks for the warning vaio, but guess S Wales will not be AXA, so he or she will probably be sitting back with a smug glow of shadenfraude.

If S Wales poster works for Admiral et al, they are by far from the worst, unfortunately the average punter that uses online companies to save a few quid by not using a broker, usually calls up in an aggressive way, as basically the punter has not read though the cover, conditions, comparisons and has gone purely on price.

Back in the day (over 30 years ago), when insurance was a skilled job, I had to go on a weeks course with Eagle Star to Cheltenham HQ, we had to nit pick policies, and learned why things were worded as they are, the reasoning behind it, etc. - this taught me loads. In fact to this day the only thing I disagree with is that cover notes should be written in black pen, it is so much harder for a dodgy punter to alter a cover note using a blue pen, as there are so many different shades of blue.

There can't have been much in their policy as there was not much ES did not cover.

They were famous for the DOC for any age.

ES had the most jobsworth Inspector (Remember those) who would audit the c/n books on a very regular basis and expect to be at our office for half a day wittering on.

Miss ES they were a decent Insurer

vaio

Back in the 30+ year ago day didn't everybody do DOC at any age? I've certainly had it since I've been insured on both TPFT and FC policies.

Even better DOC used to be DOV in that it covered driving any other vehicle so my car policy also covered bikes & vans etc.

None of this nonsense about not covering spouses vehicles or the car having to be insured in its own right either

Sally_A

dacouch wrote: »

They were famous for the DOC for any age.
Miss ES they were a decent Insurer

21+ for DOC, back in 1979-1981. Went to 23+ a couple of years later.

Happy days, customers had scruples and never abused the smallprint, insurers weren't constantly on the defensive and would treat each claim as it came.

Punters abused policy conditions, such as DOC which was designed for emergencies only, insurers have subsequently removed any slack for emergency cover, eg driving a mate in his car that has been taken poorly, or needed to get home from a sporting event with a knackered ankle.

However, also bear in mind, that insurers have also scuppered 80% of independent bodyshops, and are now getting payback in increased hire charges (less bodyshops = longer wating list = longer hire period).

One claim that sticks in mind at Eagle Star, a guy had a potted live Christmas Tree that fell over a ruined a large expensive carpet - no AD cover was the first reponse, but was paid out under the falling trees definition of the policy.