Refused Insurance from renewal date.

2sides2everystory

It really is disgraceful isn't it in this information age that financial institutions know more about you than you do yourself. I am serious. A storm damage claim 6 years ago on a building of course has no material effect on the underwriting of personal possessions insurance covering a gadget stolen at a railway station. As one of a definite pattern of claims against insurance companies over 6 years then maybe so, but as a one off ? Of course not - yet this insurance company is making it an issue.

I think with regard to insurance law it may be time to completely turn the question of "material fact" disclosure completely on it's head.

There are two sides to every contract and if one party (in this case the insurance company) can be expected to have chapter and verse on a previous claim because they have insider access to a huge database covering the entire industry over many years now then they should be obliged to tell us at the outset of the contract not use it as a way to steal premiums when they have no intention of paying claims.

As I say, I am quite serious about this. I passed very advanced level examinations in the principles and history of property and other insurance a few decades ago before the age of instant access databases so that material fact disclosure (by the customer) was important for the public good. Now it seems that bvggeration fact disclosure (by the insurance company) is even more important for the public good.

rs65

2sides2everystory wrote: »

A storm damage claim 6 years ago on a building of course has no material effect on the underwriting of personal possessions insurance covering a gadget stolen at a railway station. As one of a definite pattern of claims against insurance companies over 6 years then maybe so, but as a one off ?

......

use it as a way to steal premiums when they have no intention of paying claims.

Have you actually read this thread?

Someone is doing a bad job of assisting their grandmother.

They arrange a policy, don't disclose a claim, don't disclose 'we had a few £0 payout claims', make a claim for their own ipad on their grandmothers policy, don't follow it through and then complain 'so now I have no contents insurance'.

If I was an underwriter I would run a mile.

Steal premiums with no intention of paying claims? The insurers asked for information and didn't get it - the insureds grandchild cancelled the claim. The insurer was dealing with the claim.



ps The huge database doesn't cover the entire industry.

leon91

Have you actually read this thread?

Someone is doing a bad job of assisting their grandmother.

They arrange a policy, don't disclose a claim, don't disclose 'we had a few £0 payout claims', make a claim for their own ipad on their grandmothers policy, don't follow it through and then complain 'so now I have no contents insurance'.

If I was an underwriter I would run a mile.

Steal premiums with no intention of paying claims? The insurers asked for information and didn't get it - the insureds grandchild cancelled the claim. The insurer was dealing with the claim.

Have YOU read this thread?

1. I can not help the fact my grandmother needs me to look after things for her, old age can be a hard time - god forbid you ever need help.

2. I can only disclose what MY GRANDMOTHER herself knows!!

let me guess you know my claims history yes? no? why not?!

3. oops wrong again, iPad was my Grans as she bought it ( as a gift )

4. all the £0 payouts WERE disclosed.

5. they asked for information we gave it.

dacouch

2sides2everystory wrote: »

It really is disgraceful isn't it in this information age that financial institutions know more about you than you do yourself. I am serious. A storm damage claim 6 years ago on a building of course has no material effect on the underwriting of personal possessions insurance covering a gadget stolen at a railway station. As one of a definite pattern of claims against insurance companies over 6 years then maybe so, but as a one off ? Of course not - yet this insurance company is making it an issue.

I think with regard to insurance law it may be time to completely turn the question of "material fact" disclosure completely on it's head.

There are two sides to every contract and if one party (in this case the insurance company) can be expected to have chapter and verse on a previous claim because they have insider access to a huge database covering the entire industry over many years now then they should be obliged to tell us at the outset of the contract not use it as a way to steal premiums when they have no intention of paying claims.

As I say, I am quite serious about this. I passed very advanced level examinations in the principles and history of property and other insurance a few decades ago before the age of instant access databases so that material fact disclosure (by the customer) was important for the public good. Now it seems that bvggeration fact disclosure (by the insurance company) is even more important for the public good.

All of the recent proposal forms from CUE members I've seen mentio they will share claims data with CUE and will check it.

rs65

leon91 wrote: »

Have YOU read this thread?

Yes I have read it a few times and I still have no idea who owns the ipad.

I appreciate you are trying to help her but look at the mess you are now in.

Hackman_2

leon91 wrote: »

Have YOU read this thread?

1. I can not help the fact my grandmother needs me to look after things for her, old age can be a hard time - god forbid you ever need help.

2. I can only disclose what MY GRANDMOTHER herself knows!!

let me guess you know my claims history yes? no? why not?!

3. oops wrong again, iPad was my Grans as she bought it ( as a gift )

4. all the £0 payouts WERE disclosed.

5. they asked for information we gave it.

So it was stolen before she could give it to anyone?

If she had given it then the recipient would be the owner.

leon91

rs65 wrote: »

Yes I have read it a few times and I still have no idea who owns the ipad.

I appreciate you are trying to help her but look at the mess you are now in.

well. it was bought with HER cash by me ( that she gave me specifically for the iPad as my gift )

that obviously confuses things, who owns it? well I'd say that gifts usually become property of the receiver, so myself. but I was living with my Grandmother & the insurance were obviously aware of this when we took out the policy.

as i said, if she didnt know, she couldnt have told them about this undisclosed claim. therefore regardless of me being the middle man
this would have ended up like this anyway.

the last claim we made since the damage in 2007 that was undisclosed
( by mistake )

was in 2008 - december for a tv and were given £500

as we have always had insurance - and made maybe 5 actual claims
( paid ) in 15 years and them being all other than the TV before 2007
its understandable how an older person could forget one.

we , likemost, would rather not use an insurance provider to claim
unless there was a significant loss

ok, the iPad wasnt much - but with it being a theft rather than just breaking
we felt it best go through the insurance.

believe me, I know enough to know not to lie/try to lie to an insurer
so had I/my grandmother remembered these claims we would have disclosed them

leon91

Hackman wrote: »

So it was stolen before she could give it to anyone?

If she had given it then the recipient would be the owner.

no, as i stated just now

it became mine upon purchase

however the policy knew I was here from the start
& if they would only cover my grandmothers specific property
they would have said so

also there would be a lot less to insure

we had a contents cover of £50,000 which was needed as I own items worth a lot individually and in certain items we had to insure them separately ( 1 of my guitars ) with the insurer



I should say aswell:

the underwriters are happy to cover the building from the renewal
not the contents.

rs65

leon91 wrote: »

that obviously confuses things, who owns it? well I'd say that gifts usually become property of the receiver, so myself. but I was living with my Grandmother & the insurance were obviously aware of this when we took out the policy.

This is new info - you hadn't said before that you live with her. In that case, were you a joint insured? Presumably yes, as you say they knew.

Doesn't explain why they asked for proof of your address during the claim. I wish you had come here for help during the claim.

So, in the five years prior to the policy starting she/you had one claim which you forgot about. As Quentin said earlier, make a complaint on the basis it was a simple oversight. The insurers allege that you had another claim but can't tell you anything about it? They can't use this against you. My advice about the subject access request still stands, plus it will give you a record for the future of exact dates, amounts etc..

As Quentin said before, you need to sort this as you don't want a refusal on your record.

rs65

rs65 wrote: »

This is new info - you hadn't said before that you live with her. In that case, were you a joint insured? Presumably yes, as you say they knew.

Doesn't explain why they asked for proof of your address during the claim. I wish you had come here for help during the claim.

Hold that thought....

My policy covers immediately family and other relatives normally living with you.

What does her policy say? Perhaps they were seeking evidence that you normally live with her.