Refused Insurance from renewal date.

2sides2everystory

dacouch wrote: »

Most companies do not cross check the database against new customers until they have a claim which it appears is what More Than have done.

It will cost the Insurer's money to access the database and for the staff costs. There are companies that check all new applications against the claims data base, some that randomly check new applications and some that wait for a claim. These will be due to business decisions as to what's most economical for each Insurer.

Yes yes dacouch, business as usual you mean? I am suggesting that times have changed. This IS the information age, and the age where the over 60s are the fastest growing sector of the population with or without their iPads It is not the conveyor-belt-cuddly-toy-memory-test age.

Do you reckon Brucie can remember his claims history thesedays? He'd be an unusual senior citizen if he could.

PS Where did you deduce that the insurer is More Than ?

dacouch

2sides2everystory wrote: »

Yes yes dacouch, business as usual you mean? I am suggesting that times have changed. This IS the information age, and the age where the over 60s are the fastest growing sector of the population with or without their iPads It is not the conveyor-belt-cuddly-toy-memory-test age.

Do you reckon Brucie can remember his claims history thesedays? He'd be an unusual senior citizen if he could.

PS Where did you deduce that the insurer is More Than ?

Must have confused it with another thread.

In my experience, old people tend to stay with the same Insurer and rarely change, I suspect the OP being of the modern age and wanting to save his gran money persuaded her to change Insurers.

If she'd stayed with the same Insurer the non disclosure would not have been an issue, she'd have just ended up paying more in premiums.

Brucie will be with Chubb or Hiscox and unlikely to change due to the cover and service so not a great example.

rs65

2sides2everystory wrote: »

If you are referring to whether the op is part of his grandmother's household then we were all a bit skeptical when we read the first couple of posts. Even yesterday rs65 wasn't sure about who owned the iPad and whether the policy was in joint names, but then had a rethink and realised that it doesn't really matter. Leon is part of his grandmother's household - he even has his guitars specifically noted on the policy.

There simply isn't enough info on this thread to come to any conclusion. What info there is, is being drip fed. Joint names may not matter - depending on the definition of 'insured'. He didn't say the guitars are specified - he said they are insured separately. He may have to prove he is part of the household which it seems they asked him to do.

Again, a SAR request to CUE (which not all insurers subscribe to) will at least let him see what some insurers can see.

2sides2everystory

rs65 wrote: »

There simply isn't enough info on this thread to come to any conclusion. What info there is, is being drip fed. Joint names may not matter - depending on the definition of 'insured'. He didn't say the guitars are specified - he said they are insured separately.

Well if you like but he did say "we had to insure them separately ( 1 of my guitars ) with the insurer" , and do remember that we as insurance knowledgeable types do eventually we get around to asking the pertinent questions whereas the op as a mere mortal punter was just doing his best to state what bits he thought were important answers !

I don't see it as drip-feeding us though. Yes you may be right about the guitars ... I just read it the other way but I don't think I was far out, do you now?

He may have to prove he is part of the household which it seems they asked him to do.

Again, a SAR request to CUE (which not all insurers subscribe to) will at least let him see what some insurers can see.

Don't disagree there, but remembering Quentin's advice to keep leon's eye on the ball - his number one priority is to do what he has to do to get that refusal to renew rescinded.