Non disclosure of penalty points must i pay retrospectively?

Captain_Shambolic

stepmaxi wrote: »

Moreover D/L stated they will only retrosepctively charge me for 2012-2013. Given I pay 45 per month and they have chagred me £492 for the yr 2012-2013... you can start to see my anger with the charges

Okay, could you ask them for a breakdown on that charge? How much of it applies to each conviction and if there is an admin fee involved (and how much the admin fee is)

stepmaxi

Captain_Shambolic wrote: »

Personally I don't think we've been too judgmental, it just seems like you are getting a little upset because you've not been told what you wanted to hear. Insurance companies aren't in the habit of mollycoddling people, they send documents for you to check and to inform them if something isn't right and if they find an instance of non-disclosure they are well within their rights to claim back the money they would have charged had they known about the extra risk from the start.

I forget who it was but calling D/L and asking for a breakdown of the fee does sound like a good idea, once you have that breakdown post it here and we can look into it further to see if it does seem high or not. Also just to check, when was your renewal date?

It is directline and when i asked them could they break down the charges they said it wasn't them but their underwriters and it was the rates they charge. I guess I am angry but guilty too..so yes I have paid £241 and will pay 492 next week but it seems that they won't disclose this information on how these figures were comprised. given also that they said they would only charge me for 2012-2013 retrospectively the price does seem high. my renewal as it happens is april 2013 for my current(old) car.

Captain_Shambolic

It might seem high but I guess the only comfort you can cling to is had D/L cancelled the policy it would have cost a lot more, as then you would be going to the 'Non-Disclosure' insurance companies and they will charge a lot more.

JimmyTheWig

stepmaxi wrote: »

I feel I am a criminal to the others

I think that sometimes when you are close to an industry (e.g. you work in the industry or are a clued up customer) then you get to know the ins and outs of it and they become second nature.
The assumption, then, when someone doesn't follow the rules is that they should have done as the rules are second nature.

JimmyTheWig

stepmaxi wrote: »

Moreover D/L stated they will only retrosepctively charge me for 2012-2013.

If this is the case, you are getting off very lightly indeed! Imagine what it could have been if it was backdated?!

Given I pay 45 per month and they have chagred me £492 for the yr 2012-2013... you can start to see my anger with the charges

It's got to be wrong, hasn't it?
If I were you I would still get a quote as accurately as I could based on the situation at the time of renewal.
But I think you are somewhat stuck because they won't tell you how they have reached their figure and you probably don't have a right to know as it is company sensitive information and so wouldn't be covered under the Freedom of Information Act.

If you can get, in writing, from them that
(a) they accept it was a genuine mistake on your part,
(b) they are only charging you for 2012/2013, and
(c) that what they are charging you is the difference between what you paid and what you should have paid [plus an admin fee of £x]
then it might be worth pursuing.

If you can't get those guarantees in writing then I would pay and draw a line under it as you've got too much to lose.

stepmaxi

JimmyTheWig wrote: »

If this is the case, you are getting off very lightly indeed! Imagine what it could have been if it was backdated?!


It's got to be wrong, hasn't it?
If I were you I would still get a quote as accurately as I could based on the situation at the time of renewal.
But I think you are somewhat stuck because they won't tell you how they have reached their figure and you probably don't have a right to know as it is company sensitive information and so wouldn't be covered under the Freedom of Information Act.

If you can get, in writing, from them that
(a) they accept it was a genuine mistake on your part,
(b) they are only charging you for 2012/2013, and
(c) that what they are charging you is the difference between what you paid and what you should have paid [plus an admin fee of £x]
then it might be worth pursuing.

If you can't get those guarantees in writing then I would pay and draw a line under it as you've got too much to lose.

I rang them and had 2 verbal responses stating that it was commercial sensitive information...which of course rings alarm bells of why they won't tell me. I am paying but my thoughts are with others who are being ripped off and can't afford it. there needs to be more transparency in the industry ... may be captain marvel has the objective answers on this?

stepmaxi

Captain_Shambolic wrote: »

It might seem high but I guess the only comfort you can cling to is had D/L cancelled the policy it would have cost a lot more, as then you would be going to the 'Non-Disclosure' insurance companies and they will charge a lot more.

I rang them and had 2 verbal responses stating that it was commercial sensitive information...which of course rings alarm bells of why they won't tell me. I am paying but my thoughts are with others who are being ripped off and can't afford it. there needs to be more transparency in the industry ... may be captain marvel has the objective answers on this?

dunstonh

I rang them and had 2 verbal responses stating that it was commercial sensitive information...which of course rings alarm bells of why they won't tell me.

Its doesnt raise alarm balls. It means you are asking the wrong questions. No insurer is going to give you premium pricing information. That is commercially sensitive.

there needs to be more transparency in the industry

There is. They should be able to tell you what admin fee you have been charged and how much is applicable for each year you are being asked to pay for.

kingstreet

If unhappy, make a formal complaint to the insurer. They will have eight weeks to investigate and come up with a final response. Once you have that, you have six months to escalate to FOS - the Financial Ombudsman Service.

It will adjudicate and decide if the charges are a reasonable way for the insurer to deal with the issue of non-disclosure. The result is binding on the insurer, but not on you. You still have the right to your day in court.

vaio

OP...you have the complaints option but it might be worth doing some dummy quotes first.

Keep address close, use same car and adjust ages ncb etc to what they would have been at the time....once you have that quote then adjust and add the points, again adjust dates to suit and see what the increase is.

Obviously it isn't going to be exact but if the extra for the points on the dummy quotes is significantly less than they are trying to charge then I'd certainly complain