sdp&c but then going to a meeting after work at another location

tir21

Quentin wrote: »

Cancelling mid term is always expensive. Some companies might do a goodwill gesture over the cancellation fee, but it's you changing the goalposts, not them.

well its the company you work for changing the goalposts really unless when you started they indicated you would be required to go to a training day at different premises one day a year

For your problem just get business use from the outset and save yourself the cost and the hassle.

well its increasing my quote by £50 so its not insignificant as some here seem to suggest.

the silly thing is and what makes me take a dim view of insurance companies is that commuting to two places of work rather than one might actually reduce risk profile

so for instance you may drive say 10 miles to the same place of work every day. the company may however change where you work and ask you to only work where you currently work one day a week. the other days they may ask you to commute to new offices 500 meters from where you live

with a blanket increase regardless of the facts or distances involved then insurance companies just show that they will always just try to charge more where they can without real justification

tir21

forgotmyname wrote: »

Half the premium back. Unlikely. Seems they dont say 365 days / premium - x days used = your refund. Its usually biased in their favour.

Then the cancellation charge upto £75. Then no refund for legal protection etc..

The refund could be a LOT less. Sometimes you still owe them money.

to me such policies just encourages people to lie, which might be ok if is just them involved in an accident, but not if there is a third party

notanewuser

tir21 wrote: »

the silly thing is and what makes me take a dim view of insurance companies is that commuting to two places of work rather than one might actually reduce risk profile

so for instance you may drive say 10 miles to the same place of work every day. the company may however change where you work and ask you to only work where you currently work one day a week. the other days they may ask you to commute to new offices 500 meters from where you live

with a blanket increase regardless of the facts or distances involved then insurance companies just show that they will always just try to charge more where they can without real justification

Or you might be driving more miles, while under stress, and parking in car parks where damage is more likely to occur and require a claim.

Which scenario is more likely?

I agree with you OP that a large proprlortion of the general public are pretty clueless about this sort of stuff, but I think employers are now getting better at checking that their staff understand what is required and have checks in place re MOTs and insurance. (My former employer required all docs to be submitte to them for checking once a year.

forgotmyname

Ignorance is not an excuse though.

The question is clear enough. A single place of work.

My old firm would originally cover you on their insurance but over time things clamped down until you were no longer allowed to use your own car.

tir21

forgotmyname wrote: »

Ignorance is not an excuse though.

well if most of the population are ignorant of these nuances regarding sdp&c tghen it is not enough to just say ignorance is no excuse

there must be some onus on insurance companies to educate their customers in regards to what they are purchasing

as i said earlier i spoke to one insurance comapny rep who said i could go to more than one work location with sdp&c so long as i didnt go to more than one location per day. I spoke to someone else the next day from the same company and they said the opposite

now if people who work at these places are unsure - what chance has the average person got?

The question is clear enough. A single place of work.

as i said earlier - its not "a single place of work" its "commuting to a single place of work"

i commute to a single place of work - because once i get to that place of work i dont commute anywhere else

it just so happens that i dont commute to the same single place of work everyday

My old firm would originally cover you on their insurance but over time things clamped down until you were no longer allowed to use your own car.

what do you mean you couldnt use your own car to go to company training excursions?

forgotmyname

If its 2 places then its not a single place is it...

Onus on the insurance to educate the customer. You mean give them something like a copy of the terms and conditions that state the terms?

Correct, If you were required to goto another depot or even pop to the shop to get some milk or teabags then you took a company vehicle or the bosses car or they supplied transport.
Whether it was cost cutting to get cheaper insurance or just new rules by the insurer i dont know.
But originally we were given money to fuel the car and told we were fully covered on the firms policy.


The people on the phones are not the people that create the policy. Just a call centre. There maybe dozens of policies. Some will cover it and some wont.

Ask the person that said your covered to put it in writing. Then your sorted.

tir21

forgotmyname wrote: »

If its 2 places then its not a single place isit...

the phrase is not "single place" in isolation. The sentence becomes morenuanced and ambiguous when it is changed to "commute to a single place of work"

if i work at location A on monday/tuesday and location B on wednesday thursday friday, then i have a job where i commute to a single place of work. Every day would require commuting to a single place of work

if someone commuted to location A at 9am and location B at 11am then they would not have commuted to a single place of work. Since in this case they would not have commuted to a single place of work then by one interpretation it could be assumed that if they had remained at location A then they would have commuted to a single place of work - regardless of whether they commuted to a different location the next day.

i'm sorry i cant help you see the ambiguity in this terminology but its possibily one of those things you can either see or just cant see

Onus on the insurance to educate the customer. You mean give them somethinglike a copy of the terms and conditions that state the terms?

A lot can be hidden in the terms and conditions particularly if ambiguous language like “commute to a single place of work” is used

The people on the phones are not the people that create the policy.

then I would expect them to furnish me with the correct information if I’m confused and enquiring about something. Is that too much to ask ?

Just a call centre. There maybe dozens of policies. Some will cover it and some wont.

Then I would expect them to know which ones do and which ones don’t. again is that too much to ask?

Ask the person that said your covered to put it in writing. Then your sorted.

as ive indicated previously ive subsequently been told by another employee of the company that their sdp&c does not cover my commuting to different locations on different days

notanewuser

If you go to site A on Mon/Tues and site B on Weds/Thurs/Fri then you don't have a single place of work. You have 2. Plus potential other site visits for meetings or training. Just because you only go to one per day does not negate the need for class 1 business cover.

I used to work from 2 sites 200 miles apart. 4 days at 1, 1 day at the other. My "single place of work" was site 1, and I needed business use to travel to the second site.

Can you find a single insurer that will put in writing that your interpretation is correct?

Filip

This thread is so frustrating to read. Op, you are constantly talking about site A and site B, if it was a single place of work you wouldn't have to specify 2 sites in your example. There is no ambiguity, you need class 1.

tir21

notanewuser wrote: »

If you go to site A on Mon/Tues and site B on Weds/Thurs/Fri then you don't have a single place of work. You have 2.

i dont have a single place of work but i commute to a single place of work, because once i get to my place of work i dont have to go anywhere else

its placing the words "commute to a" in front of the words "single place of work" that creates the ambiguity

Plus potential other site visits for meetings or training.

it must be the case that absolutely every employee in the country has the potential to be required by their employer to attend a training day at some other place

personally i dont have to visit any sites away from my place of work - i just have more than one place of work. I couldnt really define any of the places i work as my main place of work - and the other places i work as sites

Just because you only go to one per day does not negate the need for class 1 business cover.

maybe not - but there would be no reason for someone to think they need business cover after reading what confused say about business class 1 on their website ie

This will cover the vehicle in connection with your job, such as driving to different sites away from your place of work if sdp&c is not applicable because of the wording then neither is this

the phrase "driving to different sites away from your place of work" cannot in all honesty apply to my situation because when i am at my place of work i do not have to drive to any site away from it

and the phrase "cover the vehicle in connection with your job" would appear to apply just as readily to someone who has to commute to location A all or the time as readily as someone who has to commute to two locations

commuting itself is an activity in connection with your job

I used to work from 2 sites 200 miles apart. 4 days at 1, 1 day at the other. My "single place of work" was site 1, and I needed business use to travel to the second site.

i would say there was nothing different about the use your car was being put to when you went to site 2 - other than the distance involved. Id say you wernt on business and you wernt on company time - you were commuting - unless you were getting a mileage allowance because of the disance

if so this is where your situation would be different to mine because all my places of work are within a few miles of each other

Can you find a single insurer that will put in writing that your interpretation is correct?

probably not because as ive said earlier insurance companies have the clout to say something means what they say it means even if it doesnt.