We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.
This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
Void Insurance Causing Problems
Comments
-
Are Asda and Southern Rock not breaching ICOBs 8.1.2 R?
-A rejection of a consumer policyholder's claim is unreasonable, except where the evidence is fraud, if it is for:
1. non-disclosure of a fact of material to the risk; or
2. non-negligent misrepresentation of a fact material to the risk; or
3. breach of warranty or condition unless the circumstances of the claim are connected to the breach.
They are not breaching is as it the disclosure you made is a material fact. So, number 1 is where you fail. They say they would never have accepted you had you given them the correct information. Indeed, that very thing is listed in the FOS guide on non-disclosure.
If you disagree with their response, you can refer it to the FOS. However, if you should read the FOS guide to non-disclosure. Most of which is based on law with a bit of consumer protection thrown in (which the courts wouldnt consider)
http://www.financial-ombudsman.org.uk/publications/ombudsman-news/46/46_non_disclosure_insurance.htm
You would fall under inadvertent most likely. However, your argument to the FOS would be more along the "innocent" lines. I guess it would then depend on whether you are believed in respect of your occupation or not.
As for legal action, you need to be aware that the courts are stronger on this than the FOS. It would be silly to consider legal action at this stage. Indeed, it would actually prevent you from going to the ombudsman.I am an Independent Financial Adviser (IFA). The comments I make are just my opinion and are for discussion purposes only. They are not financial advice and you should not treat them as such. If you feel an area discussed may be relevant to you, then please seek advice from an Independent Financial Adviser local to you.0 -
In that case, I answered all the questions on their online application as honestly as I could within the constraints of the questionnaire which was designed by them using their own experience and expertise.
Is their letter is not accurate as it refers only to the part which mentions "professional"? I indicated that I am a professional and that I then went on to indicate "security services". If they had any questions then because they had all of my contact details and could have raised the matter with me, should they not have contacted me, even though they chose not to?
Again, the description at of my business at companies house is "private security activities".
I am not a door supervisor, but I am a security professional and I offer a range of security services. However this has included acting a door supervisor from time to time.
Should they not have a list of terms of occupations they don't insure?0 -
Bear in mind they will almost certainly have googled you.0
-
Should they not have a list of terms of occupations they don't insure?
They have a list. Problem is that you choose a generic unspecific occupation rather than one that fits what you did.
None of us here can call what a complaint outcome would be. All we can do it point out issues you are likely to come up against.
My gut feeling is that the FOS would look at the duties you undertake and see which how much is allocated to each security area. The company will then be asked where they would or would not offer cover in each of those areas. If there is more than one area where cover would not have been offered then it would harm your case. (a lot of security roles would see cover refused).
Also, I wouldnt be at all surprised if they look at the quotes you obtained prior to application to see if you changed the occupation. This is something usually considered as people who know they have high risk issues will often play with options to see which gives them the best price. There are audit trails now that show if this occurred. So, if you know you did this, your chances are harmed. If you didn't and only got quotes produced on that occupation, then its better for you.
There is also the issue that most people in security services know what they do is considered high risk by insurers. If you have only recently started, they may consider it more of an innocent mistake. If you have been doing this a fair while they would likely consider it more intentional.I am an Independent Financial Adviser (IFA). The comments I make are just my opinion and are for discussion purposes only. They are not financial advice and you should not treat them as such. If you feel an area discussed may be relevant to you, then please seek advice from an Independent Financial Adviser local to you.0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply

Categories
- All Categories
- 352.1K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.5K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 454.2K Spending & Discounts
- 245.1K Work, Benefits & Business
- 600.7K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177.4K Life & Family
- 258.9K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.2K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.6K Read-Only Boards