Penalty for "claim"

barvid

I wonder if anyone here with any knowledge of the insurance industry can offer an insight...

Last August, my car was hit by a police van. The claim was eventually settled with the police accepting 100% liability, and all costs were recovered. However, in the interim my insurance was up for renewal and I took out a policy with a new insurer.

Since the claim wasn't settled at the start of the policy, the accident was recorded as a fault claim. This is fine - I understand and accept the reasons for this. Once the claim was settled, my new insurer restored my No Claims Bonus from 3 years to 5 years and also adjusted my claims history to show that it was a non fault accident. My records are therefore up to date.

However, the insurer will not make any adjustment to my premium to reflect how things have changed.

This puzzles me. I would have thought that the premium I was quoted at the start of the year would be inflated by the fact that there was a fault claim on my history, as that would make me statistically more likely to claim again. Surely if it is subsequently proven that the other party was 100% to blame my premium should be adjusted downwards?

Admiral claim that it is a fair policy because if my licence were endorsed during the policy term I would not pay anything extra until the next year, but I disagree. I've changed my car today, for example, and I've been asked to pay an increased premium immediately, not next year. Similarly, when I've changed address in the past then my premium changed for the rest of the year. Why then is it that something as significant as my claims history changing doesn't result in the premium being adjusted?

As far as I can see, Admiral is profiting by penalising me for causing an accident I didn't cause! The claim was reasonably large - £3,500 plus legal fees - so my premium reflects this. I'm being charged for being a careless driver who causes accidents and claims on his insurance when the opposite is true.

As an aside, I did query at the time of getting the quote whether the premium would be adjusted if the accident were subsequently proven to be the other party's fault and I was assured it would be, so I'm of the opinion that Admiral's refusal to do anything places them in breach of contract, but that's another matter.

What I'm actually interested in is whether this is an industry standard, and whether anyone can offer any defence for the insurer carrying on like this.

Thanks!