Gutted - insurance

[Deleted User]

Best thing to do is write a format complaint asking them to re-instate the policy and pay your costs. You don't want a cancelled polcy on your record.

If that doesn't work, and it probaby won't, get on to the Ombudsman. You can always use Small Claims Court to recover your costs too, since even if they complied with the letter of the law their action (or rather inaction) still caused you financial loss.

bennettp23

Thanks for your replies guys. I really appreciate your help.

I have complained to RAC, but hold out no hope. I will have to swallow new insurance at £1200 instead of £400 that it was before just to get the car back from the rip off towers (£200 to tow it 6 miles and store it in a field for 3 nights).

I cannot get my terms and conditions because they were all online on the self serve portal and because the policy has 'expired' (does that mean not cancelled? Maybe, I will ask). Does anyone else on here have RAC insurance with the terms and conditions to look at if it says 'recorded delivery'?

The only difference was that the one accident (only £900 payout) was down as not fault (as I thought my wife was not to blame as the other driver came onto her side of the road and then failed to stop) when LV recorded it as fault (I never knew this). I am sure they would have just increased the policy cost a small amount.

Aretnap

RAC standard terms and conditions

http://www.rac.co.uk/RAC/files/ec/ec63b98b-3ca0-42e4-8e11-5e3188a9d61f.pdf

Page 16 says "we may cancel by giving you at least 7days notice in writing". It doesn't say anything about sending it recorded delivery I'm afraid.

dacouch

Aretnap wrote: »

RAC standard terms and conditions

http://www.rac.co.uk/RAC/files/ec/ec63b98b-3ca0-42e4-8e11-5e3188a9d61f.pdf

Page 16 says "we may cancel by giving you at least 7days notice in writing". It doesn't say anything about sending it recorded delivery I'm afraid.

I don't recall ever seeing an Insurer specifying they will send a cancellation letter by recorded delivery in their policy book

Quentin

It seems this is your policy, and your wife is a named driver?

if so, then the cancellation issue is all yours and not on your wife's record. (ie. You have a cancelled policy to disclose, not your wife.)

Forget complaining over recorded delivery not being used - that's just a red herring.

Instead focus on trying to get the cancellation reversed. See if their questions regarding "fault" are ambiguous, and whether your reading of the word to mean blame is a mistake due to your ignorance (no offence) or in fact a deliberate attempt to get a cheaper premium.

(Did you have protected ncd? If not, presumably the claim resulted in a loss of ncd, which would indicate a fault claim)

Smithers37

Why is the advice here to pursue a FOS complaint? I get that the OP made a mistake, but it is THEIR mistake, not the insurers. The previous insurer would have been able to state what the type of claim was, and (probably did by way of a renewal notice) so I don't see how this is anyone's fault but the OP's.

Quentin

The reason to pursue a complaint (initially to RAC not fos) is that it is the only avenue available

As has been pointed out, insurers use a different definition of fault to the dictionary!

A cancellation on your record is always worth trying to get reversed because of its long term impact and cost.

rs65

Smithers37 wrote: »

Why is the advice here to pursue a FOS complaint? I get that the OP made a mistake, but it is THEIR mistake, not the insurers.

The insurers reaction to the mistake seems disproportionate.

BillJones

rs65 wrote: »

The insurers reaction to the mistake seems disproportionate.

How so? They decided that they did not want to do business with someone, wrote to tell them so, and stopped charging them for the service.

The OP very likely did get the letter, but may have assumed that it was junk. They also saw payments stopping, so should have seen that way that the policy had been cancelled.

rs65

BillJones wrote: »

How so?

I would be surprised if an insured would become unacceptable to an insurer just because one claim is fault rather than non-fault.

The ombudsman differentiates between different types of non-disclosure, so I would expect the first reaction would be to ask for an explanation. Maybe there were letters treated as junk and ignored but we can only go by what the OP says.