insurance cancellations unlawful?

Brooker_Dave

How does a different name on a piece of paper effect risk?

paddyandstumpy

It's up to the insurer to decide if they want to offer cover and if so at what rate, you can second guess and question their acceptance and rate if you like, but it's a commercial market.

Quentin

Brooker_Dave wrote: »

How does a different name on a piece of paper effect risk?

The problem is that the wrong name is material to the acceptance of the risk!


(The incorrect name given was acceptable, but a leasing company's name was not - and now the insurer has discovered the truth)

Brooker_Dave

It's just an excuse to profiteer.

Brooker_Dave

paddyandstumpy wrote: »

It's up to the insurer to decide if they want to offer cover and if so at what rate, you can second guess and question their acceptance and rate if you like, but it's a commercial market.

The name on piece of paper effects risk in what way?

paddyandstumpy

Brooker_Dave wrote: »

It's just an excuse to profiteer.

Given that where a policy is voided due to nondisclosure more often than not a full refund is give, I can't say I agree that it's "profiteering" .

If anything quite the opposite, insurance staff don't work for free!

Quentin

Brooker_Dave wrote: »

The name on piece of paper effects risk in what way?

The insurer was only prepared to take the risk if the proposer was the vehicle's registered keeper/owner.


That was not the case - and the insurer discovered the proposer was not the registered keeper/owner, had they known this from the start they would not have offered any cover which does give them grounds to cancel the policy

Brooker_Dave

Quentin wrote: »

The insurer was only prepared to take the risk if the proposer was the vehicle's registered keeper/owner.

The name on a bit of paper alters the risk in what way?

Brooker_Dave

paddyandstumpy wrote: »

Given that where a policy is voided due to nondisclosure more often than not a full refund is give, I can't say I agree that it's "profiteering" .

They trouser the premium and cheated customer loses the full years cover they paid for.

Then because of the cancellation the cheated customer has to pay inflated premiums on all forms of insurance for the rest of his or her life.

See racketeering for further details.

paddyandstumpy

As I said in my last post, more often than not a full refund is provided, the premium isn't "trousered".

And where a customer has attempted to deceive the insurer by not correctly proposing a risk and been found out, IMO it's right they have a limited future market for insurance and at an inflated rate.