Car insurance Cancelled after non-disclosure

zagubov

She will need to be dogged but polite and I would (in her situation) be trying to get them to understand that I'm aggrieved, non-aggressive, but imbued with a massive capacity to contact them now I'm not driving, and persistent to the extent that they'll wonder if I've got the Guinness Book of Records on speed dial.

Another vote for escalate this. Not a time to roll over and play dead.

AstroTurtle

kelevraz wrote: »

Genuine human error id say, the company i work for has tolerances for dates because people do get things wrong when taking out policies, no insurer (That i know of) cares about claims outside of 5 years, and MOST insurers that i know of - will have 3-4 months tolerance as their maximum allowed tollerance, for instance, if OP had been insured with us and we discovered a claim that was over 4 years ago and under 5, we give a four month tolerance

Im just so used to seeing honest people getting screwed out of their policies that im quite a big advocate of making complaints against them, especially when or if they've been extremely rigid in cases that any reasonable person can see was an innocent mistake.. People's insurance is a big thing, not something that should be treated robotically when the consequences of cancelling policies can be so big

BUT, TO BE FAIR... maybe my post is a bit useless in the sense that like i said - once the policy has been 'cancelled', it must always be declared - if it had been 'voided', then a complaint could've seen the voidance 'revoked', and you wouldn't need to declare it - a complaint in this case probably wouldn't 'change' anything

Your company isn't Every company, it depends on whats in the underwriters appetite. This particular policy may have been dirt cheap but only tailored for claims free drivers. Therefore cannot accommodate any accidents on it's book.


Goodluck complaining that insurers should factor in your human error and give you a policy/compensation.


Cant people check records anymore? Or double check things careful instead of banging guesswork into a website then entering legal contracts based on false facts.


I had an accident 4 years and 6 months ago. I still count the exact months creeping up to the day I can celebrate the fact it's over 5 and my insurance will drop.

tenchy

essex_zx7r wrote: »

Hi
My daughter recently renewed her insurance policy and when asked if she had any accidents in the last 5 years she replied no, she has not had her insurance cancelled as it turns out she had an accident 4 years and 9 months ago, she believed it was earlier in the year and so over the 5 years, she now has to disclose every year for the rest of her life that she had insurance cancelled/refused . this seems rather harsh for a genuine error. I can't remember what I done last week let alone almost 5 years ago.

Does anyone know if there is a right to appeal to have this removed from her records ?

Thanks

In reality, she doesn't. The cancellation records are shared in databases such as CUE, which have now been PROPERLY regulated so that records must be deleted after five years. Of course individual insuarance companies may well keep their own records indefinitely (a questionable data protection practice in itself), so it's just a case of avoiding the rogue company you dealt with.


Now stand by for a load of finger waggers coming in and shouting FRAUD, FRAUD. Just ignore them and go with the actualit!.

missile

Your daughter ought to have looked at her renewal notice where all previous incidents would be recorded. Unless she "forgot" to declare it to them?

ValiantSon

tenchy wrote: »

In reality, she doesn't. The cancellation records are shared in databases such as CUE, which have now been PROPERLY regulated so that records must be deleted after five years. Of course individual insuarance companies may well keep their own records indefinitely (a questionable data protection practice in itself), so it's just a case of avoiding the rogue company you dealt with.


Now stand by for a load of finger waggers coming in and shouting FRAUD, FRAUD. Just ignore them and go with the actualit!.

Most insurers ask whether you have ever had a policy cancelled, so she would have to declare it and failing to do so because some random person on the internet said it was okay, would be fraud.

lisyloo

had you told us, we would not have offered you cover.

Insurers won't offer you cover if you've had an accident serveral years ago?
I don't believe that.
Millions of people wouldnt be able to drive if that was the case.

rudekid48

lisyloo wrote: »

Insurers won't offer you cover if you've had an accident serveral years ago?
I don't believe that.
Millions of people wouldnt be able to drive if that was the case.

Insurers offer multiple schemes & products, each with their own qualifying criteria. Some schemes will only quote if the policyholders record is completely clean i.e. no claims/convictions in a given period.
This is not unusual - just because one insurer/scheme won't offer cover doesn't mean that others won't.
Otherwise it's like saying that nobody under 50 can drive because Saga won't insure under 50's...

AstroTurtle

lisyloo wrote: »

Insurers won't offer you cover if you've had an accident serveral years ago?
I don't believe that.
Millions of people wouldnt be able to drive if that was the case.

Insurers have different criteria for different schemes.


There isn't just 1 insurer in the world. and that 1 insurer may cover them on different scheme at a different price.


Had they put In the claim it may not have offered that scheme with that insurance company but may have quoted a different price on a different scheme.


Admiral for example may have "Admiral 123 - tailored for under 25's and then Admiral Black Box - tailored for young drivers with telematics, Then may have Admiral Gold - Aimed at over 65's where rates decrease, or Admiral Online aimed at online only policies"


^ That is just a random made up example but the principle is the same.


People try to fudge insurance premiums everyday so insurers cant sit there and try to decipher who is genuine mistakes and who isn't. The easier option is to cancel and have nothing to do with the person.


They run businesses not services.

lisyloo

Some schemes will only quote if the policyholders record is completely clean i.e. no claims/convictions in a g en period.

Ok, I understand that some policies/schemes are restrictive and I would have expected a more expensive policy but I'm suprised there are insurers that don't offer policies/schemes AT ALL to people who've had a single accident. Is that common?

AstroTurtle

lisyloo wrote: »

Ok, I understand that some policies/schemes are restrictive and I would have expected a more expensive policy but I'm suprised there are insurers that don't offer policies/schemes AT ALL to people who've had a single accident. Is that common?

Depends how Niche it is, On comparison sites it doesn't surprise me.


The insurer for this specific scheme might be backed by someone like Axa who provide them with £5,000,000 capacity for this scheme. Prior to being given the capacity there is an underwriting guide agreed between the Scheme provider and the underwriters if this isn't followed it could be deemed invalid and in breech of their agreements. In this they may operate a smaller book of business with reduced premiums for low risk accident free drivers.


This would mean that there is little room to allow higher risks into the scheme as the premiums they collect need to match what they are "likely" to be paying out otherwise a few risky drivers could tank the whole scheme and it would go into run-off.


There is literally 1000's of schemes out there geared towards different risk types this just happens to be 1 that isn't right for the OP because it's targeting a whole different market.