Car Insurance policy cancelled with immediate effect on policyholder's death

George_Michael

shaun_from_Africa wrote: »

Correct, but the DPA covers more than just the information about the policyholder.

Exactly .
Because of the Data protection Act, the insurer shouldn't speak to anyone about the policy details of a deceased person if there is information held regarding people who are still alive.
There are exception to this such as having to release the data due to a legal request of if the policyholder had given their prior permission.

I experienced this when I tried to get speak to an insurance company about the policy held by my sister who had died a few days before.
Despite me being a named driver, they would not even confirm if the policy had been suspended or totally cancelled or if there was any way for me to legally move the car that she had owned.

Car_54

George_Michael wrote: »

Exactly .
Because of the Data protection Act, the insurer shouldn't speak to anyone about the policy details of a deceased person if there is information held regarding people who are still alive.
There are exception to this such as having to release the data due to a legal request of if the policyholder had given their prior permission.

I experienced this when I tried to get speak to an insurance company about the policy held by my sister who had died a few days before.
Despite me being a named driver, they would not even confirm if the policy had been suspended or totally cancelled or if there was any way for me to legally move the car that she had owned.

What part of the DPA would have prevented them?


Data protection is an all-purpose excuse for being unhelpful.

George_Michael

Car_54 wrote: »

What part of the DPA would have prevented them?
.

Their security procedures before they access details of the policy.
As with all insurers, they will ask security questions such as the name of the policy holder, first line of address, DOB etc and some of these details will be covered by the DPA.

Car_54

George_Michael wrote: »

Their security procedures before they access details of the policy.
As with all insurers, they will ask security questions such as the name of the policy holder, first line of address, DOB etc and some of these details will be covered by the DPA.

OK. If I've followed the chain of events correctly, they hadn't been informed of the death at that point.


Once they have been informed (and provided with evidence), then different procedures should apply.

TooManyPoints

Data protection is an all-purpose excuse for being unhelpful.

Very true. If you read the DPA there is nothing in it that would prevent the insurers discussing the matter in a sensible fashion with the OP in these circumstances. In the event they require information for "security" purposes, provided it is supplied correctly there is nothing to prevent them moving on. The idea of the DPA is to protect people's personal data and to protect individuals' privacy. It is not there to hinder day to day business but it clearly does (or at least, many organisations cite it as a reason for refusing to discuss matters). If the insurers don't believe their policyholder had died, that is a different issue (though I doubt that was even mentioned). But if they do, to quote "data protection" as a reason to refuse to discuss matters with a clearly interested party is simply crass. In fact, even if the policyholder had not died, there is still nothing to prevent them discussing matters with a named driver on that policy. I've done so many times as I am a named driver on my wife's motor policy.

AdrianC

George_Michael wrote: »

Because of the Data protection Act, the insurer shouldn't speak to anyone about the policy details of a deceased person if there is information held regarding people who are still alive.

No, they treat the executor exactly the same as they would the policyholder.

I experienced this when I tried to get speak to an insurance company about the policy held by my sister who had died a few days before.
Despite me being a named driver, they would not even confirm if the policy had been suspended or totally cancelled or if there was any way for me to legally move the car that she had owned.

Were you executor?

George_Michael

George_Michael wrote: »

Exactly .
Because of the Data protection Act, the insurer shouldn't speak to anyone about the policy details of a deceased person if there is information held regarding people who are still alive.

AdrianC wrote: »

No, they treat the executor exactly the same as they would the policyholder.

If you are going to quote someone to try to make a point, it does you no favours by selectively quoting what they posted.

George_Michael wrote: »

Exactly .
Because of the Data protection Act, the insurer shouldn't speak to anyone about the policy details of a deceased person if there is information held regarding people who are still alive.
There are exception to this such as having to release the data due to a legal request of if the policyholder had given their prior permission

An executor of a will making a request for information will be doing so because they have the legal right to it, therefore it is a legal request.

Car_54

George_Michael wrote: »

Exactly .
Because of the Data protection Act, the insurer shouldn't speak to anyone about the policy details of a deceased person if there is information held regarding people who are still alive.
.

What makes you think that?

The insurer is certainly restricted regarding the personal data of living people (e.g. additional drivers), but there's nothing to stop them discussing any other aspect of the policy.

AdrianC

George_Michael wrote: »

If you are going to quote someone to try to make a point, it does you no favours by selectively quoting what they posted.

Yes, you went on to contradict yourself. I wasn't going to draw attention to that, to save your blushes, just correct the obvious error.

Derventio

Quentin wrote: »

You were mislead when told that insurers always give 30 days grace to deceased policyholders.

I did not say that the broker told me insurers always give 30 days grace, but I am aware that some insurers do and some don't. It is also clear from other responses that some insurers will transfer policies. It seems to be different insurers have radically different approaches which I think is wrong. I would like to see policy changes that require all insurers to have the same approach and am going to push for this with my petition.