Car insurance void: please help!

brooksyz

I've had my insurance cancelled and they're charging me £75 for the cancellation! let alone having my money returned

uk1

brooksyz wrote: »

thank you all so much for your responses.


I have taken what everybody said on board and written a complaint to the insurers stating my position and will keep you updated!


I did not nor would I intentionally withhold information and this whole matter is very upsetting.

However, I feel now feel just in disputing this first with the insurers and then the FOS.

They have given me 7 days notice of cancelling my policy and i'm struggling to now find insurance based on the fact this policy was cancelled so i'm hoping that even if it takes some time this complaint works!


thank you again for all the advice

Good luck.

No fears, no sensible copntributor thinks you did this purposefully. When writing your letter make it short and "business like" and take our all superlatives and emotion. Try and use numbered paragraphs.

Best wishes and good luck.

brooksyz

BoGoF wrote: »

So how do you establish the deliberate from the careless non-disclosure? We could all say innocent mistake. In my line of work 'forgot' usually means I thought I would take a chance on it.

IMHO undertaking a journey you know you are not covered for is very careless. OP must have made a conscious decision to exclude commuting when taking out the policy.

I did not realise until this came about that I my insurance did not cover me to drive to work and it was an honest mistake I didn't notify my insurers of the change.


When I took out the policy it was fully valid and I have 2 years worth of train passes to prove this

dacouch

uk1 wrote: »

It is you. Thankfully, things are rarely black or white as you think. No one is saying it is OK, it is just the sanctions insurers are allowed to take when a situation like this occurs. They should respond "fairly" and proportioately. And the "authority" for this is the Ombudsman's web site where they lay out how they have dealt with previous similar complaints and what is fair and unfair. The only case where insurers can void and decline is when the non-disclosure is either fraudulent, deliberate or "clearly reckless" - and these are the words used by The Ombudsman. In that situation they can void the policty and refuse to pay out.

Or where the Insurer would not have acceped the risk had the correct details been declared

Aretnap

Is this a question of non-disclosure though? The way I see it, the problem isn't that the OP failed to tell his insurer that he uses his car for commuting - is that he bought a policy which didn't cover commuting and then commuted. The difference is subtle, but potentially important.

As an analogy, if I buy home insurance but forget that I have a lot of high value jewellery, I'll most likely end up with a policy that doesn't cover high value jewellery. It's a mis-purchase rather than a non-disclosure though, and if the jewellery gets stolen it won't be covered - even if it was clearly an oversight on my part and even if the insurer would have sold me a policy that did cover it for a small amount extra, had I asked. Isn't this situation similar?

I'm play devils advocate here somewhat as I agree that the OP faces a big loss for a minor oversight and that's very harsh on him - but that doesn't in itself get him of the hook.

paddyandstumpy

OP, what is the new job you've started?

I wonder if the avoidance was more to do with the occupation rather than the commuting.