Car Insurance Article Discussion

27ab1c

Just convinced my father of the value of shopping around - he turned 80 last year and suspected his premium might go up (from around £500), but when Lloyds TSB asked him for £1,290.18 (actually £1,419.19, as he couldn't afford to pay it in a single payment and would have to pay monthly), I persuaded him to let me check other insurers.
Several insurers - including Direct Line - simply wouldn't insure him because of his age, despite 9 years NCD.
However, several quoted in the £500-£600 region and eventually I got him what he wanted for £478.98 (with LV) - a saving of £940.21!!!:D

andy_12_2

Hi all,

I've just received a surprise letter from my previous car insurer stating that I must pay an outstanding balance of just over £1000 within 14 days, or "we will instruct our debt collection agents to recover the debt. Such action could have an adverse effect on your credit rating".

Having paid a full years worth of insurance to them without claiming, and the years insurance coming to an end with them in October 2010, I'm surprised to receive this letter from them today, 8 months after the end of the contract. (I ended up changing to another insurer at the time of renewal last October)

From memory (8 months is a long time) I believe the issue may be around who the "main driver" is/was. At renewal time, I was negotiating with them about possibly renewing the policy with them, but went with another insurer instead. I remember them saying I owed them an extra £1000 and needed to pay it immediately. I disagreed with this and cancelled the policy, as I new I had a better renewal deal elsewhere. I've heard nothing from them since.

However, regardless of the dissagreement and before I call them in response to this letter, do they have any right in sending collection agents to recover the debt? I've received no explanation or anything in writing relating to the charge, so I'm confused and clearly concerned about it.

Any advice would really be appreciated! Thanks!

Andy

Steve_xx

andy_12 wrote: »

Hi all,

I've just received a surprise letter from my previous car insurer stating that I must pay an outstanding balance of just over £1000 within 14 days, or "we will instruct our debt collection agents to recover the debt. Such action could have an adverse effect on your credit rating".

Having paid a full years worth of insurance to them without claiming, and the years insurance coming to an end with them in October 2010, I'm surprised to receive this letter from them today, 8 months after the end of the contract. (I ended up changing to another insurer at the time of renewal last October)

From memory (8 months is a long time) I believe the issue may be around who the "main driver" is/was. At renewal time, I was negotiating with them about possibly renewing the policy with them, but went with another insurer instead. I remember them saying I owed them an extra £1000 and needed to pay it immediately. I disagreed with this and cancelled the policy, as I new I had a better renewal deal elsewhere. I've heard nothing from them since.

However, regardless of the dissagreement and before I call them in response to this letter, do they have any right in sending collection agents to recover the debt? I've received no explanation or anything in writing relating to the charge, so I'm confused and clearly concerned about it.

Any advice would really be appreciated! Thanks!

Andy

This sounds like an incomplete story. What is the £1000 for?

andy_12_2

The policy was taken with myself as the main driver, and my younger brother as 2nd driver. At the end of the contract (renewal time) they said that I had 'fronted' the policy, and that initially it was based on myself being the main driver. I agreed with them as I confirmed I was the main driver - they clearly dissagree.

The £1000 is for the difference between myself being driver no. 1, and my brother being driver no.1. They believe that I was being dishonest with them.

Hope that helps.

Steve_xx

andy_12 wrote: »

The policy was taken with myself as the main driver, and my younger brother as 2nd driver. At the end of the contract (renewal time) they said that I had 'fronted' the policy, and that initially it was based on myself being the main driver. I agreed with them as I confirmed I was the main driver - they clearly dissagree.

The £1000 is for the difference between myself being driver no. 1, and my brother being driver no.1. They believe that I was being dishonest with them.

Hope that helps.

What gave them cause to believe that you were 'fronting' the policy?

Ms_Mouse

Ms_Mouse wrote: »

I have been getting quotes for car insurance and don't recall seeing this question before. Some, maybe not all, ask if there are any children under 16 in the household.

What is the relevance? How does the answer affect premiums?

The question is never framed with reference to an address, always to a "household".

The insurance is for my partner, who has yet to take his driving test. He does not live at the same address at me. I already have car insurance, have had a licence for over 35 years and I am going to be a named driver on his insurance - I hope that this will help to reduce his premiums.

He has a child under 16 who does not live with him. However, the child stays with him a couple of days and one night a week. He and the child always stay at my house, not his house. (I have got a garden and a dog, which means it is much more fun for him than staying with his dad in a small upper-storey flat.)

We both live in "high risk" areas not far from each other. My partner's car will be kept in my very secure, locked back yard.

For the purposes of car insurance, to answer honestly:

1) Should my partner answer "Yes" or "No" to the question about any children under 16 being "part of his household"?

2) Should I answer "Yes" or "No" to the question about any children under 16 being "part of my household"?

I hope that there are some legal-types around who can help clarify :-)

Best wishes,

Liz

Just spotted this popup when completing MoneySupermarket.com form:
Number of children under 16

Why are we asking? Insurers need to know this as you are at higher risk of having an accident if you have children in the back of the car.

SOOBEE

I have a Nissan micra which has never let me down in 10 years. I have been driving since 1987 and made a claim once when someone hit me while I was stationary. I am now fuming as the insurance company I was with have told me that because my car is old ( a P reg ) I cannot claim for vandalism done to my car because the cost to respray, outweighs the value, nor can it be written off as the excess outweighs the value. So in a nutshell I would be paying them! I have no points on my licence, and have claimed once in 23 years but when it comes to asking for help I am told tough luck. The only reason I would pay less insurance than someone else is because of my good record, yet I am discriminated against because of the age of my car. Its a bloody disgrace, I cannot afford a new car so have to drive around in a battered car. No wonder people are driving around uninsured.

Steve_xx

SOOBEE wrote: »

I have a Nissan micra which has never let me down in 10 years. I have been driving since 1987 and made a claim once when someone hit me while I was stationary. I am now fuming as the insurance company I was with have told me that because my car is old ( a P reg ) I cannot claim for vandalism done to my car because the cost to respray, outweighs the value, nor can it be written off as the excess outweighs the value. So in a nutshell I would be paying them! I have no points on my licence, and have claimed once in 23 years but when it comes to asking for help I am told tough luck. The only reason I would pay less insurance than someone else is because of my good record, yet I am discriminated against because of the age of my car. Its a bloody disgrace, I cannot afford a new car so have to drive around in a battered car. No wonder people are driving around uninsured.

But you are insured for things other than replacement of the car. For example if you run someone over and cause them such an amount of harm that they are wheelchair bound then your insurer would have to pay that individual a hefty sum so as to enable the individual to be cared for, for the rest of their life. This could run into millions of pounds.

Now, if you have an accident and it is not your fault, then the other party would have to pay for your car to be replaced as is, regardless of its value. If you cause the problem and your car is worth lees than the excess then it would be no different for you to buy another and would save you claiming anyway.

SOOBEE

I am a bit confused by the points you have made. I am fully aware of the other things I am insured for, but none of these apply to my situation. My anger comes from the fact I will have to accept £150 for a perfect working order car, because it is old. Part of my policy that I pay for covers damage/vandalism, yet I cannot get it repaired and with £150 offered cannot buy a new car. As I said I have to pay the same insurance, yet dont get the same options.

katielee15

Steve_xx wrote: »

If he has his own insurance and he is not a named driver on your policy, then you don't need to inform your insurer.

He insurance through his company, but wants to drive my car too??:o