Insurance Refusing to settle

DoaM

SHAFT wrote: »

I get all that and he's probably committed fraud to obtain insurance. What I'm asking in terms of your vehicle is there any get out due to it not being insured when loss occurred?

If there's no policy in force then there's no loss that can be claimed from an insurer. That doesn't mean there's no loss, just that there's nobody to reclaim it from.

/obvious-statement-is-obvious

Or am I misunderstanding what you're trying to say?

shaun_from_Africa

SHAFT wrote: »

What I'm asking in terms of your vehicle is there any get out due to it not being insured when loss occurred?

I think it would all come down to exactly what questions were asked when the insurance was applied for.
If they only asked if the driver/drivers who the policy was to cover had previously had any accidents, claims or convictions then IMO, the OP could have legitimately stated no.
But, if they had asked:
"Have you had any accidents, made any claims, or suffered any losses due to an accident (in relation to a motor vehicle) in the past 5 years?" then I think yes would have to be answered.

However, I think it's all academic as I get the feeling that we are never going to get the full story from the OP.

Geodark

FaizanKhan wrote: »

Yes but the car was no insured by us, if your comprehensive you can drive others cars so long as they also have comp insurance and allow you to do so, this wasnt the case with this

I could be wrong here, but if the car was still insured by the original owner then surely it still had insurance on it for the brother to drive if he had fully comp? Wasn't there a case a few years back where someone forgot to cancel the insurance on a motorbike they sold, which was involved in an accident and they were held to blame? Is this not the main reason you should always cancel insurance.

This really doesn't add up at all. OP is just digging a massive hole for himself.

SHAFT

Geodark wrote: »

I could be wrong here, but if the car was still insured by the original owner then surely it still had insurance on it for the brother to drive if he had fully comp? Wasn't there a case a few years back where someone forgot to cancel the insurance on a motorbike they sold, which was involved in an accident and they were held to blame? Is this not the main reason you should always cancel insurance.

This really doesn't add up at all. OP is just digging a massive hole for himself.

Give it was showing as having insurance and the brother had third party cover then the story of no insurance is dodgy.

The thing is about having the previous keeps insurance still on the vehicle that pays out third party risks. Read the charge wording for no insurance and it's odd they can charge for no insurance in those circumstances.

FaizanKhan

The problem is not about by sibling driving it uninsured, thats dealt with and insurer is aware of all that. The problem here is they dont believe its been repaired because I dont have the evidence for it. And the key data also

Aylesbury_Duck

FaizanKhan wrote: »

The problem is not about by sibling driving it uninsured, thats dealt with and insurer is aware of all that. The problem here is they dont believe its been repaired because I dont have the evidence for it. And the key data also

If you don't have evidence that it's been repaired and that it was driven regularly between January and August, you're stuck. No one on here is going to be able to provide evidence for you. You've had several suggestions of where to look for evidence:

- petrol receipts (that have the registration attached)
- parking tickets/invoices naming the registration
- receipts from garages where any work, servicing or MOT was carried out, again, listing the car in question
- congestion zone/toll road evidence
- ANPR/CCTV evidence

It seems that you've used cash for everything and somehow don't have receipts for anything except a tyre and some brake work. If that's all you've got, you better hope it's enough, but if it doesn't suggest that on the balance of probability, you had the car fixed and drove it about for months, you'll lose. There's not much more anyone's going to be able to say, we can't create evidence for you.

Manxman_in_exile

FaizanKhan wrote: »

The problem is not about by sibling driving it uninsured, thats dealt with and insurer is aware of all that. The problem here is they dont believe its been repaired because I dont have the evidence for it. And the key data also

That's what I understood you to be saying. I'm not sure where the assumption that they weren't aware of it and that you hadn't told them about it when you got round to insuring it crept in to the thread.


EDIT: Apologies. The OP actually says in post #48 that the new insurers were not told of the sibling's earlier accident - so I suppose that could be a problem for them depending on exactly what questions the new insurer asked about "previous incidents" etc. It seems odd to me that it's got this far with the insurers simply disputing the claim rather than telling the OP that the insurance has been cancelled because of the sibling's earlier "incident" being not disclosed?

shaun_from_Africa

FaizanKhan wrote: »

The problem here is they dont believe its been repaired because I dont have the evidence for it. And the key data also

With the evidence that they are asking for there's little that you can do.
As it stands, you are asking for the insurance company to recompense you for the value of a repaired and roadworthy Golf R but they think that you only have a wrecked Golf R which hasn't been repaired since it was crashed, something which will have a far lower value.
All they simply want you provide is some sort of verifiable proof to confirm the value before they pay out, something that I think is a reasonable request.

FaizanKhan

I agree, but all I have it cash receipts (most small garages dont take card), although they are VAT receipts. The car had an accident anything could have happened to the data recording system for the key. Like previously mentioned if insurance still refuse to pay the sibling will take the cost on his own head for replacing the car as he caused this headache, which I dont mind as long as the insurance just close the claim, its just this whole getting framed for fraud thing im worried about because its nothing like that and Ive never been in trouble with police

Herzlos

You can always just ask the insurance company to drop the claim and see what happens. They may still try and involve the police regarding the apparent fraud.