Extra cost for named drivers no fault claims ???

freddyp1

Hello all, 

I am writing this, not as a complaint but I would like some clarification on a matter that I feel is very unfair. And see if it has happened to anyone else .

I will try my best to explain the circumstances so that you can see my point. 

I have recently changed car insurance provider. I have been with Admiral for several years on their multi car policy with my wife. She has always been a named driver on my cars, just in case, but has not driven any of my cars for years. This year our premium went up so I ended up getting individual policies for both our cars. I used a comparison site which I have used many times. 

I made an error when completing my policy. My wife has unfortunately had two incidents where her car had been hit while it was parked. On both occasions the cars were repaired by the third party’s insurance companies. 

 When looking for insurance for my vehicle, I forgot to update my profile to add this information, before getting my quotes. A few weeks after the start of my policy, my new insurance provider contacted me to say the were adjusting my premium up due to them receiving the information about my wife for Admiral.

I called them to see why it had to go up. The first person I spoke to explained that the CUE Database did not state what the cause of the claims were. She told me that they both had  ‘other’ in the description and said this could mean anything. I explained what had happened and was told that I had to contact Admiral and ask them to update the database. I was told, if I received any information to confirm this, I should email it to them to put on my file. Once I provided the information, I would get this money back.

The following day they called me back and informed me they had received information on both incidence and would update my file. Due to me being busy at the time I forgot to ask about the extra payment I had made.  

I called them back to find out how to get the extra payment back and was told that, although they were no fault / no loss of no claims, they would result in an increase in my premium. It does not seem fair. I feel that I am being penalised for something that has nothing to do with me. I have over 10 years no claims and my wife has over 15 years. Both incidents happened when my wife’s car was parked on the side of the road when she was not there. 

Please can someone explain to me how it should cost me more money if she is a named driver on my policy. I would understand if she was at fault but I feel aggrieved that they can charge more for something I had no control over. It wasn’t even my car. 

The only way to avoid this in the future is to leave her off my policy for the next five years as one incident was at the start of this year. They told me it was a about £40 per incident. 

My current insurance provider, The AA, have told me this will always affect me If she is a named driver on my policy. How is she a higher risk? 

If someone could enlighten me on how this is fair I would appreciate it. It may be something people will need to take into account in the future.

forgotmyname

Its costs more because a named driver has had claims/incidents/losses which they deem to be a higher risk.

jimbo6977

Seen from the insurer's perspective, the ND parks in areas where people drive like morons. 

freddyp1

Its costs more because a named driver has had claims/incidents/losses which they deem to be a higher risk.

But this is my point. She has been unfortunate to have her cars hit. How does that make her high risk. It could happen to anyone. If it does it cost you £40 more each time !! That’s ludicrous . 

[Deleted User]

It doesn't happen to anyone though.

It happens to your wife because she parks in place where people hit parked cars.

Aretnap

jimbo6977 said:

Seen from the insurer's perspective, the ND parks in areas where people drive like morons. 

It's probably not even that, particularly. The precise circumstances of the accident are largely irrelevant - the algorithm simply sees "accident" and "non-fault" and makes a call based on that. "No fault accident" covers a multitude of circumstances, some of which might mark you out as higher risk than others.

Example 1 - many years ago, when I was young and foolish, I rather knobbishly overtook a line of queuing traffic at speed, cut into the queue when a gap emerged, slammed my brakes on... and the guy I pulled in front of didn't brake as hard as I did. His insurers admitted liability, and I was hardly going to argue with that, so it went down as no fault on my part. But truth be told it wasn't my finest hour as a motorist and I had no real complaints about the fact that it put my premium up slightly for a few years.

Example 2 - imagine two different drivers heading for a junction, where a muppet pulls out in front of them without looking. Driver A crashes into the side of said muppet and has an accident which is settled as the muppet's fault. Driver B is paying more attention to the road ahead, or perhaps slows down as he approaches the junction, brakes just in time and doesn't have an accident at all. As an insurer who would you rather insure - driver A or driver B?

And so when the algorithm sees "no fault accident" it's not just thinking of your wife; it's also thinking about pillocks like me, and our hypothetical driver A, and applying an average weighting across all three of us.

If you think that's unfair, and don't want a blind algorithm that confuses your wife with me to set your premium there is an alternative. If you go to Lloyds of London you can sit down for tea and biscuits with your underwriter, have a chat with him about the exact circumstances of your wife's accidents, and see if he thinks that they mark her out as a higher risk. However you will inevitably pay a premium for that level of personalised service - probably a lot more than the £40 that Admiral's computer wants to charge you, and so in practice nobody does it.

Aretnap

freddyp1 said:

The only way to avoid this in the future is to leave her off my policy for the next five years as one incident was at the start of this year.

Not much help at the moment but it doesn't necessarily affect you for 5 years. There are plenty of insurers (off the top of my head Direct Line, Admiral, Hastings) who only take accidents in the last 3 years into account.