Hastings Direct Insurance Cancelled because of a 'Number of Quotes Using Different Details'

Marvel1

TELLIT01 said:

1.  You didn't lie, but didn't give correct information either so they are naturally suspicious.  When you add information about claims and convictions piecemeal it rings all sorts of alarm bells.  In that situation the easiest route for the insurer is to decline to insure you, and that is what they have done.

2.  They have not "straight up lied", any more than you lied initially about your father's driving history.  Somebody in the office made an error in offering the second policy and that has been corrected, just as you made errors and corrected them when attempting to take out the policy.  I would agree that it should be noted in the policy history that the second cancellation was due to the policy being issued in error.

The OP didn't lie, they never took out the insurance policy without the dad's driving history.  Was a contract made?

Marvel1

When u get quotes, I mess with the excess to see the difference, think I better accept the first one! They might do me for it!!

dunstonh

Marvel1 said:

TELLIT01 said:

1.  You didn't lie, but didn't give correct information either so they are naturally suspicious.  When you add information about claims and convictions piecemeal it rings all sorts of alarm bells.  In that situation the easiest route for the insurer is to decline to insure you, and that is what they have done.

2.  They have not "straight up lied", any more than you lied initially about your father's driving history.  Somebody in the office made an error in offering the second policy and that has been corrected, just as you made errors and corrected them when attempting to take out the policy.  I would agree that it should be noted in the policy history that the second cancellation was due to the policy being issued in error.

The OP didn't lie, they never took out the insurance policy without the dad's driving history.  Was a contract made?

When you obtain the quotes the declaration is that the information is true and correct.  This information is stored for up to 30 days typically.     

Marvel1 said:

When u get quotes, I mess with the excess to see the difference, think I better accept the first one! They might do me for it!!

You dont need to worry about that as excess changes are not an area where fraud can be committed.  You can change them as much as you like.

naedanger

"When you obtain the quotes the declaration is that the information is true and correct.  This information is stored for up to 30 days typically."
All the declarations I recall ever giving when obtaining insurance have been at the application submission or renewal stages not at the quotation stage. 

Norman_Castle

dunstonh said:

The front line staff at firms generally have permission to deviate from the company rules.  Those behind the scenes, and in particular the complaints team, do.  

Should the above read, "The front line staff at firms generally [do not] have permission to deviate from the company rules"?

Dosty

dunstonh said:

In my view you should not say you made a mistake. (I don't see what mistake you made, other than underestimating their ability to jump to the wrong conclusion based on an inadequate investigations.) And you shouldn't ask, you should insist they reinstate the policy and clean your record.

The mistake the OP made if very clear.  They lied (inadvertently) on the comparison site.
The OP cannot insist on reinstatement.    That is the up to the provider.

Do say what actually happened - i.e. you did obtain a number of quotes for the reasons you have given but there is nothing wrong with doing so. If they thought it suspicious fair enough but they needed to confirm you did in fact fail to disclose something (which you didn't). By failing to get your side they failed to undertake even the most basic investigation before reaching the wrong conclusion.

They did think it was suspicious which is why the withdrew.  They do not need to confirm that the disclosure is accidental.   Sufficient doubt is enough for them to either alter their price or not offer cover.

There is the argument that if they didn't want to offer terms then they should have declined at the point of application and not after the event.  

So what you are saying is that I cannot aim for my policy to be reinstated, and instead what I should aim for is to have any references to the cancellation be removed? Could the phone agents be able to do that for me, or would I be able to achieve that only through a formal complaint? 

dunstonh

So what you are saying is that I cannot aim for my policy to be reinstated, and instead what I should aim for is to have any references to the cancellation be removed?

The FOS cannot force an insurer to take on business it does not want.   If they stick with that decision then no amount of complaining will change that.

Could the phone agents be able to do that for me, or would I be able to achieve that only through a formal complaint? 

The front line staff have very little ability to go away from their scripted tasks and permissions.   A complaint has more chance of giving you the outcome you want rather than the front line call centre staff.   its not impossible you could get a supervisor or more experienced worker in the front line staff that could do it but time and again with insurers, you need to get behind the front line to get better outcomes.

Norman_Castle said:

dunstonh said:

The front line staff at firms generally have permission to deviate from the company rules.  Those behind the scenes, and in particular the complaints team, do.  

Should the above read, "The front line staff at firms generally [do not] have permission to deviate from the company rules"?

yes - thank you.

Dosty

dunstonh said:

So what you are saying is that I cannot aim for my policy to be reinstated, and instead what I should aim for is to have any references to the cancellation be removed?

The FOS cannot force an insurer to take on business it does not want.   If they stick with that decision then no amount of complaining will change that.

Well I meant like directly without involving the FOS yet, and I wouldn't want from the FOS to make Hastings reinstate my policy. What I meant was, should I try to get Hastings remove any references to the cancellation. Like is that within their ability to do that? Whether that is through a supervisor on a phone, or a formal complaint or through FOS.

naedanger

Dosty said:

dunstonh said:

So what you are saying is that I cannot aim for my policy to be reinstated, and instead what I should aim for is to have any references to the cancellation be removed?

The FOS cannot force an insurer to take on business it does not want.   If they stick with that decision then no amount of complaining will change that.

Well I meant like directly without involving the FOS yet, and I wouldn't want from the FOS to make Hastings reinstate my policy. What I meant was, should I try to get Hastings remove any references to the cancellation. Like is that within their ability to do that? Whether that is through a supervisor on a phone, or a formal complaint or through FOS.

Were you actually issued with a policy, even if it hadn't come into effect?
Did it included your father as a second driver and if so did the details on the insurance match reality e.g. as regards your father's claim history and driving conviction history?

dunstonh

What I meant was, should I try to get Hastings remove any references to the cancellation.

That is what I would be targetting.

Like is that within their ability to do that? Whether that is through a supervisor on a phone, or a formal complaint or through FOS.

More chance of it happening via the complaints team than the frontline telephone staff.