Do I need to declare on car insurance???

Pkman

2 years ago, My car was hit in my work private car park by the company car. It needed a spray paint job in the back bumper.
Went through insurance, as it was not my fault, it was taken care of. My NCB is protected, No up front excess, no paperwork, no nothing, it was like it didn't happened lol
Last year I renew with the same insurance. This year unless the quote is 50% cheaper, I'm going with 'by miles' due to work from home. 

Now do I need to declare this on my car insurance quote. If so, what do I choose? Etc as I have no clue as I am a good driver

ontheroad1970

You should answer any questions they ask truthfully.  You do not have to give detail they do not ask for (but do check their assumptions which are usually hidden away somewhere, and equally binding).  Do make sure you tell them about things which they could find out about by searching a claims database.  You don't want to be at fault for an accident involving serious injuries or worse if they find out about a previous claim during the claims process.

A_Lert

Yes.

Your car was hit while parked. The driver responsible was known. You were not at fault. Nobody was injured. The cost of the damage was £whatever and the third party's insurance paid.

Those are the basic facts. Fit them into the most appropriate description. Sometimes "hit while parked" is explicitly listed as an option. If not, treat it as most fitting.

AdrianC

Pkman said:

2 years ago, My car was hit ... Went through insurance

Now do I need to declare this on my car insurance quote.

What is the question they ask?

How can anything but "yes" be fitted into that question?

Remember that it IS recorded, since it went through insurance, so if you lie and say "no", then they will know.

bartelbe

Sadly the answer is yes and it will more than likely increase your insurance, despite the fact you were literally not in the car at the time. The system stinks but there is nothing you can do about it.

AdrianC

bartelbe said:

Sadly the answer is yes and it will more than likely increase your insurance, despite the fact you were literally not in the car at the time. The system stinks but there is nothing you can do about it.

You park places where your car gets hit.

Does that make you more likely to cost an insurer money?

williamgriffin

AdrianC said:

bartelbe said:

Sadly the answer is yes and it will more than likely increase your insurance, despite the fact you were literally not in the car at the time. The system stinks but there is nothing you can do about it.

You park places where your car gets hit.

Does that make you more likely to cost an insurer money?

It's does by their logic, however unfortunate if you park somewhere as a one off and may never return to that location. Where's the risk of it happening again?

JustAnotherSaver

I wouldn't advise doing anything other than being honest with insurance. 
If you're of the mind that they don't share whatever database or databases and that pleading ignorance will work then trust me it won't. 

If you still want to think that guy on the Internet is talking crap and I'll get away with it then go for it. Maybe you get lucky. Don't be surprised if you get a phone call about it though. 

Sandtree

williamgriffin said:
It's does by their logic, however unfortunate if you park somewhere as a one off and may never return to that location. Where's the risk of it happening again?

Insurance works on averages, indeed the very idea of the common pool etc is that to predict events for a single individual is very difficult but to predict the aggregate of events for a large population is much easier (not diminishing the work of all those actuaries out there).

The statistics will reflect both those cases where its a one off event and where its a regularly visited carpark as with the OP.

Obviously in an ideal world we'd get a much more personal quote but the cost of wiring up your car to cover all telemetry, having the underwriter as a passenger in your car for a month or so to get first hand experience of your driving skills etc would make the cost of the accuracy far out weigh the benefit of them knowing it truly was a one off event or that you really aren't like all the other drivers of Ford STs who've modded their car with stickers, tinted windows etc

williamgriffin

Sandtree said:

williamgriffin said:
It's does by their logic, however unfortunate if you park somewhere as a one off and may never return to that location. Where's the risk of it happening again?

Insurance works on averages, indeed the very idea of the common pool etc is that to predict events for a single individual is very difficult but to predict the aggregate of events for a large population is much easier (not diminishing the work of all those actuaries out there).

The statistics will reflect both those cases where its a one off event and where its a regularly visited carpark as with the OP.

Obviously in an ideal world we'd get a much more personal quote but the cost of wiring up your car to cover all telemetry, having the underwriter as a passenger in your car for a month or so to get first hand experience of your driving skills etc would make the cost of the accuracy far out weigh the benefit of them knowing it truly was a one off event or that you really aren't like all the other drivers of Ford STs who've modded their car with stickers, tinted windows etc

How will the statistics reflect a one off or a regularly visited carpark? They don't ask about that. 

Sandtree

williamgriffin said:

How will the statistics reflect a one off or a regularly visited carpark? They don't ask about that. 

They wouldnt be able to differentiate and therefore price it differently but the fact that 30% are one offs so dont repeat and 70% are regular car parks which do periodically repeat will be reflected by the blended rate they see and therefore charge. 

You would need something truly exceptional to happen to you for the volume of similar incidents to be too small for a statistically relevant price adjustment.

Insurers could ask if they wanted but with the level of honesty people have when dealing with insurers its almost certainly a pointless exercise. Several years ago we looked at thefts from the home address and hit parked & unattended vehicles claims where the insured had declared they kept the car in their garage overnight... of those cases circa 20% didnt even have a garage and a further 15% it'd be a real stretch to call their lean to /car port a garage.