Cancelled Insurance need help please.

Arklight

youngman19 said:

Arklight said:

Has it definitely been recorded as a cancellation that you have to declare to future insurers? This sounds more like a "The underwriters have decided that they can't offer cover after looking at your application"  than a "You have broken the terms of the policy" cancellation.

When the former happened to me, I got an apology letter confirming that it wasn't registered as a cancellation I would have to declare and a voucher. 

Yes, the underwrites (Advantage) told Hastings from what I have been told. How can my mum find out for sure please? Do I get my mum to ask them for a letter confirming this?

You need to find out if it is a cancellation that must be declared to other insurers for violating the terms of your policy, or simply a cancel and refund as it "didn't meet your needs (to make multiple different quotes beforehand."

If it is the former, it will be recorded on a shared database of motor insurers, and you must declare you have had a policy cancelled in the past if you take out a new policy. 

You can submit an FOI to the database yourself, and they have to delete your details within 6 years. 

As a lot of people have had policies cancelled for various reasons, there is a reasonable secondary market. Your mother could probably still get cover through Adrian Flux which might not be eye watering. 

Sandtree

Arklight said:
You can submit an FOI to the database yourself, and they have to delete your details within 6 years.  

Freedom of Information requests are only for governmental and public bodies... I strongly suspect that the MIB who operate the MID do not fall in this (certainly they arent on the list in the "what do they know" website that submits FOI requests and that site has some very small organisations listed).

Secondly the FOI explicitly forbids personal information to be detailed, indeed the fact that individuals can be identified because the cohort is too small is one of the key reasons why requests are refused.

What you actually want to do is a Data Subject Access Request (DSAR these days, used to be SAR) which allows a person to ask any organisation what data they hold about themselves.

The MIB dont "have to" delete data within 6 years, however their current process is they do delete data after 6 years. MID is not the only central db that insurers use and if you are trying to find out if a cancellation has been recorded you are better looking in the Claims and Underwriting Exchange (CUE) as this is where it would be recorded not MID. It too is maintained by MIB however unlike MID there is no stated data retention period. Given it contains details of fraud etc its likely its stored for much longer than the MID that is basically only there to identify the insurer on a vehicle at a given point.

Idiot_Savant

youngman19 said:

!I would only be driving to non walking distance areas"

"and I do not even need a car to get around as my work is close by. We are using this car as a second car to get my nan to her hospital appointments. When my mum is at her work then I will take her"

One of the above statements is untrue....

No-one has asked the obvious question - why don't you insure the car under your name as main driver?

I think the answer to this question will answer all others....

caprikid1

I have 7 cars in my house two drivers and one child who is soon to be driving, If I put my child on any of those cars with a provisional license it's probably fine, once he passes his test it would almost certainly be fronting.

As have been stated unless its a classic or a sports car, we know the truth , you know the truth and so does the insurance company. If it was not fronting the logical thing for you to do would be to insure it in your name, you did lots of quotes using your mums details ... to help her out ?. Who's cash paid for this second car ? Who chose it  ?.....

Get the second car insured in your name and put her as second driver, then you can drive your mum around and fix the issue. I would also put the car in your name too. Not sure why this was not done in the first place ? Actually I know exactly why it was not done, it would be far more expensive to do it legally. Think yourself luck, you may have had an accident and had a very difficult conversation with the police or the insurance company.

youngman19

DB1904 said:

youngman19 said:

Belenus said:

youngman19 said:

Ditzy_Mitzy said:

Jenni_D said:

Good spot.

Then yes, this could look suspicious to an insurance company. No doubt an entirely innocent act by the OP and Mum, and not intended in that way, but in effect still "fronting".

Especially if the mother's other car is insured with the same company, or they are somehow aware of its existence.  Her trying to insure a second car as 'main driver' with teenage son as a named driver, in addition to also being the main driver of the first car would surely set off alarm bells.  

Why can't someone have two cars and be main driver for legitimate reasons? Is that illegal?

(reasons I have already written above)

Anyone can legally be the main driver on as many cars as they wish.

Car enthusiasts often have multiple cars and can insure themselves as the sole or main driver on all of them.

Many people have a weekday car for commuting etc and a weekend sports car for fun.

Many wealthy enthusiasts have far more than two cars.

Legality has little or no bearing on your situation. Your mother's insurance difficulties appear to be related to suspicious quotes or suspected fronting.

This is why she doesn't want to use her main one as that is used for business and commuting

Ah so she's a car enthusiast then, I hope it's not too sporty for taking nan to the orthopaedic surgeon.   

Yeah imagine turning up to hospital for a chemo sess in a ferrari!!!

youngman19

Arklight said:

youngman19 said:

Arklight said:

Has it definitely been recorded as a cancellation that you have to declare to future insurers? This sounds more like a "The underwriters have decided that they can't offer cover after looking at your application"  than a "You have broken the terms of the policy" cancellation.

When the former happened to me, I got an apology letter confirming that it wasn't registered as a cancellation I would have to declare and a voucher. 

Yes, the underwrites (Advantage) told Hastings from what I have been told. How can my mum find out for sure please? Do I get my mum to ask them for a letter confirming this?

You need to find out if it is a cancellation that must be declared to other insurers for violating the terms of your policy, or simply a cancel and refund as it "didn't meet your needs (to make multiple different quotes beforehand."

If it is the former, it will be recorded on a shared database of motor insurers, and you must declare you have had a policy cancelled in the past if you take out a new policy. 

You can submit an FOI to the database yourself, and they have to delete your details within 6 years. 

As a lot of people have had policies cancelled for various reasons, there is a reasonable secondary market. Your mother could probably still get cover through Adrian Flux which might not be eye watering. 

Amazing advice, thank you for giving me proper advice unlike others who are hell bent on assuming 

youngman19

Sandtree said:

Arklight said:
You can submit an FOI to the database yourself, and they have to delete your details within 6 years.  

Freedom of Information requests are only for governmental and public bodies... I strongly suspect that the MIB who operate the MID do not fall in this (certainly they arent on the list in the "what do they know" website that submits FOI requests and that site has some very small organisations listed).

Secondly the FOI explicitly forbids personal information to be detailed, indeed the fact that individuals can be identified because the cohort is too small is one of the key reasons why requests are refused.

What you actually want to do is a Data Subject Access Request (DSAR these days, used to be SAR) which allows a person to ask any organisation what data they hold about themselves.

The MIB dont "have to" delete data within 6 years, however their current process is they do delete data after 6 years. MID is not the only central db that insurers use and if you are trying to find out if a cancellation has been recorded you are better looking in the Claims and Underwriting Exchange (CUE) as this is where it would be recorded not MID. It too is maintained by MIB however unlike MID there is no stated data retention period. Given it contains details of fraud etc its likely its stored for much longer than the MID that is basically only there to identify the insurer on a vehicle at a given point.

Thank you for this advice. Learning  alot from here from people who genuinely give advice without judging

youngman19

caprikid1 said:

I have 7 cars in my house two drivers and one child who is soon to be driving, If I put my child on any of those cars with a provisional license it's probably fine, once he passes his test it would almost certainly be fronting.

As have been stated unless its a classic or a sports car, we know the truth , you know the truth and so does the insurance company. If it was not fronting the logical thing for you to do would be to insure it in your name, you did lots of quotes using your mums details ... to help her out ?. Who's cash paid for this second car ? Who chose it  ?.....

Get the second car insured in your name and put her as second driver, then you can drive your mum around and fix the issue. I would also put the car in your name too. Not sure why this was not done in the first place ? Actually I know exactly why it was not done, it would be far more expensive to do it legally. Think yourself luck, you may have had an accident and had a very difficult conversation with the police or the insurance company.

Wow a lot of assumption and judging according to what you think. If it makes you feel better then go ahead assume. Reality is far from it. I will be buying my own car next year, oh yeah wait, that wont seem suss to the insurers either!!! Maybe if you read previous comments properly you would have known this.

youngman19

Belenus said:

youngman19 said:

Sandtree said:

youngman19 said:

Ditzy_Mitzy said:

Jenni_D said:

Good spot.

Then yes, this could look suspicious to an insurance company. No doubt an entirely innocent act by the OP and Mum, and not intended in that way, but in effect still "fronting".

Especially if the mother's other car is insured with the same company, or they are somehow aware of its existence.  Her trying to insure a second car as 'main driver' with teenage son as a named driver, in addition to also being the main driver of the first car would surely set off alarm bells.  

Why can't someone have two cars and be main driver for legitimate reasons? Is that illegal?

(reasons I have already written above)

The question is who is the main driver of this "spare car"?

Insurers are concerned with "fronting", where an older/low risk person insurers a vehicle in their name with them as the main driver and adds a young/high risk person as a named driver. This results in a lowish premium as the main driver is low risk. In reality in some of these cases the main driver is the high risk driver and had this been declared the premiums would have been much higher.

A person can be the main driver on as many cars as they want as long as thats the truth... if someone has another main car, adds their kid on a second vehicle and the kid doesnt have access to any other vehicles then that starts smelling like a fronted policy.

Ultimately you need clarity from Hastings on exactly what grounds the cancellation has been made to enable you to formulate the complaint appropriately. 

Currently it is my mum. It is a very cheap car. I will be looking to buy my own car once I have saved up enough and something that suits me more. 

A cheap car is close to meaningless for insurance purposes.

The main risk that insurance companies take on is third party claims not claims for the insured vehicle.

An insurance policy for a cheap car risks a claim for maybe a few thousand pounds for damage, theft etc.

But the main risk is that the insured drivers of that cheap car could be responsible for an accident that causes many thousands of pounds of damage to an expensive car or, almost infinitely worse, causes injury or death resulting in claims for hundreds of thousands or many millions of pounds.

Young drivers of cheap cars are statistically responsible for a much higher proportion of serious and expensive accidents and claims than older drivers of expensive cars and that is reflected in the cost of insurance premiums.

Insurance companies are well aware of fronting to avoid such higher premiums and they will do all they can to avoid taking on such risks.

That is a great read, so just for my future car, would you say a cheap one won't be worth it? As I always thought we just need to show insurers that we can be sensible drivers and drive safely?

caprikid1

"Wow a lot of assumption and judging according to what you think. If it makes you feel better then go ahead assume. Reality is far from it. I will be buying my own car next year, oh yeah wait, that wont seem suss to the insurers either!!! Maybe if you read previous comments properly you would have known this."

I read your previous comments and like the insurance company have assumed it's a lie.... nothing with the information provided stacks up !.

OP can you tell us the year and model of both cars, it might seem more plausible then. Ultimately the person driving the second car the most will be you and you should be named first on the policy.