Insurance refusing to pay out, refusing to accept liability for lost key and looking for advice

jaykurb

So my partner drove into a ford (river in the road) and destroyed her car. She spoke to her insurance and answered the questions and left the claim to them. Over several weeks (with no car) they asked additional random questions which personally I felt could have been asked from the offset. Eventually they requested we sent off a load of documents (copies of drivers licences, logbook) and the keys to the vehicle. Upon receiving the documents and keys, they stated we had not supplied a copy of my licence (no mention of not receiving keys), we informed them we had and it took them 2 weeks to confirm. 

After 6-7 weeks (with no car) they asked her where the car was flooded and they concluded it was negligence and they will not be paying out. They returned the documents but the key was not there, upon asking them they have out right refused they have received them. Additionally, they have informed her she is unable to cancel the policy as she has claimed and will need to pay the whole policy outright (which is a hefty amount). 

Can anyone offer any advice for this situation, do they have any grounds to refuse the insurance, do we really have to pay the whole policy to cancel and can they just refuse liability for the keys? 

Car_54

It certainly sounds like negligence. Was the ford clearly signposted? 

If the car was 'destroyed', why do you need the keys?

jaykurb

Car_54 said:

It certainly sounds like negligence. Was the ford clearly signposted? 

If the car was 'destroyed', why do you need the keys?

I would say so but there were no depth markings, either way I understand there may not be much luck in the claim. Although, surely crashing into the back of someone constitutes negligence, where is the line drawn? wherever the insurance fancies it?

As for your comment on the keys. Firstly, I don’t care, they should be returning my keys regardless. Secondly, we now need to get the car repaired or sell it as it is, either way  we need the keys. 

Aretnap

Re refusing to pay out, most insurance policies have a catch-all clause along the lines of "you must take reasonable care of your vehicle", and they might have grounds to decline a claim for driving through floodwater (assuming the level of the river was unusually high) under that clause.

However the level of carelessness required before those catch-all clauses can be activated is generally pretty high. Most car accidents involve an element of carelessness and it would defeat the object of car insurance if an insurer could decline every claim which was caused by taking a bend too fast, or pulling out of a junction without looking properly etc etc. 

So it will depend on just how obvious the danger was, what warning signs were in place and so. Here are two Financial Ombudsman decisions with different outcomes which show the type of things which might be relevant.

https://www.financial-ombudsman.org.uk/decision/DRN-2823964.pdf

https://www.financial-ombudsman.org.uk/decision/DRN-2895996.pdf

The Financial Ombudsman Service if free (to you) so your partner has nothing to lose by making a complaint over the refusal to cover the car 

Grey_Critic

If you are in possesion of the vehicle why do they need the key?

chrisw

If they're refusing to pay out then surely there hasn't effectively been a claim on the policy so it should be able to be cancelled.

HillStreetBlues

It shouldn't be a automatic rejection.
People make mistakes driving and get paid out so "negligence"  is just too broad a term.

What will matter is the degree of negligence, there is to limited info to give a judgement on that.

soolin

chrisw said:

If they're refusing to pay out then surely there hasn't effectively been a claim on the policy so it should be able to be cancelled.

I would have thought a claim is a claim regardless of whether it was paid out or not. 

jimbo6977

in the long distant past there was an ombudsman case about the definition of a collision to do with a deer jumping into a swimming pool. anyway, back to work....

DullGreyGuy

chrisw said:

If they're refusing to pay out then surely there hasn't effectively been a claim on the policy so it should be able to be cancelled.

There has been a claim, just because it was declined doesnt mean it wasnt a claim not that they havent incurred costs assessing the claim

jaykurb

Grey_Critic said:

If you are in possesion of the vehicle why do they need the key?

I couldnt work this out. I only assumed they wanted the key to take the car away without needing anyone home.