Car claim

montyfullers

I had a car accident with other parties involved whilst on a social occasion.  My car does not appear to be covered for commuting however the accident did not occur on a commute.  Will my insurance claim be invalid? 

swingaloo

Not sure I understand the question. If you were not commuting what is the problem?

montyfullers

I could see our policy was for social. Domestic and pleasure and advised this did not include commuting.  Regardless of the accident not occurring on a commute, would my policy be invalid because I had not included this, irrespective of when the accident occurred. 

MattMattMattUK

For clarity, are you took out a policy for Social, Domestic and Pleasure, however you also used the car for commuting. You then had an accident whilst on a social trip?

montyfullers

Yes that’s correct 

DullGreyGuy

montyfullers said:

I had a car accident with other parties involved whilst on a social occasion.  My car does not appear to be covered for commuting however the accident did not occur on a commute.  Will my insurance claim be invalid? 

Is it safe to assume you are at fault for the accident?

The relevant legislation is CIDRA which basically says if you made a deliberate or reckless false declaration (selecting SD&P rather than SDP&C when you knew you commuted) then they can void the policy and avoid the claim. If it was a careless false declaration then it depends if the insurer would have offered terms had you made a correct declaration. 

Its hard to understand how someone wouldn't know if they use their car for commuting or not?

If the claim is in relation to commuting or not is totally irrelevant in relation to the legislation however if it was during your commute the insurer is much more likely to discover the false declaration.

montyfullers

The policy has been updated to change main driver and at the time they were not working and wasn’t even thought about.  The main driver only started work a couple of months ago and it wasn’t even thought about nor did we appreciate what the insurance policy stated.  There was nothing deliberate or reckless, more oversight and misunderstanding that general commute to work not even covered.  

user1977

It does seem rather improbable that the insurers would know that the car had also been used for commuting, if that has no connection to the incident being claimed for. Unless you do something daft like ask them for a hire car so you can get to work...

montyfullers

Unfortunately I stated it had as did not appreciate that it was an issue of missed! 

DullGreyGuy

user1977 said:

It does seem rather improbable that the insurers would know that the car had also been used for commuting,

Companies are good at asking the relevant questions as per the OP's response:

montyfullers said:

Unfortunately I stated it had 

Insurers invest in voice stress analysis, teams with cognitive questioning experience etc but the majority of non-claims issues is detected by customers simply admitting it. 

montyfullers said:

The policy has been updated to change main driver and at the time they were not working and wasn’t even thought about.  The main driver only started work a couple of months ago and it wasn’t even thought about nor did we appreciate what the insurance policy stated.  There was nothing deliberate or reckless, more oversight and misunderstanding that general commute to work not even covered.  

At the end of the day you have to wait and see what happens. It's certainly more defendable than had they been working at the point of taking it out but its always going to be a debate if someone was reckless or careless. 

montyfullers

Thanks everyone.  Appreciate comments.