Help / Legal Advice re Car impounding / Insurance Problem

colincowleyhurlock

I have just been Srtopped by the Police for No insurance :mad:

I have been insured by Tesco for over a year, they have changed underwrighter and between the two insurance companies the mistake has happened.

Whilst UKi have offered to repay my impond fees they say that in not the fault.

As far as I am concerened it TESCO that I deal with not UKi or Tesco Insurance PLC.

If they want to make changes behind the scene, why can't they keep it behine the scene and have one customer service team dealing with it?

Why make there customers have to speak with UKi Customer services (operating as Tesco Insurance) then have to Speak with Tesco Insurance PLC to tell them the same thing!?:mad:

The whole thing is RUBBISH and seem to be a method of NOBODY taking responcibility

bluelight

I'm a retired policeman. In my experience, the insurance industry will blame everyone but itself when things go wrong, even when it's the insurance industry's fault.

As of 6 April 2010, the Information Commissioner has the power to order data users to pay compensation to victims of abuses or mistakes and hit them with a financial penalty of up to £500,000 as well.

In cases such as this, it is probably best to send a written notice to the insurer involved and the Motor Insurers Database informing them you are making a formal complaint against them to the Information Commissioners Office (ICO) for Failing to Maintain Accurate Records. Go to the ICO website for further details.

Motorists need to start hitting back at the insurance industry and send a very clear message to them that their bullying, complacency and incompetence will not longer be tolerated

Best of luck and I hope you get justice.

mchale

bluelight wrote: »

I'm a retired policeman. In my experience, the insurance industry will blame everyone but itself when things go wrong, even when it's the insurance industry's fault.

Sorry disagree, with regard to the OP the police should have issued a producer to show docs within 7 days, not remove vehicle, the police are too zealous to remove a vehicle and hit the owner with a large bill, especially when the is doubt over the vehicle having cover, as has been stated the ins companies are legally bound to update the MID within 7 days of ins being taken out

pendulum

Indeed, rather than the police blaming the insurance database for not being 100% accurate all the time, they should accept that no large database will ever be 100% accurate and use producers where there's a reasonable doubt as to a persons guilt.

raskazz

bluelight wrote: »

I'm a retired policeman. In my experience, the insurance industry will blame everyone but itself when things go wrong, even when it's the insurance industry's fault.

As of 6 April 2010, the Information Commissioner has the power to order data users to pay compensation to victims of abuses or mistakes and hit them with a financial penalty of up to £500,000 as well.

In cases such as this, it is probably best to send a written notice to the insurer involved and the Motor Insurers Database informing them you are making a formal complaint against them to the Information Commissioners Office (ICO) for Failing to Maintain Accurate Records. Go to the ICO website for further details.

Motorists need to start hitting back at the insurance industry and send a very clear message to them that their bullying, complacency and incompetence will not longer be tolerated

Best of luck and I hope you get justice.

It's a good job you are retired because you don't seem to know what you are talking about. When it comes to insurance and MID issues, neither do most serving policeman, seemingly.

You are confusing two separate issues:

(i) The insurer's obligation to keep an accurate record - i.e. maintain its own databases in line with the Data Protection Acts, and

(ii) The insurer's obligation to the MIIC to supply MID data in a timely fashion.

The first is what falls under the Information Commissioner's Office remit - if you are referring to the OP's situation, there is no evidence that the insurer did not keep an accurate record on its own database. On the second note, I have already addressed this earlier in the thread - insurers are not expected to immediately update MID for every policy.

To blame every such situation on "bullying, complacency and incompetence" by insurers is hysterical and inaccurate.

What the police need to understand is that the absence of a record on MID does not mean that a vehicle is not insured. Neither does the presence of a record on the MID mean that it is properly insured - e.g. for the use to which the vehicle is being put. They need to display some policing skills and exercise their discretion in an appropriate manner. Sadly being an automaton seems to be a key requirement for working as a police officer these days.

What I would also mention is that the police's attitude to motor insurance fraud is appalling - they are not interested in anything other than the most "Hollywood" operations involving organised crime. For example, I have never heard of a single prosecution under Section 174 of the RTA, despite application fraud being rife.