At fault claim as a witness/pedestrian!?
Discussion
Son trying to insure his new car, had a clean license since the beginning, never involved in any accidents etc. However, insurance company say there's an at fault claim from him through LV in 2013- when he was 15! From what we can piece together, it seems to be relating to an accident he witnessed when walking back from the station (funnily enough, because he was too young to drive), and as the only person to see it occur provided a witness statement to an officer at the scene. He said he remembers something from LV coming through the post a few weeks later, but ignored it.
Any idea where to go on this? Insurance company said they have to add it to the policy even though they agree it was technically impossible for him to be at fault- setting the new premium at £4400...
Any idea where to go on this? Insurance company said they have to add it to the policy even though they agree it was technically impossible for him to be at fault- setting the new premium at £4400...
Might be worth speaking to LV, but I'd focus on the current insurers if I were you. Complain, appeal, and go to the Ombudsman if you need to.
Meanwhile, you can always do what I did when I was having a "computer says no" issue with your insurer. Get on LinkedIn and find the name of the director of underwriting (it's useful for something!). Ignore the call centre and go straight for the head office, ask for the director by name rather than by his title and you might just get through to them. I got my issue fixed fairly fast after that...
Meanwhile, you can always do what I did when I was having a "computer says no" issue with your insurer. Get on LinkedIn and find the name of the director of underwriting (it's useful for something!). Ignore the call centre and go straight for the head office, ask for the director by name rather than by his title and you might just get through to them. I got my issue fixed fairly fast after that...
Got a decent broker near you? At your sons age, he'll be changing insurance companies year by year, as Company A might love him this year, yet by the time renewal comes round, Company B might be stacks cheaper.
The bit about LV the broker should sort in very little time as they know exactly which buttons to press etc.
The bit about LV the broker should sort in very little time as they know exactly which buttons to press etc.
Anyone else noticed that insurers databases are increasing full of complete rubbish? My wife was recently flagged as having two fault claims ... turned out they were windscreens that someone had coded as accidents. Its really hard to prove it is a windscreen when the claim they are talking about is 5 years ago...
rxe said:
Anyone else noticed that insurers databases are increasing full of complete rubbish? My wife was recently flagged as having two fault claims ... turned out they were windscreens that someone had coded as accidents. Its really hard to prove it is a windscreen when the claim they are talking about is 5 years ago...
There is one insurer doing that for all their windscreen claims.It is completely infuriating.
desolate said:
rxe said:
Anyone else noticed that insurers databases are increasing full of complete rubbish? My wife was recently flagged as having two fault claims ... turned out they were windscreens that someone had coded as accidents. Its really hard to prove it is a windscreen when the claim they are talking about is 5 years ago...
There is one insurer doing that for all their windscreen claims.It is completely infuriating.
If so why aren't you naming them if the evidence is there?
10PercentPlus2 said:
Son trying to insure his new car, had a clean license since the beginning, never involved in any accidents etc. However, insurance company say there's an at fault claim from him through LV in 2013- when he was 15! From what we can piece together, it seems to be relating to an accident he witnessed when walking back from the station (funnily enough, because he was too young to drive), and as the only person to see it occur provided a witness statement to an officer at the scene. He said he remembers something from LV coming through the post a few weeks later, but ignored it.
Any idea where to go on this? Insurance company said they have to add it to the policy even though they agree it was technically impossible for him to be at fault- setting the new premium at £4400...
Four and a half grand!!!!! What is he driving? A Ferrari ??!!Any idea where to go on this? Insurance company said they have to add it to the policy even though they agree it was technically impossible for him to be at fault- setting the new premium at £4400...
I think you should try the Meerkat. Never failed me.
J
I know who they are, but I have no idea if it is their fault, or someone is cocking up the central database. If it helps, it is an insurer specifically aimed at women drivers. They were helpful when we found the policy information (thank god for bottomless gmail inboxes) and we've got a nice letter explaining the situation.
speedyguy said:
Do you know who they are ?
If so why aren't you naming them if the evidence is there?
The one I was thinking of is not the one mentioned below (it could possibly be both)If so why aren't you naming them if the evidence is there?
The one I am referring to is a specialist in a certain sector of the commercial market.
In didn't think we could 'name and shame' but if anyone is concerned they are a Gibraltar insurer that specialises in niche commercial motor. We have built a bit of software that automatically checks CUE and this windscreen issue is the major cause of manual intervention.
Echo66 said:
How an earth can a 15yr old lad who wasn't insured for anything at the time then be loaded against once he decides to insure a car a few years later. Ridiculous. I'd be straight on to the ombudsman, Hope you get it sorted OP.
It's a mistake in the data exchange. The insurers concerned can sort it out and if they don't then I think the data commissioner would be interested and may provide a better solution than the ombudsman.We are just checking this currently as to what the best recourse is.
The quickest is to complain to the insurer concerned but I appreciate that can take ages and say the will to live.
desolate said:
speedyguy said:
Do you know who they are ?
If so why aren't you naming them if the evidence is there?
The one I was thinking of is not the one mentioned below (it could possibly be both)If so why aren't you naming them if the evidence is there?
The one I am referring to is a specialist in a certain sector of the commercial market.
In didn't think we could 'name and shame' but if anyone is concerned they are a Gibraltar insurer that specialises in niche commercial motor. We have built a bit of software that automatically checks CUE and this windscreen issue is the major cause of manual intervention.
Thanks again all, very strange situation indeed! After talking to LV, they've sent an email advising he was an inactive witness, and that any queries from other insurers should contact them for confirmation- however, they've said its impossible to remove from the database, and "it will lapse soon so don't worry about it". 'Which?' however have advised me this could stand against his driving record for years to come if not removed, regardless of whether the insurance company say it will lapse soon.
We're starting with a Subject Access Request letter to LV, so we can fully understand what details/information (correct or otherwise) they hold on him.
Also, those saying £4400 is a lot- indeed, £3800 more than originally quoted! All I can say is thank f
k he's never actually been involved in an at-fault, otherwise with a premium like that he'd have to live without a car for a bit longer!
We're starting with a Subject Access Request letter to LV, so we can fully understand what details/information (correct or otherwise) they hold on him.
Also, those saying £4400 is a lot- indeed, £3800 more than originally quoted! All I can say is thank f
k he's never actually been involved in an at-fault, otherwise with a premium like that he'd have to live without a car for a bit longer!Glad that you are doing the Subject Access Request, as the Information Commissioner takes a dim view of firms holding information about people which is incorrect. Or not required for the registered purpose.
It is concerning that the insurers are allowed to ship all this data around and back and forth, without us necessarily knowing what they have whacked into their systems.
It is concerning that the insurers are allowed to ship all this data around and back and forth, without us necessarily knowing what they have whacked into their systems.
Flooble said:
Glad that you are doing the Subject Access Request, as the Information Commissioner takes a dim view of firms holding information about people which is incorrect. Or not required for the registered purpose.
It is concerning that the insurers are allowed to ship all this data around and back and forth, without us necessarily knowing what they have whacked into their systems.
You can get the subject access request for the central database from here.It is concerning that the insurers are allowed to ship all this data around and back and forth, without us necessarily knowing what they have whacked into their systems.
http://www.insurancedatabases.co.uk
I may be cynical, but is it really a coincidence that the high quote is from LV and it was LV that asked him for a witness statement that he didn't provide.........!
Maybe try for a quote from anyone else?
On a serious note, personal lines insurance is a total mess these days - it mostly operated pretty sensibly when I left that area of the business 20 years ago. Frankly I find it embarrassing to admit that I ever had any involvement with it!
Maybe try for a quote from anyone else?
On a serious note, personal lines insurance is a total mess these days - it mostly operated pretty sensibly when I left that area of the business 20 years ago. Frankly I find it embarrassing to admit that I ever had any involvement with it!
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff