Speed awareness courses could invalidate your insurance
Discussion
swisstoni said:
So Nick, if I make a misjudgement on the road and narrowly avoid an accident, should it tell my insurers? All in good faith and everything?
Why would you want to tell your insurers that Toni?They have already taken into account your propensity to have an accident through your age, driving record and soon.
You haven't gotten the hang of this have you?
The original Nick the Greek said:
Why would you want to tell your insurers that Toni?
They have already taken into account your propensity to have an accident through your age, driving record and soon.
You haven't gotten the hang of this have you?
but surely if he has a spotless record, they would have based their figures on a false assumption? I say tell 'em, Toni, or they'll track you down with hounds...!They have already taken into account your propensity to have an accident through your age, driving record and soon.
You haven't gotten the hang of this have you?
You're right in that you should disclose all information that's used to determine your risk by the insurance company. However every company is different and calculate risk with different factors and how are you to know all of these? It's up to them to ask the relevant questions which is why they have a strict script to follow on the phone.
Although I agree with you in that you should disclose all information regardless of the questions - if they don't strictly ask about driving courses it's a good indication it's not a risk factor for them.
Besides I think charging more based on the course is really cheeky. The whole point of these courses are that you will leave as a reformed driver and thus reduce your risk.
Although I agree with you in that you should disclose all information regardless of the questions - if they don't strictly ask about driving courses it's a good indication it's not a risk factor for them.
Besides I think charging more based on the course is really cheeky. The whole point of these courses are that you will leave as a reformed driver and thus reduce your risk.
Edited by whitecobra on Saturday 23 January 22:55
The original Nick the Greek said:
swisstoni said:
So Nick, if I make a misjudgement on the road and narrowly avoid an accident, should it tell my insurers? All in good faith and everything?
Why would you want to tell your insurers that Toni?They have already taken into account your propensity to have an accident through your age, driving record and soon.
You haven't gotten the hang of this have you?
Should I call my insurers when I get home? All in good faith.
swisstoni said:
Ok Nick, let's try this one. What if I found myself breaking the speed limit one day. Fortunately I wasn't caught.
Should I call my insurers when I get home? All in good faith.
You're still struggling with the concept Toni.Should I call my insurers when I get home? All in good faith.
In your example I would be phoning my insurers most days of the week....
You would only tell your insurers if you'd been caught, and been offered a speed awareness course, in lieu of points / fine / taken points / gone to court.
Just out of curiosity, does anybody here actually work in the Motor Insurance industry...
You only have to declare information that the insurance company has asked for. This was changed with the Consumer Insurance Act.
So if an insurance company asks you a direct question such as;
"Have you had any motoring offences including convictions, endorsements, fixed penalties, bans or points in the last 5 years?"
Then you only have to declare convictions, endorsements, fixed penalties, bans or points in the last 5 years.
As this question does not state anything regarding a speed awareness course, this does not have to be declared. Obviously if the question included speed awareness course, then this would have to be declared...
As people have already stated, Admiral do ask this question, hence why you have to declare it.
Making accusations such as that an insurance company can keep your premium if you do not declare speed awareness course, when this question hasn't been asked by the insurer, is like stating they will hold your premium if you have a dog in the front seat in the event of am accident...
Bottom line is you only have to declare what an insurance company asks you to declare. If they fail to ask the right questions, then they are accountable for the discrepancy.
You only have to declare information that the insurance company has asked for. This was changed with the Consumer Insurance Act.
So if an insurance company asks you a direct question such as;
"Have you had any motoring offences including convictions, endorsements, fixed penalties, bans or points in the last 5 years?"
Then you only have to declare convictions, endorsements, fixed penalties, bans or points in the last 5 years.
As this question does not state anything regarding a speed awareness course, this does not have to be declared. Obviously if the question included speed awareness course, then this would have to be declared...
As people have already stated, Admiral do ask this question, hence why you have to declare it.
Making accusations such as that an insurance company can keep your premium if you do not declare speed awareness course, when this question hasn't been asked by the insurer, is like stating they will hold your premium if you have a dog in the front seat in the event of am accident...
Bottom line is you only have to declare what an insurance company asks you to declare. If they fail to ask the right questions, then they are accountable for the discrepancy.
xjay1337;
It happens all the time at claim stage, claims consultant will ask the insured if they have any motoring convictions in the last 5 years, insured will mention an SP30 that isn't on the policy records...on further discussions and checks turns out it was declared by the insured but the customer service consultant setting up the policy didn't record it on the file.
In this instance the conviction would be added and any premium is waived, as the insured has correctly declared the conviction - hence my comment about the insurance company being accountable for the discrepancy.
It happens all the time at claim stage, claims consultant will ask the insured if they have any motoring convictions in the last 5 years, insured will mention an SP30 that isn't on the policy records...on further discussions and checks turns out it was declared by the insured but the customer service consultant setting up the policy didn't record it on the file.
In this instance the conviction would be added and any premium is waived, as the insured has correctly declared the conviction - hence my comment about the insurance company being accountable for the discrepancy.
Iambatman said:
xjay1337;
It happens all the time at claim stage, claims consultant will ask the insured if they have any motoring convictions in the last 5 years, insured will mention an SP30 that isn't on the policy records...on further discussions and checks turns out it was declared by the insured but the customer service consultant setting up the policy didn't record it on the file.
In this instance the conviction would be added and any premium is waived, as the insured has correctly declared the conviction - hence my comment about the insurance company being accountable for the discrepancy.
Yes, that is true and seems obvious. But you are implying that, instead of declaring the SP30 and the insurance agent failing to add it, that the insurance company do not ask about any speeding offenses.It happens all the time at claim stage, claims consultant will ask the insured if they have any motoring convictions in the last 5 years, insured will mention an SP30 that isn't on the policy records...on further discussions and checks turns out it was declared by the insured but the customer service consultant setting up the policy didn't record it on the file.
In this instance the conviction would be added and any premium is waived, as the insured has correctly declared the conviction - hence my comment about the insurance company being accountable for the discrepancy.
Apologies it's come across that way. The point i was making is that you only have to declare information to an insurer that they have asked for when underwriting the purchasers policy. So if they never asked you about motoring offences, convictions or speed awareness courses etc when taking out the policy, then you would not have to declare them.
Further info on this (pulled from http://www.financial-ombudsman.org.uk/publications... if you want to read it all...it's quite lengthy....)
what doesn't need to be disclosed
We are unlikely to say an insurer should have expected a consumer to provide information if we think:
the insurer did not ask a specific and clear question which - if answered honestly - would have given them that information
the consumer did not know the information or
the consumer could not reasonably have been expected to know.
And we usually say it is not reasonable to expect a consumer to provide:
facts of law
information already known to the insurer - for example, facts the insurer should have noted in a surveyor's report where it had already carried out a property survey
information that we decide the insurer should reasonably be expected to know - for example, where a consumer answers "see your records for claims history" and the insurer does not check them
information that the insurer has waived its right to know
information that reduces the risk to be covered by the policy and
information about convictions spent under the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act 1974.
Further info on this (pulled from http://www.financial-ombudsman.org.uk/publications... if you want to read it all...it's quite lengthy....)
what doesn't need to be disclosed
We are unlikely to say an insurer should have expected a consumer to provide information if we think:
the insurer did not ask a specific and clear question which - if answered honestly - would have given them that information
the consumer did not know the information or
the consumer could not reasonably have been expected to know.
And we usually say it is not reasonable to expect a consumer to provide:
facts of law
information already known to the insurer - for example, facts the insurer should have noted in a surveyor's report where it had already carried out a property survey
information that we decide the insurer should reasonably be expected to know - for example, where a consumer answers "see your records for claims history" and the insurer does not check them
information that the insurer has waived its right to know
information that reduces the risk to be covered by the policy and
information about convictions spent under the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act 1974.
Edited by Iambatman on Monday 25th January 11:35
Enjoyed reading this thread.
I've discovered I like people called George from Greece.
Just to add, I got the impression that one or two think that Insurance Companies are trying to get out of a payout if ANYTHING is not declaired.
I wrote off my TVR Tuscan a few years back. When I called the insurance to begin the claim, I was asked quite a few questions.
When asked if I had made any modifications to the car, I informed them that I fitted stronger alloy wheels.
The response was that they needed to know the value and review if it affected the premium.
The outcome was not that of "You didn't inform us", but that a small increase in premium was back dated to when they were fitted and the claim was paid in full with the exception of the above cost.
They even gave me more than I had paid for the Tuscan due to market value increasing.
It was a pleasure to deal with the broker. They even sympathized regarding the loss of my TVR.
(Tesco if anyone is interested).
I've discovered I like people called George from Greece.
Just to add, I got the impression that one or two think that Insurance Companies are trying to get out of a payout if ANYTHING is not declaired.
I wrote off my TVR Tuscan a few years back. When I called the insurance to begin the claim, I was asked quite a few questions.
When asked if I had made any modifications to the car, I informed them that I fitted stronger alloy wheels.
The response was that they needed to know the value and review if it affected the premium.
The outcome was not that of "You didn't inform us", but that a small increase in premium was back dated to when they were fitted and the claim was paid in full with the exception of the above cost.
They even gave me more than I had paid for the Tuscan due to market value increasing.
It was a pleasure to deal with the broker. They even sympathized regarding the loss of my TVR.
(Tesco if anyone is interested).
Edited by so called on Monday 8th February 08:41
832ark said:
So based on this theory, if you are pulled over for speeding and given a warning by a nice police office in lieu of points/fine/prosecution then you should also disclose that. What about speeding convictions in other countries - should those be declared also?
Well no, that's not a fine/endorsement/penalty is it?Gassing Station | Motoring News | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff