Insurance voided due to car having PPF! HELP PLEASE!
Discussion
silentbrown said:
skwdenyer said:
My insurer classes a roof rack as modification, FWIW.
Stickers too, of course. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-south-west-wal...InitialDave said:
Probably just an age thing, holdover from before forums etc.
It doesn't serve a practical purpose, but it's fundamentally harmless.
I think it's what we oldies would call an affectationIt doesn't serve a practical purpose, but it's fundamentally harmless.
https://www.google.com/search?q=affectation+meanin...
Bert
Foss62 said:
Many (maybe most) cars list roof racks as an optional extra. As soon as the car became second-hand how would anyone know what extras the original owner had ordered with it?
Keep up at the back: Some insurers treat factory options as modifications...https://www.ageasbroker.co.uk/media/1482/bib010-mo...
silentbrown said:
Foss62 said:
Many (maybe most) cars list roof racks as an optional extra. As soon as the car became second-hand how would anyone know what extras the original owner had ordered with it?
Keep up at the back: Some insurers treat factory options as modifications...https://www.ageasbroker.co.uk/media/1482/bib010-mo...
Has anyone got an actual example of a theft or accident claim being refused due to a legal and properly fitted roof rack?
Hi All
Sorry for the lack of communication or feedback on this case its taken forever to get to the point it has.
Without giving too much away as the case is STILL ONGOING ill give you all a quick break down of whats gone down so far.
Ombudsman had asked for details regarding the case and as to what had happen, i provided all the information required and then it was a waiting game to see what the insurance company cam back with. After what seemed like forever the insurance company provided information to the Ombudsman and a decision had been made that the insurance company did NOT do anything wrong and that there was no case to argue!
I appealed against this as i felt the situation at hand was not understood, i was asked to provide further details for example date of purchase of the car when the PPF was carried out ECT. After providing this information and taking pictures of my car as well as providing proof of the same car for sale with and with out PPF, in the meantime i asked that the Ombudsman listen to all the telephone conversations it seems that the insurance company played a little trick and got caught out as the phone conversations proved that what i was saying all along was correct and i did not carry out the job of PPF after purchasing the car despite me providing the information to the insurance company before they cancelled me insurance. I also pointed out on comparisons website there is no where to declare PPF.
Another decision was made and this time in MY FAVOUR! The insurance company where told they did not act correctly and the PPF has not visual or performance enhancement and that exactly what the word modification means. the Ombudsman have now asked the insurance company to put things right by doing the following:
1. Pay for the repairs for the car if it has been carried out already by my self if not then to get the car repaired.
2. if i have sold the car then to pay the difference as i may have lost money due to the damage.
3. To remove any marks of my name (having insurance declined) and to ensure my record going forward is kept clean.
4. to pay the difference in premiums as it had shot up as i had to declare insurance being declined previously.
5. To pay compensation for messing me around.
The insurance company of course have rejected this and it is now in the process of a final decision as of last week. This means that another adviser will have a look at the case and will make a final decision. i was told this could take a couple of months however as its an older case they expect it to be quicker.
Now its a waiting game and i feel that the Ombudsman have fully taken into account everything and have told the insurance company and that they have not made things clear at all and its unfair what they have done i am very hopeful this will be sorted in my favour !
FINGERS CROSSED!!!
Sorry for the lack of communication or feedback on this case its taken forever to get to the point it has.
Without giving too much away as the case is STILL ONGOING ill give you all a quick break down of whats gone down so far.
Ombudsman had asked for details regarding the case and as to what had happen, i provided all the information required and then it was a waiting game to see what the insurance company cam back with. After what seemed like forever the insurance company provided information to the Ombudsman and a decision had been made that the insurance company did NOT do anything wrong and that there was no case to argue!
I appealed against this as i felt the situation at hand was not understood, i was asked to provide further details for example date of purchase of the car when the PPF was carried out ECT. After providing this information and taking pictures of my car as well as providing proof of the same car for sale with and with out PPF, in the meantime i asked that the Ombudsman listen to all the telephone conversations it seems that the insurance company played a little trick and got caught out as the phone conversations proved that what i was saying all along was correct and i did not carry out the job of PPF after purchasing the car despite me providing the information to the insurance company before they cancelled me insurance. I also pointed out on comparisons website there is no where to declare PPF.
Another decision was made and this time in MY FAVOUR! The insurance company where told they did not act correctly and the PPF has not visual or performance enhancement and that exactly what the word modification means. the Ombudsman have now asked the insurance company to put things right by doing the following:
1. Pay for the repairs for the car if it has been carried out already by my self if not then to get the car repaired.
2. if i have sold the car then to pay the difference as i may have lost money due to the damage.
3. To remove any marks of my name (having insurance declined) and to ensure my record going forward is kept clean.
4. to pay the difference in premiums as it had shot up as i had to declare insurance being declined previously.
5. To pay compensation for messing me around.
The insurance company of course have rejected this and it is now in the process of a final decision as of last week. This means that another adviser will have a look at the case and will make a final decision. i was told this could take a couple of months however as its an older case they expect it to be quicker.
Now its a waiting game and i feel that the Ombudsman have fully taken into account everything and have told the insurance company and that they have not made things clear at all and its unfair what they have done i am very hopeful this will be sorted in my favour !
FINGERS CROSSED!!!
Bloody hell - insurance ombudsman siding with the customer shocker!!!
They were utterly useless when my son had to deal with them a few years back despite the case being very clear (he had insurance cancelled for failing to declare a claim, that "claim" was phoning his insurance company and asking is this something I need to tell you about?)
They were utterly useless when my son had to deal with them a few years back despite the case being very clear (he had insurance cancelled for failing to declare a claim, that "claim" was phoning his insurance company and asking is this something I need to tell you about?)
simon_harris said:
Bloody hell - insurance ombudsman siding with the customer shocker!!!
They were utterly useless when my son had to deal with them a few years back despite the case being very clear (he had insurance cancelled for failing to declare a claim, that "claim" was phoning his insurance company and asking is this something I need to tell you about?)
What was the thing he was asking them if he needed to tell them about?They were utterly useless when my son had to deal with them a few years back despite the case being very clear (he had insurance cancelled for failing to declare a claim, that "claim" was phoning his insurance company and asking is this something I need to tell you about?)
Someone pulled out on him, no contact was made but it got a bit shouty. he was concerned that they might call the police/insurance co. He was a new driver at the time and called them before speaking to me because he thought that was what he was supposed to do.
They registered it as an incident, about 3 years after this he got a letter saying his insurance was cancelled because of a failure to declare when we got to the bottom of it that was the reason. The ombudsmen were utterly useless.
They registered it as an incident, about 3 years after this he got a letter saying his insurance was cancelled because of a failure to declare when we got to the bottom of it that was the reason. The ombudsmen were utterly useless.
simon_harris said:
Someone pulled out on him, no contact was made but it got a bit shouty. he was concerned that they might call the police/insurance co. He was a new driver at the time and called them before speaking to me because he thought that was what he was supposed to do.
They registered it as an incident, about 3 years after this he got a letter saying his insurance was cancelled because of a failure to declare when we got to the bottom of it that was the reason. The ombudsmen were utterly useless.
Oh wow that is ridiculous! If no contact was made then there wasn't any accident!They registered it as an incident, about 3 years after this he got a letter saying his insurance was cancelled because of a failure to declare when we got to the bottom of it that was the reason. The ombudsmen were utterly useless.
I've never seen any insurance ask that we need to declare near-misses or arguments on the road, so its awful that they used that situation to label it as an incident.
simon_harris said:
Bloody hell - insurance ombudsman siding with the customer shocker!!!
They were utterly useless when my son had to deal with them a few years back
They were utterly useless when my son had to deal with them a few years back
Same for me! my insurance company broke there own t&c in dealing with me & we had all the proof they still sided with them
It was complete waste of time
sonnenschein3000 said:
simon_harris said:
Someone pulled out on him, no contact was made but it got a bit shouty. he was concerned that they might call the police/insurance co. He was a new driver at the time and called them before speaking to me because he thought that was what he was supposed to do.
They registered it as an incident, about 3 years after this he got a letter saying his insurance was cancelled because of a failure to declare when we got to the bottom of it that was the reason. The ombudsmen were utterly useless.
Oh wow that is ridiculous! If no contact was made then there wasn't any accident!They registered it as an incident, about 3 years after this he got a letter saying his insurance was cancelled because of a failure to declare when we got to the bottom of it that was the reason. The ombudsmen were utterly useless.
I've never seen any insurance ask that we need to declare near-misses or arguments on the road, so its awful that they used that situation to label it as an incident.
Or wether a plugged in GPS navigation with p.o.i (i.e. speed traps) needs to be declared, or rather if it voids the policy. Again:
We keep complaining about how certain businesses treat their customers, and how society seems to go insane, but then again there are so many stories of people doing things like I wrote above. A bit of a chicken and egg situation….
We are the society!
Thought I'd update this thread with my own experience/findings.
Got a message from a mate yesterday telling me another guy he knows, had just had his insurance cancelled due to the PPF thing, and that maybe I should look into it.
This scared me a bit, as I have had full PPF done, plus a load of custom pinstripes and lettering, as well as matching wheel colour (wheels and stripes matching colour). I hadn't given this a second thought before, but a web search brought me to this thread.
I'm insured on this car with Admiral, so went about seeing if these 'mods' would be seen by Admiral, as they appear to be by AXA, ie, a game changer.
Couldn't find a number to call, but long story short, did it all via my online login, and 'chat' with Admiral.
The stripes, lettering and wheel colour change all fall under 'Exterior Decorative Changes'. This seems a very broad brush to me, as there's no final detail beyond those words, so pretty 'catch all' as far as stripes, decals, wheel colour etc etc etc.
Informing of that modification added £13 to my annual premium, not bad I reckon.
There was no option anywhere that I could see that referenced either PPF, or 'Wrap', so spoke with an advisor via the chat system and explained that I was considering these changes (not commiting at this stage :-/ ). Response was, 'No need to Report, don't worry'. So I saved/printed the chat for my records.
So for me, and Admiral, my total cost to feel safe in the knowledge that my insurance is valid and secure, was £13. I'm guessing it may have been a different story had I been with AXA!
Jon
Got a message from a mate yesterday telling me another guy he knows, had just had his insurance cancelled due to the PPF thing, and that maybe I should look into it.
This scared me a bit, as I have had full PPF done, plus a load of custom pinstripes and lettering, as well as matching wheel colour (wheels and stripes matching colour). I hadn't given this a second thought before, but a web search brought me to this thread.
I'm insured on this car with Admiral, so went about seeing if these 'mods' would be seen by Admiral, as they appear to be by AXA, ie, a game changer.
Couldn't find a number to call, but long story short, did it all via my online login, and 'chat' with Admiral.
The stripes, lettering and wheel colour change all fall under 'Exterior Decorative Changes'. This seems a very broad brush to me, as there's no final detail beyond those words, so pretty 'catch all' as far as stripes, decals, wheel colour etc etc etc.
Informing of that modification added £13 to my annual premium, not bad I reckon.
There was no option anywhere that I could see that referenced either PPF, or 'Wrap', so spoke with an advisor via the chat system and explained that I was considering these changes (not commiting at this stage :-/ ). Response was, 'No need to Report, don't worry'. So I saved/printed the chat for my records.
So for me, and Admiral, my total cost to feel safe in the knowledge that my insurance is valid and secure, was £13. I'm guessing it may have been a different story had I been with AXA!
Jon
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff