Insurance cancelled due to painted wheels !

[anonymous-user]

Buff Mchugelarge said:

A law unto themselves.
Insurance and it's associated bullst really winds me up. They seem to be able to do/ charge whatever they want with no comeback/ common sense or liability.
I feel for you OP

I am of the opinion that FCA would do better to look at the insurance industry rather than disputing whether contract hire is mis-sold. This type of behaviour happens all day every day for almost every insurance policy imaginable, and having vague and unintelligible caveats hidden in miniscule Ts & Cs, is exactly the sort of thing they should be pursuing. Transparency! Once they finish with insurance, then look at mobile phone contracts.

[croyde]

Janluke said:

Slightly off topic but what's the issue with stickers?

I'm assuming the statistics show cars with stickers have more accidents?

I was paying an amazing low £300 fully comp to insure my brand new Mustang GT.

I enquired about fitting a Mustang trademark, a big black vinyl stripe from boot to front bumper.

No problem, just a doubling of premium to £600!!

Apparently the type of driver who likes stripes is not the same type of driver that doesn't like stripes.

I also have problems as I work in telly. I pay a lot more for most car insurance and bike insurance is quite often denied.

It's because I'm always giving famous people lifts??

I was filming Martin Scorsese the other day and for some reason he declined his usual chauffeur driven limo and insisted that the scruffy geezer on camera 4 should run him home on the back of the Vespa.

Insurance is legalised robbery.

[silverfoxcc]

Sounds like those gnomes in Switzerland have spare time on their hands

[captainaverage]

fastbikes76 said:

Well we will most definitely be escalating the complaint today. If nothing else it will cost them money when the ombudsman gets involved and with a bit of luck push for all the admin fees to be refunded too.

I had to be careful yesterday during all the calls and arguments, they made out like they were doing her a favour by allowing her to cancel the policy rather than them cancel it outright for undeclared modifications. I was concerned if I pushed to hard they would have just dug in and cancelled with immediate effect meaning she would have to declare having a policy cancelled !

The car is as it left the factory right down to the crappy standard radio, it is purely the aversion to some peeling black paint on the wheels that all this came about. There are no stickers on the car, I only mentioned that as they told me they would have done the same even for something as small as that.

Im not fussed about the whole black box thing, in fact with both my lads it’s been a good thing. He often tells me he wishes his back box was off now as he would be ‘razzing it’ with all his mates . Having the black box has ensured they at least drive half sensibly. It’s also the only way new drivers can get even remotely comparitive insurance. She has managed to insure a 1.4 Zetec Fiesta on her own policy after passing her test two weeks ago for a mere £1059 full comp. 3-4 years ago that was a minimum of £3500 to insure something like that when our first son drove.

I will update once I start the complaints procedure

Well they're kind of doing her a favour as if they cancelled the policy then either she can't drive or has to declare a cancelled policy and pay a horrendous amount of money until this matter is resolved.

I guess you don't want to tell us the name of the company until the matter is resolved with the FOS but once it comes to an end please tell us who these utter tw*ts are. The more hit their business takes the better they will behave next time.

[TooMany2cvs]

captainaverage said:

I guess you don't want to tell us the name of the company until the matter is resolved with the FOS but once it comes to an end please tell us who these utter tw*ts are.

You haven't read the thread, have you?

[Monkeylegend]

captainaverage said:

I guess you don't want to tell us the name of the company until the matter is resolved with the FOS but once it comes to an end please tell us who these utter tw*ts are. The more hit their business takes the better they will behave next time.

There are a few clues in the thread, like the name of the company involved

[saaby93]

fastbikes76 said:

I had to be careful yesterday during all the calls and arguments, they made out like they were doing her a favour by allowing her to cancel the policy rather than them cancel it outright for undeclared modifications. I was concerned if I pushed to hard they would have just dug in and cancelled with immediate effect meaning she would have to declare having a policy cancelled !

As posted earlier yes they were doing you a favour allowing you to cancel otherwise if they cancel, wont she always have to declare she had insurance cancelled, even if the ombudsman turns it around
If they dont cancel, do you have a complaint with which to go to the ombudsman?

[fastbikes76]

captainaverage said:

Well they're kind of doing her a favour as if they cancelled the policy then either she can't drive or has to declare a cancelled policy and pay a horrendous amount of money until this matter is resolved.

I guess you don't want to tell us the name of the company until the matter is resolved with the FOS but once it comes to an end please tell us who these utter tw*ts are. The more hit their business takes the better they will behave next time.

We HAD to cancel the policy yesterday, we couldn’t risk being insured a minute longer with Zurich.

Now we no longer run the risk of them cancelling, we can start all avenues of complaints against them and their conduct.

Her new policy with More than starts tomorrow which will give me time to pick up another set of standard wheels today and not go through this whole debacle again ! As I said I can see things from their side regarding painted wheels not being ok, but to not even allow us to refurbish back to standard or even replace with another set of stock wheels is just crazy.

[fastbikes76]

saaby93 said:

fastbikes76 said:

I had to be careful yesterday during all the calls and arguments, they made out like they were doing her a favour by allowing her to cancel the policy rather than them cancel it outright for undeclared modifications. I was concerned if I pushed to hard they would have just dug in and cancelled with immediate effect meaning she would have to declare having a policy cancelled !

As posted earlier yes they were doing you a favour allowing you to cancel otherwise if they cancel, wont she always have to declare she had insurance cancelled, even if the ombudsman turns it around
If they dont cancel, do you have a complaint with which to go to the ombudsman?

I get that them allowing us to cancel was a favour and a big help. If they REALLY wanted to help they would have just given us the 7 days to swap another set of standard wheels on like the manager on the phone said. Less than 2 hours later she got a stinking email saying cancel or else basically. A very different line to what the manager had just told us

[ashleyman]

croyde said:

I was paying an amazing low £300 fully comp to insure my brand new Mustang GT.

I enquired about fitting a Mustang trademark, a big black vinyl stripe from boot to front bumper.

No problem, just a doubling of premium to £600!!

Apparently the type of driver who likes stripes is not the same type of driver that doesn't like stripes.

I also have problems as I work in telly. I pay a lot more for most car insurance and bike insurance is quite often denied.

It's because I'm always giving famous people lifts??

I was filming Martin Scorsese the other day and for some reason he declined his usual chauffeur driven limo and insisted that the scruffy geezer on camera 4 should run him home on the back of the Vespa.

Insurance is legalised robbery.

I’m a photographer and when going through a broker once I was asked if I ever photographed famous people. I asked why did it matter and they said because if I was in close proximity to a famous person of taking my car to a location where they might be there could be a risk of press photographers or fans damaging my car or being hit by me. The usual person wouldn’t have that risk but I did. I accepted that and said yes. I ended up working with someone famous a few months later but not only was it top secret meaning nobody knew he was there. I didn’t even drive because I was given a taxi!

[Gad-Westy]

fastbikes76 said:

saaby93 said:

fastbikes76 said:

I had to be careful yesterday during all the calls and arguments, they made out like they were doing her a favour by allowing her to cancel the policy rather than them cancel it outright for undeclared modifications. I was concerned if I pushed to hard they would have just dug in and cancelled with immediate effect meaning she would have to declare having a policy cancelled !

As posted earlier yes they were doing you a favour allowing you to cancel otherwise if they cancel, wont she always have to declare she had insurance cancelled, even if the ombudsman turns it around
If they dont cancel, do you have a complaint with which to go to the ombudsman?

I get that them allowing us to cancel was a favour and a big help. If they REALLY wanted to help they would have just given us the 7 days to swap another set of standard wheels on like the manager on the phone said. Less than 2 hours later she got a stinking email saying cancel or else basically. A very different line to what the manager had just told us

Good that you have that in writing.

'Favour' in this case being along the line of slow death or quick death.

[Integroo]

TooMany2cvs said:

Only if they're a departure from OEM spec.

Brake rebuild with pattern discs, pads, calipers? Nope.
Grooved and drilled big brake kit? Yep.

Pattern tail lights? Nope.
"Lexus-style" rear light kit? Yep.

Doesn't seem unreasonable, does it?

I do wonder if you buy an older car, how are you going to know whether the parts are pattern-spec or not? "Great car, recently changed the discs, pads, calipers, exhaust as it was blowing a bit". Do you have to identify whether or not the parts are pattern-spec and disclose to your insurer if they are not? Is it sufficient to say to your insurer "it's a 25 year old car, who knows if the parts are pattern spec or not, but it doesn't have any obvious modifications?", What if they say down the line "oh that exhaust is clearly louder than stock" but you had no idea?

[Icehanger]

LandRoverManiac said:

It just goes to show how much leeway different companies seem to take when classing modifications. Some companies seem to regard options that were fitted at the factory as a modification - others aren't bothered. Some don't even regard bumper stickers as worth noting down - others go the whole hog and regard them in the same camp as sticking a halfords spoiler on the boot.

Repairing or refurbishing factory-fitted parts is just part and parcel of car ownership - if anything it would be the sign of an owner who is at least looking after the insured asset in question - so any company that tries to paint that as a modification is just moronic. Where do they draw the line - replacing corroded brake lines for the MOT considered a performance mod?

OP: I'd make life as difficult as possible for the company in question and in future take my business elsewhere. Wouldn't hurt to put off family and friends from using said company in future as well.

I had a similar thing with an insurance company that’s sailing based, wife’s mini has approximately 30 optional extras added, they insisted I declared all factory fitted optional extras, but their system wouldn’t allow more than 10, I made sure I said on the recorded call that their system was preventing me for declaring all optional extras, even talking with an Under writer didn’t resolve that, ended up moving to the big red telephone who were happy to list all....and no extra costs for that too
The industry as a whole is a joke

Edited by Icehanger on Wednesday 7th March 09:59

[Integroo]

Icehanger said:

LandRoverManiac said:

It just goes to show how much leeway different companies seem to take when classing modifications. Some companies seem to regard options that were fitted at the factory as a modification - others aren't bothered. Some don't even regard bumper stickers as worth noting down - others go the whole hog and regard them in the same camp as sticking a halfords spoiler on the boot.

Repairing or refurbishing factory-fitted parts is just part and parcel of car ownership - if anything it would be the sign of an owner who is at least looking after the insured asset in question - so any company that tries to paint that as a modification is just moronic. Where do they draw the line - replacing corroded brake lines for the MOT considered a performance mod?

OP: I'd make life as difficult as possible for the company in question and in future take my business elsewhere. Wouldn't hurt to put off family and friends from using said company in future as well.

I had a similar thing with an insurance company that’s sailing based, wife’s mini has approximately 30 optional extras added, they insisted I declared all factory fitted optional extras, but their system wouldn’t allow more than 10, I made sure I said on the recited call that their system was preventing me for declaring all optional extras, even talking with an. Under writer didn’t resolve that, ended up moving to the big red telephone who were happing to list all....and no extra costs for that too ??

I presume you mean Admiral (what is the problem with just saying their names people?). I find that odd (not that I don't believe you) as they were very relaxed when I was discussing with them changing things (refurbing alloys to a different colour and stainless steel exhaust) - neither impacted premium, happy to do both though they wouldn't replace them if car was written off, subject to an admin fee for noting it on my policy.

[Alex_225]

Gad-Westy said:

Alex_225 said:

Based on this situation, there must be thousands of motorists 'uninsured' due to these apparent modifications!! Winter tyres, after market air filter, grey alloys instead of silver? Criminals the lot of them.

What an utter joke!! By contrast when I've insured a car I own that has powder coated black alloys, the insurance told me on the phone that it makes no difference so not to worry.

OP - I hope you're able to get some kind of response from the situation. Hugely unfair that you're quite a bit out of pocket due to this. Oh and the chap fitting the black box sounds like an utter ****!

If you mean aftermarket air filter like a K&N etc rather than a pattern part, I'd say it's obvious that would be a modification. To be honest, I would also say that a dramatic wheel colour change is fair game as counting as a mod too.

The injustice in this case is not allowing the OP to simply refurb the wheels back to silver. Total failure of common sense.

In that respect I don't disagree but let's be honest but it's the nature of insurance more than the logic behind it. We all know a K&N panel filter isn't giving anyone 10bhp more, probably not even 1 it's just a better quality filter. Yet some insurers may deem it a modifications, others wouldn't even consider it.

I personally don't deem a wheel colour change anything to fuss about either. Ok, so maybe a lime green or orange refurb would make your car stand out over standard but lets face it, grey or silver, even black is often standard on vehicles in general so it is sheer pedantry to use it as an excuse to change a premium let alone cancel it.

Agree on the common sense though, what harm is it to let a customer just put it back to standard? As someone else mentioned it seems like an excuse to cancel the policy for whatever reason.

[anonymous-user]

Integroo said:

I do wonder if you buy an older car, how are you going to know whether the parts are pattern-spec or not? "Great car, recently changed the discs, pads, calipers, exhaust as it was blowing a bit". Do you have to identify whether or not the parts are pattern-spec and disclose to your insurer if they are not? Is it sufficient to say to your insurer "it's a 25 year old car, who knows if the parts are pattern spec or not, but it doesn't have any obvious modifications?", What if they say down the line "oh that exhaust is clearly louder than stock" but you had no idea?

Basically the insurance company doesn’t really care that things are modified, more that there’s a way to wiggle out of any possible claim. It’s a great business model, take the premium to cover a vehicle then walk away on some minor detail. Non OEM equipment that generally benefits the cars safety, brakes, lights etc really should be encouraged. It’s only a backwards industry that would penalise for these ‘modifications’. Basically, unless you have to deal with them you’re better off saying nothing. Best case you’ll get a BS ‘admin’ charge, worst case your policy cancelled. It’s a BS industry full of the worst kind of people.

[Toltec]

Isn't fitting the black box a modification?

[Gad-Westy]

Alex_225 said:

In that respect I don't disagree but let's be honest but it's the nature of insurance more than the logic behind it. We all know a K&N panel filter isn't giving anyone 10bhp more, probably not even 1 it's just a better quality filter. Yet some insurers may deem it a modifications, others wouldn't even consider it.

I personally don't deem a wheel colour change anything to fuss about either. Ok, so maybe a lime green or orange refurb would make your car stand out over standard but lets face it, grey or silver, even black is often standard on vehicles in general so it is sheer pedantry to use it as an excuse to change a premium let alone cancel it.

Agree on the common sense though, what harm is it to let a customer just put it back to standard? As someone else mentioned it seems like an excuse to cancel the policy for whatever reason.

I'm no big fan of the insurance industry but I see the logic. A k&N filter might make bugger all difference to performance but by fitting one, you're highlighting to the insurers that you're a little bit more boy racer than Mr average. Similarly, painting your wheels black. Of course it makes no difference to anything but it tells the insurer something about you that they didn't otherwise know. I have no big problem with that, it's a statistics game and they can pick and choose who they deal with or how much they charge just like any other business and we as customers can vote with our wallets. Nothing to do with OP's case of course which is just awful treatment of a paying customer.

[InitialDave]

Integroo said:

I presume you mean Admiral (what is the problem with just saying their names people?).

Forum rules not to. Presumably on grounds that anyone could say anything about a company, and they don't want the hassle of dealing with the problems that may cause.

Whether that is overly paranoid or not is a separate issue, but it's how the place runs.

[Charlie Michael]

Had a look at the website and they have the following under "Has the car been modified in any way"



i wouldn't be suprised if insurance companies wanted photos of the vehicle to be insured given to them before the policy is taken out.