Windscreen Claims WILL Affect Your NCD
Discussion
Glassman said:
Loon, would you say that not declaring a windscreen claim would be deemed as non disclosure of a material fact?
Non disclosure of a material fact became a moot point in April 2013 when the Consumer Insurance Act came into force. Insurers must ask specific an pnd clear questions if they want some information and can't rely on the age old non disclosure card very easily anymore. You should declare it, but if you look at websites they have a pick list for the type of claim. Windscreens should be declared, it they will be ignored pricing wise by most insurers. Run some dummy quotes in the comparison wenpbsites and screenshot your results.
Does this mean that an insurer has to ask you about everything that they deem to be important now and that you aren't legally responsible for declaring things which may be relevant, but about which they haven't specifically asked?
Also, can they ask you whether there is anything else which may be relevant - a sort of arse-covering catch-all which puts the ball back in your court?
Also, can they ask you whether there is anything else which may be relevant - a sort of arse-covering catch-all which puts the ball back in your court?
Specific questions requiring specific answers but only within reason. They can ask "have you had any losses whether insured or not" for example
They can't hold it against you on a question like "is there anything else you should tell us about that you haven't already?" As that's too vague
They can't hold it against you on a question like "is there anything else you should tell us about that you haven't already?" As that's too vague
Glassman said:
What are you trying to prove?Firstly, that's a forum like this so the answers given are hurt as likely to be loaded with rubbish like a lot of the SP&L stuff on here.
Secondly, you've always had to declare a glass claim. Declaring something doesn't mean it actually affects the policy in any way.
I have no idea why it matters whether you have to declare or not, or how you think that supports your (incorrect) view that a claim for glass will affect your NCD.
Finally, I have said numerous times that a couple of insurers may reduce your NCD for a windscreen claim, but that is not all and it is a huge minority. When are you going to accept that you're wrong? This thread has been going for years and you were wrong then and remain so today.
Glassman said:
If it bothers you that much, feel free to ignore it.
Personally, I think it's a contentious subject and very much in the public interest.
But there's no story. I've shown dozens of times on here that there's no story. I've posted policy booklets from the insurers websites showing that there's no story. I've asked you to provide evidence which you haven't, other than irrelevant and tangential forums. Personally, I think it's a contentious subject and very much in the public interest.
There is no story. There is no issue. You just keep whipping it up to pretend there is in the vain hope that it'll drum up some business for you.
Admit it. Your sole purpose on this thread is to try to con people into believing that their NCD will be reduced so they'll come and pay full retail price with you rather than just a £50-£100 excess via their insurer.
Small update on my part here, I have just had to change from Bell to Aviva as given the renewal prices Bell do not want my business any more.
Anyway, got an email through from Aviva wanting proof of NCD yesterday, so got Bell to send me a copy. As I read it over, I saw at the bottom under "claims" they listed the windscreen I claimed for in 2012, bill was just over £100. Called Aviva to see what the situation was and they said it makes no difference to the premium, and obviously my 4 years no claims is still valid.
I have never had protected no claims either, so at least in my case with these insurers it makes no difference.
Anyway, got an email through from Aviva wanting proof of NCD yesterday, so got Bell to send me a copy. As I read it over, I saw at the bottom under "claims" they listed the windscreen I claimed for in 2012, bill was just over £100. Called Aviva to see what the situation was and they said it makes no difference to the premium, and obviously my 4 years no claims is still valid.
I have never had protected no claims either, so at least in my case with these insurers it makes no difference.
LoonR1 said:
civicduty said:
Does this mean I have to start writing down dates when I have used my windscreen cover? Does it have to be the precise day or just general. How far back do I have to remember?
Thanks in advance for any help.
Are you serious?Thanks in advance for any help.
Are my posts invisible?
Are you posts invisible? No, they sometimes contain spelling mistakes that make them a bit hard to understand and sometimes you post the same reply twice, but invisible, no.
I seriously thought that the whole glass cover was outside the "Any motor accidents or claims in the last 5 years?", I didn't think I had had an accident by getting a chip.
I also didn't think I had claimed by getting the chip repaired I thought I had paid extra for my premium in the first place to get windscreen cover and that I just had to pay a bit more to get a repair or a replacement.
I guess from your blunt statement that I will need to take note of my repairs and by looking at the 'Confused' I guess it will be for period of 5 years.
Thanks for your input LoonR1, I shall treasure it for ever.
LoonR1 said:
Non disclosure of a material fact became a moot point in April 2013 when the Consumer Insurance Act came into force. Insurers must ask specific an pnd clear questions if they want some information and can't rely on the age old non disclosure card very easily anymore.
You should declare it, but if you look at websites they have a pick list for the type of claim. Windscreens should be declared, it they will be ignored pricing wise by most insurers. Run some dummy quotes in the comparison wenpbsites and screenshot your results.
A couple of spelling mistakes I mentioned are in this reply, but it was also useful as I did the comparison web check dummy quotes you mentioned and the premium was the same. You should declare it, but if you look at websites they have a pick list for the type of claim. Windscreens should be declared, it they will be ignored pricing wise by most insurers. Run some dummy quotes in the comparison wenpbsites and screenshot your results.
LoonR1 said:
Glassman said:
If it bothers you that much, feel free to ignore it.
Personally, I think it's a contentious subject and very much in the public interest.
But there's no story. I've shown dozens of times on here that there's no story. I've posted policy booklets from the insurers websites showing that there's no story. I've asked you to provide evidence which you haven't, other than irrelevant and tangential forums. Personally, I think it's a contentious subject and very much in the public interest.
LoonR1 said:
There is no story. There is no issue. You just keep whipping it up to pretend there is in the vain hope that it'll drum up some business for you.
I get countless emails and have many conversations with people who say they have seen increases following a glass claim. I have also spoken to many people who have also had their NCD affected in some way because some insurers/policies do/did impact on it. Yes, it's my business and that is why I get so much involvement in the subject. LoonR1 said:
Admit it. Your sole purpose on this thread is to try to con people into believing that their NCD will be reduced so they'll come and pay full retail price with you rather than just a £50-£100 excess via their insurer.
Con? Interesting choice of word. And oh yeah, it's all so they take up my retail offer, and click on the flashing advert I have running in conjunction with this thread. Get real.
Ignore the thread; unsubscribe. You're clearly getting far too worked up over it.
Fat fingers, small iphone keyboards and stupid autocorrect are my cop outs on that.
My answers are even more blunt than usual on this thread as Glassman seems obsessed with resurrecting this thread every six months or so. Nothing has changed for the worse, nor is it likely to, but that doesn't seem to stop him despite my overwhelming evidence to refute his wibblist tendencies.
Apologies for being so terse.
My answers are even more blunt than usual on this thread as Glassman seems obsessed with resurrecting this thread every six months or so. Nothing has changed for the worse, nor is it likely to, but that doesn't seem to stop him despite my overwhelming evidence to refute his wibblist tendencies.
Apologies for being so terse.
LoonR1 said:
Fat fingers, small iphone keyboards and stupid autocorrect are my cop outs on that.
My answers are even more blunt than usual on this thread as Glassman seems obsessed with resurrecting this thread every six months or so. Nothing has changed for the worse, nor is it likely to, but that doesn't seem to stop him despite my overwhelming evidence to refute his wibblist tendencies.
Apologies for being so terse.
No harm no foul Loon My answers are even more blunt than usual on this thread as Glassman seems obsessed with resurrecting this thread every six months or so. Nothing has changed for the worse, nor is it likely to, but that doesn't seem to stop him despite my overwhelming evidence to refute his wibblist tendencies.
Apologies for being so terse.
. I have found that Churchill won't decrease my NCD for a glass claim so that's all good.
Having read the policy wording for 1st Central insurance I couldn't find whether or not they remove NCD for glass claims, Loon, do you know, with out taking up too much of your time, if this company does or not. Thanks in advance.
Also I need something really simple explained with regard to insurance and NCD, that is not related to this thread directly (plus I will probably look stupid for asking it) so is it okay to PM you?
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff