Are my insurers screwing me over?
Discussion
Ok, here's the story.
About 2 years ago, I was hit in the rear by a third party whilst waiting to pull out at a junction. They immediately accepted it was their fault and so I made a claim to THEIR insurer, who sorted it all out. It never had anything to do with my insurers.
When taking out insurance since, I have never disclosed this as a claim/incident as I presumed I would only have to disclose any claims against my own insurance policies.
Now, for the first time in my life, I am in the process of making a claim on my own insurance because my car was hit whilst parked and unattended.
When I made the claim they asked me if i had made any other claims in the last three years and I gave details about the incident I described above from a couple of years ago, emphasising that the claim was made against someone elses policy and not my own.
Now I've had a letter from the insurers to say they are taking additional premium due of nearly £200 from my credit card!!
Is this correct? Am I in the wrong here?
Surely it goes against the very concept of insurance for me to be penalised now for what happened a couple of years ago when nothing ever happened on my policy.
I've never cost my insurers a penny regards this incident so to be charging me additional premium because of it seems abhorrent.
Any help much appreciated.
Thanks
About 2 years ago, I was hit in the rear by a third party whilst waiting to pull out at a junction. They immediately accepted it was their fault and so I made a claim to THEIR insurer, who sorted it all out. It never had anything to do with my insurers.
When taking out insurance since, I have never disclosed this as a claim/incident as I presumed I would only have to disclose any claims against my own insurance policies.
Now, for the first time in my life, I am in the process of making a claim on my own insurance because my car was hit whilst parked and unattended.
When I made the claim they asked me if i had made any other claims in the last three years and I gave details about the incident I described above from a couple of years ago, emphasising that the claim was made against someone elses policy and not my own.
Now I've had a letter from the insurers to say they are taking additional premium due of nearly £200 from my credit card!!
Is this correct? Am I in the wrong here?
Surely it goes against the very concept of insurance for me to be penalised now for what happened a couple of years ago when nothing ever happened on my policy.
I've never cost my insurers a penny regards this incident so to be charging me additional premium because of it seems abhorrent.
Any help much appreciated.
Thanks
I think most insurers as, pretty clearly, a question along the lines of "have you had any accidents/claims, regardless of fault in the last X years".
You didn't disclose that so, from their perspective, you didn't tell the truth. This can be a black mark in future so disclose everything.
You didn't disclose that so, from their perspective, you didn't tell the truth. This can be a black mark in future so disclose everything.
Unfortunately you are now in a higher risk category. People who have been in an accident (regardless of fault) are more likely to be in another one.
Effectively you are being peanalised because you possibly drive when there are more muppets on the road (driving at night, at rush hour, morning run etc).
Its just statistics, and you are getting lumped in with a different group now.
You can always try to recover it from the other insurance company.
Effectively you are being peanalised because you possibly drive when there are more muppets on the road (driving at night, at rush hour, morning run etc).
Its just statistics, and you are getting lumped in with a different group now.
You can always try to recover it from the other insurance company.
98elise said:
Unfortunately you are now in a higher risk category. People who have been in an accident (regardless of fault) are more likely to be in another one.
Effectively you are being peanalised because you possibly drive when there are more muppets on the road (driving at night, at rush hour, morning run etc).
Its just statistics, and you are getting lumped in with a different group now.
You can always try to recover it from the other insurance company.
Very true. My insurance went up because someone crashed into me and wrote my car off, whilst I was parked. He was also a disqualified driver which made it interesting.Effectively you are being peanalised because you possibly drive when there are more muppets on the road (driving at night, at rush hour, morning run etc).
Its just statistics, and you are getting lumped in with a different group now.
You can always try to recover it from the other insurance company.
98elise said:
Unfortunately you are now in a higher risk category. People who have been in an accident (regardless of fault) are more likely to be in another one.
Effectively you are being peanalised because you possibly drive when there are more muppets on the road (driving at night, at rush hour, morning run etc).
Its just statistics, and you are getting lumped in with a different group now.
You can always try to recover it from the other insurance company.
Why would the other insurance company cover it? Basically you've underpaid on your insurance, due to non-disclosure of relevant information. If you insurers really wanted to screw you over they would void your insurance due to non-disclosure.Effectively you are being peanalised because you possibly drive when there are more muppets on the road (driving at night, at rush hour, morning run etc).
Its just statistics, and you are getting lumped in with a different group now.
You can always try to recover it from the other insurance company.
Just take it on the chin, and learn for next time.
98elise said:
People who have been in an accident (regardless of fault) are more likely to be in another one.
That is possible, but not the real reason for higher premiums. People who have had claims in the past have (as a group) higher claims in the future than those who do not. Cost is what is important, not just frequency. Are they trying to screw you? Yes almost always.
It's true that you probably should have disclosed the no fault claim. But in their own little world of probability they have now decided that anyone who gets hit and it's not their fault then they are more likely to be involved in more accidents.
Mike
It's true that you probably should have disclosed the no fault claim. But in their own little world of probability they have now decided that anyone who gets hit and it's not their fault then they are more likely to be involved in more accidents.
Mike
MH said:
Are they trying to screw you? Yes almost always.
It's true that you probably should have disclosed the no fault claim. But in their own little world of probability they have now decided that anyone who gets hit and it's not their fault then they are more likely to be involved in more accidents.
Mike
That's what really annoys me.It's true that you probably should have disclosed the no fault claim. But in their own little world of probability they have now decided that anyone who gets hit and it's not their fault then they are more likely to be involved in more accidents.
Mike
Two insurance companies are now profiting out of this. The third party's insurance premiums will have rightly gone up, but to be penalised by my own insurer because I had the audactity to let someone hit me....
Sigh.
At the risk of repeating myself, it is claim costs, not frequency, that really matter.
Men have (well, for now) higher premiums not because they have more accidents, but because those accidents cost more on average.
Nobody says "Oh, I am a year older and my premiums have gone down, they must be making it up" or "My premium went down when I moved out of central Manchester to the Isle of Skye - it is all a con". Those are just as *real* facts as "I had a non fault claim". It isn't as if having an accident is any less real than having a birthday.
Add up incurred claim costs for a particular group (28 year olds, men, people from Oxford, people who have had 1 non fault claim, people who have had 3 non-fault claims) and divide by the number of claims. Average claim cost. Charge more to those groups where it is higher. Not hard is it.
Men have (well, for now) higher premiums not because they have more accidents, but because those accidents cost more on average.
Nobody says "Oh, I am a year older and my premiums have gone down, they must be making it up" or "My premium went down when I moved out of central Manchester to the Isle of Skye - it is all a con". Those are just as *real* facts as "I had a non fault claim". It isn't as if having an accident is any less real than having a birthday.
Add up incurred claim costs for a particular group (28 year olds, men, people from Oxford, people who have had 1 non fault claim, people who have had 3 non-fault claims) and divide by the number of claims. Average claim cost. Charge more to those groups where it is higher. Not hard is it.
Edited by Noger on Wednesday 20th April 10:34
kambites said:
Yup, it's all statistical risk based. If you get hit once, you are statistically more likely than average to get hit again.
It's infuriating if you're a young driver, as you are penalized for something that is not your fault. My premiums are higher than usual, as my 306 HDi was written off (non-fault, rear ended in traffic!) and my Elise S1 was damaged when an old woman turned into a parking space, outside a Lotus dealership, a bit too soon and damaged the front clam 
When renewing my insurance last year Admiral accidentally added the latter accident twice. As soon as this was amended, my premium decreased by £200. So I'm guessing each non-fault accident of mine is worth ~£200 on top of my base premium
My insurance (on any car) is actually higher in comparison to my friend who lives in the same area, is of the same age, has been driving just as long, and has written off multiple cars!
As for the OP, you must disclose all accidents (fault & non-fault) to your insurers.
BRISTOL86 said:
That's what really annoys me.
Two insurance companies are now profiting out of this. The third party's insurance premiums will have rightly gone up, but to be penalised by my own insurer because I had the audactity to let someone hit me....
Sigh.
Out of interest, You didn't declare the incident to your insurer at the time, or at renewal/inception of new policy thereafter, however when they sent you the paperwork to fill in for this recent claim, you decided to tell them about it - just wondered why? Would have been interesting if you'd again not informed them to see if they would have picked up on it, presumably it would be difficult as your name wouldn't have been connected with the previous insurance claim.Two insurance companies are now profiting out of this. The third party's insurance premiums will have rightly gone up, but to be penalised by my own insurer because I had the audactity to let someone hit me....
Sigh.
Lastly, are people sure that you have to inform insurers about non-fault claims? As a quick look on the Aviva website asks the following question only WRT claims:
Aviva website said:
How many motor claims have you made in the last 4 years?
W00DY said:
Surely it depends on what question you were asked when you took out the policy.
I know for a fact some websites ask if you've made any claims in the last 5 years. In this case you haven't made any claims, someone else has through another insurer.
I would disagree, he has made a claim, granted it was from someone else's insurers, but he still made a claim.I know for a fact some websites ask if you've made any claims in the last 5 years. In this case you haven't made any claims, someone else has through another insurer.
OP - I would just be grateful that they haven't voided your insurance, if that had happened then you have to declare it forever AFAIK.
hora said:
OP you are lucky. They could have refused to pay out due to incorrect information provided when you took out your current policy.
This ^^Happened to me many years ago, I declared the accident but ticked the wrong box which apportioned blame. In my defence the question was very woolly**.
The car was subsequently nicked and I lost the lot.
- Said insurance company admitted it was woolly, one of the reasons why I will not use them.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff