Insurance voided due to change in occupation
Discussion
A friend of mine was involved in a minor car park bump last October. He waited for the owner of the car he hit to come out of the shop and exchanged details apologising for the accident.
He has now received a bill from his own insurers for nearly £9k for the repairs to the other persons car which includes £3k for hiring a replacement loan car (not sure if it’s relevant but the car he hit was an 8 year old A3 so surely any cheap hatchback hire would’ve been ok) as his insurance company have said his insurance is void as he changed occupations mid-term and didn’t notify them. He was a fork truck driver then and is a van delivery driver now. He doesn’t use his car for deliveries.
Is this a valid reason to cancel his insurance as I don’t remember ever seeing a clause that you have to notify change of circumstance like changing occupation mid-policy? They would’ve insured him in his current role.
He asked me to help as English isn’t his first language so any advice on how to deal with it would be helpful as he doesn’t have the £9k to pay them.
He has now received a bill from his own insurers for nearly £9k for the repairs to the other persons car which includes £3k for hiring a replacement loan car (not sure if it’s relevant but the car he hit was an 8 year old A3 so surely any cheap hatchback hire would’ve been ok) as his insurance company have said his insurance is void as he changed occupations mid-term and didn’t notify them. He was a fork truck driver then and is a van delivery driver now. He doesn’t use his car for deliveries.
Is this a valid reason to cancel his insurance as I don’t remember ever seeing a clause that you have to notify change of circumstance like changing occupation mid-policy? They would’ve insured him in his current role.
He asked me to help as English isn’t his first language so any advice on how to deal with it would be helpful as he doesn’t have the £9k to pay them.
They can only void his insurance in this instance for two reasons:
1. They charge a lot more for people who are van drivers compared to FLT drivers and can show your friend knew this and deliberately avoided telling them to get cheaper insurance that he should have done. That's going to be very hard to prove so forget that reason.
2. They just don't insure van drivers at all. That may well be their policy and if so, he's stuffed. Give them a ring using fictious details but similar age, postcode and car to your friend, and give occupation as a van driver, and see if they quote you. If they say "sorry, we don't cover van drivers", you have your answer.
It's all covered in the 2015 Insurance Act.
1. They charge a lot more for people who are van drivers compared to FLT drivers and can show your friend knew this and deliberately avoided telling them to get cheaper insurance that he should have done. That's going to be very hard to prove so forget that reason.
2. They just don't insure van drivers at all. That may well be their policy and if so, he's stuffed. Give them a ring using fictious details but similar age, postcode and car to your friend, and give occupation as a van driver, and see if they quote you. If they say "sorry, we don't cover van drivers", you have your answer.
It's all covered in the 2015 Insurance Act.
Edited by TwigtheWonderkid on Thursday 26th January 08:22
TwigtheWonderkid said:
They can only void his insurance in this instance for two reasons:
1. They charge a lot more for people who are van drivers compared to FLT drivers and can show your friend knew this and deliberately avoided telling them to get cheaper insurance that he should have done. That's going to be very hard to prove so forget that reason.
2. They just don't insure van drivers at all. That may well be their policy and if so, he's stuffed. Give them a ring using fictious details but similar age, postcode and car to your friend, and give occupation as a van driver, and see if they quote you.
It's all covered in the 2015 Insurance Act.
Thanks. They have already done so and sent him a bill, what’s the next step as they don’t seem willing to discuss any further. 1. They charge a lot more for people who are van drivers compared to FLT drivers and can show your friend knew this and deliberately avoided telling them to get cheaper insurance that he should have done. That's going to be very hard to prove so forget that reason.
2. They just don't insure van drivers at all. That may well be their policy and if so, he's stuffed. Give them a ring using fictious details but similar age, postcode and car to your friend, and give occupation as a van driver, and see if they quote you.
It's all covered in the 2015 Insurance Act.
4Q said:
TwigtheWonderkid said:
They can only void his insurance in this instance for two reasons:
1. They charge a lot more for people who are van drivers compared to FLT drivers and can show your friend knew this and deliberately avoided telling them to get cheaper insurance that he should have done. That's going to be very hard to prove so forget that reason.
2. They just don't insure van drivers at all. That may well be their policy and if so, he's stuffed. Give them a ring using fictious details but similar age, postcode and car to your friend, and give occupation as a van driver, and see if they quote you.
It's all covered in the 2015 Insurance Act.
Thanks. They have already done so and sent him a bill, what’s the next step as they don’t seem willing to discuss any further. 1. They charge a lot more for people who are van drivers compared to FLT drivers and can show your friend knew this and deliberately avoided telling them to get cheaper insurance that he should have done. That's going to be very hard to prove so forget that reason.
2. They just don't insure van drivers at all. That may well be their policy and if so, he's stuffed. Give them a ring using fictious details but similar age, postcode and car to your friend, and give occupation as a van driver, and see if they quote you.
It's all covered in the 2015 Insurance Act.
Its a tricky one, and will depend on what the policy says. Changing a job role could be classed as a fundamental change, and if the policy clearly has a condition to say that the policy holder needs to tell it about any changes after the policy has started, they may be able to apply that term.
If it does, then the application of the term should be fair and reasonable, i.e. he hasn't changed the car, just his job, which is more a careless mistake as opposed to a reckless one.
Best thing to do is raise a complaint, then refer to FOS if they decline.
If it does, then the application of the term should be fair and reasonable, i.e. he hasn't changed the car, just his job, which is more a careless mistake as opposed to a reckless one.
Best thing to do is raise a complaint, then refer to FOS if they decline.
Most insurance policies require a change in occupation to be notified immediately. To pick an insurer at random, Direct Line have the clause on page 33 of their sample policy booklet.
https://www.directline.com/car-cover/policy-docume...
However as Twig says they can only void his policy outright if (a) they can prove that the failure to update them was intentional rather than an oversight (difficult) or (b) they would not have insured him at all under the new occupation. Otherwise they should be paying at least a proportion of the claim (ie if they would have charged him an extra 50% premium as a van driver, they should be covering two thirds of the claim themselves and only chasing him for the remaining third).
If you think they would have covered him under his current occupation then his next move should be to make a formal complaint - the details of how to do this should be in the policy booklet. If he's not happy with their response, or if they don't respond within 8 weeks he can then take his complaint to the Financial Ombudsman.
https://www.directline.com/car-cover/policy-docume...
However as Twig says they can only void his policy outright if (a) they can prove that the failure to update them was intentional rather than an oversight (difficult) or (b) they would not have insured him at all under the new occupation. Otherwise they should be paying at least a proportion of the claim (ie if they would have charged him an extra 50% premium as a van driver, they should be covering two thirds of the claim themselves and only chasing him for the remaining third).
If you think they would have covered him under his current occupation then his next move should be to make a formal complaint - the details of how to do this should be in the policy booklet. If he's not happy with their response, or if they don't respond within 8 weeks he can then take his complaint to the Financial Ombudsman.
4Q said:
Johnnybee said:
Which insurance company?
Watford Ins Co. I've done a google search for their T&C's but cant even find a website other than one in Romanian.
Note, I'm not naming and shaming as I've made no aspersions about this company
https://goskippy.com/wp-content/skippy_documents/c...
Mammasaid said:
4Q said:
Johnnybee said:
Which insurance company?
Watford Ins Co. I've done a google search for their T&C's but cant even find a website other than one in Romanian.
Note, I'm not naming and shaming as I've made no aspersions about this company
https://goskippy.com/wp-content/skippy_documents/c...
sociopath said:
Section 18 seems pretty clear
Surely they need to be clearer though and not just reference t and c.I would expect them to have said something along the lines “we do not insure van drivers , as such the insurance would not have been accepted as per our policy”
To just refuse due to not informing of a job change is a bit “iffy” in actual legality without some substance behind their decision.
without knowing anything:
- If you’ve failed to make a fair presentation of risk deliberately or recklessly, your insurer can void your policy (treat it as if it never existed) and keep your premium
- If you didn’t do it deliberately or recklessly but your insurer wouldn’t have insured you if they’d had the full facts, they can void your policy but they must refund your premium
- If it wasn’t deliberate or reckless and your insurer still would have insured you but on different terms (for example different terms and conditions, premiums, excesses, endorsements or conditions) then any claim payment can be reduced (see point 3 under fair presentation of risk condition in your policy Endorsement), and/or your policy can be treated as if it had included those terms
do as the others have suggested and obtain a quote as a van driver, not this policy though.
- If you’ve failed to make a fair presentation of risk deliberately or recklessly, your insurer can void your policy (treat it as if it never existed) and keep your premium
- If you didn’t do it deliberately or recklessly but your insurer wouldn’t have insured you if they’d had the full facts, they can void your policy but they must refund your premium
- If it wasn’t deliberate or reckless and your insurer still would have insured you but on different terms (for example different terms and conditions, premiums, excesses, endorsements or conditions) then any claim payment can be reduced (see point 3 under fair presentation of risk condition in your policy Endorsement), and/or your policy can be treated as if it had included those terms
do as the others have suggested and obtain a quote as a van driver, not this policy though.
Edited by TheDrownedApe on Thursday 26th January 12:38
4Q said:
Watford Ins Co. I've done a google search for their T&C's but cant even find a website other than one in Romanian.
Note, I'm not naming and shaming as I've made no aspersions about this company
4Q said:
Thanks everyone for your input so far. I think the next step is to write to the insurance company using their appeals process and take it from there.
If that’s unsuccessful is there any way to dispute the amount as £5700 for a rear 1/4 and £3k car hire seems a bit steep.
Surely, the next step is to get a quote for a van driver with similar risk profile to your friend and on a similar car. If that’s unsuccessful is there any way to dispute the amount as £5700 for a rear 1/4 and £3k car hire seems a bit steep.
Mammasaid said:
Isn't that Aaron Banks outfit?TooLateForAName said:
Mammasaid said:
Isn't that Aaron Banks outfit?https://www.uswitch.com/car-insurance/providers/go...
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff