Safe Speed Forums

The campaign for genuine road safety
It is currently Tue Nov 10, 2026 00:13

All times are UTC [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 27 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2
Author Message
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Dec 28, 2006 08:59 
Offline
Member
Member

Joined: Fri Apr 09, 2004 14:04
Posts: 2325
Location: The interweb
In Gear wrote:
Rigpig wrote:
Homer wrote:
The trouble is you are not dealing with people in a position to make a decision, you are dealing with muppets sat at a computer screen and if the "computer says no" then that's as far as you can go.


Quite. Telephone and internet sales are all well and good as long as the transaction proceeds according to the checksheet that the automaton or computer has as its reference.
Once things break out of the pre-programmed trail, you can almost picture the telesales bod sat there with a symbolic flashing cursor in their brain waiting for some input.


Yep.. but sometimes the quaint old way with a broker who at least asks you questions and give advice as to the policies and the company offering them can be a benefit.


I went through a broker for many years, as far as I could see he just entered my details into a computer system (much the same as using confused.com) and offered me the cheapest quote. When it came to advice he was pretty useless, in some cases giving me advice which was plain wrong.


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Dec 28, 2006 14:55 
Offline
User
User avatar

Joined: Sat Aug 13, 2005 23:28
Posts: 1940
Assuming I understood one of the posts correctly..

What I cannot understand ist how it can be a "refusal to insure" if the insurer does not have the product/policy to sell to person making enquiries as to policy und weighing up costs.

I have refused quotes in the past as not happy with small print. We have been with Fortis past few years now.. und they are quite reasonable in cost und attitude with regard to the three young drivers we now have.

I insure via broker. There are good ones und bad ones. I think we found a knowledgeable one. IG also use him :hehe: for his own car.

Am surprised lieber Peter find himself in situation. I think he should ask some questions about this und maybe write to MP or Ombudsman or something over the retained full premium for goods not supplied.

_________________
Nicht ganz im Lot!
Ich setze mich immer wieder in die Nesseln! Der Mad Doc ist mein Mann! Und ich benutzte seinen PC!

UND OUR SMILEYS? Smile ... und the the world smiles with you.
Smiley guy seen when you read
Fine me for Safe Speed
(& other good causes..)

Greatest love & Greatest Achievements Require Greatest Risk
But if you lose the driving plan - don't lose the COAST lesson.
Me?
Je ne regrette rien
!


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Thu Dec 28, 2006 15:02 
Offline
Friend of Safe Speed
Friend of Safe Speed
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 09, 2004 23:09
Posts: 6737
Location: Stockport, Cheshire
WildCat wrote:
What I cannot understand ist how it can be a "refusal to insure" if the insurer does not have the product/policy to sell to person making enquiries as to policy und weighing up costs.

I am not treating it as a "refusal to insure" as the company did not offer insurance on a different model of car - the policy would have continued if I had kept the old car. This kind of thing must happen all the time, especially when brokers transfer policies at renewal time from one insurer to another. It is possible that they might have been prepared to do SD & P on the new vehicle, but not Class 1 business use, in which case it certainly isn't a refusal to insure.

Quote:
Am surprised lieber Peter find himself in situation. I think he should ask some questions about this und maybe write to MP or Ombudsman or something over the retained full premium for goods not supplied.

I was a bit surprised myself. Even if they didn't fancy me as a customer you might have expected them simply to apply a premium loading. Anyway, once I have cancelled the old policy I will write a stiff letter to the intermediaries.

However, insurance companies normally have a mechanism whereby you don't get premiums back pro rata, so you wouldn't expected to get 75% of the premium back if you terminated the policy three months in.

_________________
"Show me someone who says that they have never exceeded a speed limit, and I'll show you a liar, or a menace." (Austin Williams - Director, Transport Research Group)

Any views expressed in this post are personal opinions and may not represent the views of Safe Speed


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Dec 29, 2006 12:09 
Offline
Friend of Safe Speed
Friend of Safe Speed
User avatar

Joined: Tue Mar 09, 2004 23:09
Posts: 6737
Location: Stockport, Cheshire
I got my new policy details through this morning and, being an honest sort of chap, phoned the company to clarify the situation. They confirmed my circumstances didn't constitute a "refusal to insure" because, as several people have stated earlier in the thread, different companies have different underwriting policies and in the normal course of events might not offer cover on a different vehicle.

They said "refusal to insure" typically arises where someone might have, for example, failed to declare convictions and the insurance company therefore declined to pay out.

_________________
"Show me someone who says that they have never exceeded a speed limit, and I'll show you a liar, or a menace." (Austin Williams - Director, Transport Research Group)

Any views expressed in this post are personal opinions and may not represent the views of Safe Speed


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Fri Dec 29, 2006 18:21 
Offline
User

Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2005 21:27
Posts: 247
Location: Near Stockport
In Gear wrote:
Peter - you will have to declare this to your new insurer and shop around as well. They are all different companies and they all have different rules.. so how one interprets your "claims record" may not be the same as another insurer.


You need to distinguish between intermediaries (brokers) and underwriters. Many intermediaries use the same underwriter, and if that underwriter refuses insurance with one intermediary, the chances are it will do so with other intermediaries as well. It's the underwriters that set the rules not the intermediaries, and the rules applied may well differ between underwriters. Certainly Peter would be advised not to go for an automated quote over the Internet - particularly not an "aggregator" such as confused.com - but phone round so that he can talk to real people. First he should find out who the underwriter was for his previous insurance. Then he should ask who the underwriter is before obtaining another quote, and hang up if it's the same one that refused him insurance before giving any personal details.

Before shelling out large sums of money on 0870 numbers, it would be worth his while having a look at saynoto0870.com to see if it has standard rate - or even 0800 - numbers he can use instead.

I'll steer clear of the "refused" issue. Quote engines may return "no quote" for a variety of reasons, and as I have no idea precisely why the insurance was refused in this case, It's impossible to say whether it will count as a "black mark" or not. It's a whole lot muddier than a credit score at Experian!

Of course if I had read the entire thread I would have realised that Peter has now resolved the issue!

_________________
Brian


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Dec 30, 2006 13:30 
Offline
User

Joined: Tue Aug 30, 2005 12:06
Posts: 20
PeterE wrote:
However, insurance companies normally have a mechanism whereby you don't get premiums back pro rata, so you wouldn't expected to get 75% of the premium back if you terminated the policy three months in.


You NEED to read the SMALL print and read it very carefully, the important word is if YOU cancel the policy.

A friends dad was smarting after being done for a DWDCA and FTS after clipping a wing mirror and busting his glass both stopped but carried on after checking... long story but cutting it short imho he shouldn't have been done, but he didn't report it so......

Anyway, his insurer refused to carry on his insurance and "cancelled it" when he told them, they then refused to refund him any money other than in accordance with their "short term insurance" terms which basically meant he got back 10% of the money he paid them a few months ago.

I read the small print inside out and noted that the "Short Term" rates ONLY apply if YOU cancel YOUR insurance, not if the insurer cancels it. After a number of very snotty letters between him, the broker and the insurer he got his money back (which helped pay the heavily loaded new policy)

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Sat Dec 30, 2006 13:40 
Offline
Gold Member
Gold Member

Joined: Thu Nov 09, 2006 14:06
Posts: 3654
Location: Oxfordshire
Glad of a good result there Insider.

Certainly worth remembering that you cannot expect them to be forthcoming, or even necessarily truthful, about what you are entitled to. You may need to trawl through your paperwork and figure it out for yourself. I'd suggest it's certainly worth an hour of your time if your insurance premiums are anything like mine!


Top
 Profile Send private message  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 27 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 16 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You can post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
[ Time : 0.010s | 11 Queries | GZIP : Off ]