Can anyone advise please? I have recently taken out a new insurance policy with esure, their rate having been most competitive from a 'compare the market.com' search.

Whilst completing their on-line process, I felt I had been as complete as possible, noting that both myself and my wife (as named driver) had one SP30 speeding offence each and my wife had made a claim for damage to her car (no other driver involved) within the last 5 years. For the latter of these categories, Compare the Market's headline request is to detail "any motor accidents or claims in the last 5 years".

I did neglect to mention that someone had hit my car in a Supermarket car park whilst I was shopping a few months back, causing some damage. At the time the driver gave me a written, signed admission of full responsibility and an aplology. Instead of coming to a financial arrangement with the driver there and then, I foolishly exchanged insurance details and so this was registered by my then insurer (Direct Line). Very quickly, the damage to my car was fixed, at zero cost to Direct Line or myself and I thought nothing further about this - Direct Line confirmed that it would not affect my no-claims status, even though when renewing my policy I found esure to be cheaper this time around.

I did not mention this on my esure application because I did not feel I had 'had an accident' or had to 'make a claim' on my insurance. I did not see that this 'random, no cost event' should have been relevant..

So much for the background.. Having adopted my policy with e-sure, they then wrote to me saying that they wanted details of a "claim I made in July". I phoned them and was advised that, even though this "indicent" (new word, introduced by them as an alternative to "accident" or "claim") was not my fault, had involved no cost to myself or my insurer, since (I quote) it's a "statistical fact" that anyone having had such an incident is more at risk of making a future claim, they would have to load my policy by some 7% to reflect my new 'higher risk' status.

Under threat of my policy being invalid, I paid this and am now in dispute with esure and following their complaints procedure, which so far has resulted in a re-affirmation of their assertion that by "statistical fact" I am a higher risk driver and they need to load my premium accordingly. They do say that their statistics are "commercially confidential" (wheras I take the view that they may be in line for a Nobel prize if they have statistical analysis to prove that a 'very near' random event significantly affects the outcome of any future event.

Can anyone with insurance industry experience please confirm whether or not this is standard industry practice, or is it just an example of shoddy 'writing one's own meal ticket' by esure?

Many thanks!

Hiya,

you are responsible for admitting all claims made, regardless of fault or whether the full cost was recovered or not. The difference between a fault and a non-fault claim however is quite large, but it does not make the non-fault claim immaterial.

Unfortunately esure are correct that there is a statistical correlation between non-fault accidents and the probability of future claims. Nobody really knows why there is (there is speculation, but no fact), but the point is that all you have to go on is the statistics. It's the only way that an insurance company can discriminate around age and gender. The analysis is not especially hard, you just look at all the claims you have had to pay out over the last few years and see what risk details the drivers making those claims had vs those that didn't. If you see a high proportion of younger drivers, people with speeding convictions, people who live in a certain area, or even people involved in claims that were not their fault then you upload the premiums of others with the same profile to account for it. It's not about proving or even understanding any individual reason or case.

Now the exact formula of how they came upwith the 7% loading I don't know. Insurance companies tend to look at claims and conviction history and assign points based upon experience. This will have factors such as which driver, their age, how long ago, total number etc. This will give you a number of 'claim points' which will then decide how much of an increase your premium gets. A single non-fault claim alone probably wouldn't alter your premium at all, but in combination with another claim, and 2 convictions may be why there is a 7% increase. It's impossible to say without knowing theirexact rating structure.

Personally I don't think you will get anywhere with your complaint, as you should have declared the claim and esure are within their rights to recalculate your premium based upon this new information. Sorry.

Many thanks to 'Wulfyn' for your consideration and response, albeit that you are frank and clear about my chances of success!

Can anyone advise please? I have recently taken out a new insurance policy with esure, their rate having been most competitive from a 'compare the market.com' search.

 

Whilst completing their on-line process, I felt I had been as complete as possible, noting that both myself and my wife (as named driver) had one SP30 speeding offence each and my wife had made a claim for damage to her car (no other driver involved) within the last 5 years. For the latter of these categories, Compare the Market's headline request is to detail "any motor accidents or claims in the last 5 years".

 

I did neglect to mention that someone had hit my car in a Supermarket car park whilst I was shopping a few months back, causing some damage. At the time the driver gave me a written, signed admission of full responsibility and an aplology. Instead of coming to a financial arrangement with the driver there and then, I foolishly exchanged insurance details and so this was registered by my then insurer (Direct Line). Very quickly, the damage to my car was fixed, at zero cost to Direct Line or myself and I thought nothing further about this - Direct Line confirmed that it would not affect my no-claims status, even though when renewing my policy I found esure to be cheaper this time around.

 

I did not mention this on my esure application because I did not feel I had 'had an accident' or had to 'make a claim' on my insurance. I did not see that this 'random, no cost event' should have been relevant..

 

So much for the background.. Having adopted my policy with e-sure, they then wrote to me saying that they wanted details of a "claim I made in July". I phoned them and was advised that, even though this "indicent" (new word, introduced by them as an alternative to "accident" or "claim") was not my fault, had involved no cost to myself or my insurer, since (I quote) it's a "statistical fact" that anyone having had such an incident is more at risk of making a future claim, they would have to load my policy by some 7% to reflect my new 'higher risk' status.

 

Under threat of my policy being invalid, I paid this and am now in dispute with esure and following their complaints procedure, which so far has resulted in a re-affirmation of their assertion that by "statistical fact" I am a higher risk driver and they need to load my premium accordingly. They do say that their statistics are "commercially confidential" (wheras I take the view that they may be in line for a Nobel prize if they have statistical analysis to prove that a 'very near' random event significantly affects the outcome of any future event.

 

Can anyone with insurance industry experience please confirm whether or not this is standard industry practice, or is it just an example of shoddy 'writing one's own meal ticket' by esure?

 

Many thanks!

Hi just wondering if you got anywhere with this??? I have a similar situation where I had my handbag stolen out a locker at the gym with my car keys in, they didnt take my car, (obviously just wanted the phone and money) I rang my insurance to find out if i was covered for my keys thay said no and that was that, I got new keys and immobiliser costin about £400. Now when I am trying to get new insurance, it comes up as a theft claim which adds an additional £300 to my policy! because i am now riskier to insure even though I have 9 years + no claims!

BEWARE OF ESURE.

Last month I completed an online application for car insurance through 'compare .com'. ESURE came up with a reasonable quote. I compared this with my renewal quote from Sainsbury's which I later realised was actually still ESURE! But by dealing with Esure online and bypassing Sainsbury's, the quote was over £100.00. cheaper. So it seems Sainsbury's are simply agents for ESURE. NO, That's not the end of it! ESURE are not an insurance company either, they are merely brokers. ESURE accepted my online proposal and I paid them the premium in full with a credit card. Six weeks later I received a phone call from ESURE telling me some information I had supplied them with was incorrect and there would be an increase in the premium. The information referred to a claim I'd made for a few hundred pounds three years ago when my car received minor damage from an unknown vehicle that had driven off whilst my car was left in a car park. I had in fact disclosed all the information they requested about this small claim, and they had even acknowledged this on the accepted proposal form. Despite this, the tele-sales operator from ESURE'S call centre accused me of withholding relevant information, which in my eyes amounts to being accused of trying to obtain an insurance policy by deception. I was being spoken to by this wretched tele-sales operator as if I was a common criminal. Trying to get her to reason or even listen was a complete waste of time. The point I failed to get her to understand is that having been with ESURE for the last seven years and having made a claim through ESURE three years ago, I would be completely stupid if I now tried to lie about the claim. My request to speak to their CEO or legal department was denied. Eventually I gave up and requested that somebody in authority should call be back or I would instruct solicitors to deal with the accusations that were being made. I then contacted my solicitor who quickly advised me that they had been negligent in processing the information I had given them, and were now effectively in breach of contract. Later the 'team leader' phoned me and at least had the intelligence to listen to what I had to say. She agreed that I'd done nothing wrong and that the mistake was theirs. In view of this she said she would try and get the request for an additional premium 'waived'!!

I thanked her for her kindness but told her that I had no intention of paying them any more money. Furthermore, I explained that if they failed to apologise, I would take immediate legal action against them for virtually accusing me of insurance fraud and all the accompanying stress. The following day 7th of January 2012, the team leader phoned me and expected me to jump for joy that the additional premium they were seeking has now been waived. I have demanded a full and unequivocal written apology which I was told will be sent out in the next few days. In the mean time I have checked my online details on their site and find it hard to believe that they have taken the extra premium (today 7th of January 2012) from my credit card. So the fight continues. This post is long and rambling perhaps possibly due to the fact that I've had the last 48 hours completely ruined by this despicable company. I HOPE PEOPLE WILL READ THIS THOUGH AND AVOID THE STRESS AND AGGRAVATION THAT NOBODY SHOULD HAVE TO ENDURE.