It is quite possible that the car had a DVLA marker on it for some other reason, hence the police stop. It could equally be the police decided to stop it and went 'fishing', the police are more au fait these days with class of use on insurance policies, but there is absolutely no reason why they should have confiscated the food. Mossy

Most companies including the one I work for break it down like this SDP ONLY SDP + to and from a fixed place of work SDP + Business use (ie not a fixed place of work) Commercial Travelling (Delivery drivers etc) I know that a few companies do treat travel to and from work as aceptable in the SDP, but not all do and those that do are slowly phasing it out (so they can increase premiums) Mossy

RESULT ! Mossy

If it was been used for business purposes then driving it away could still be classed as commercial travelling, SDP is just that and not to and from work. I guess it depends on how reasonable the Police wanted to be, but technically it could be seized, driving back from the compound would then make it SDP use. Mossy

Are you sure about that date? I only ask because it's only May 2010 now!!!!!!! Mossy

Most Insurers nowadays make a very distinctive difference between Social Domestic & Pleasure Use (SDP), and business use. The police are increasingly aware of this and will in most cases check to see if the use of the vehicle is covered by the insurer or not. A second occupation is something that needs to be disclosed to your insurer if the vehicle is going to be used for it, if a claim came in from a policyholder who stated their occupation was for example an office worker and the claim form stated the journey at the time of the accident was for delivering pizza it would most certainly be looked into and probably rejected . All insurance policies are based on utmost good faith, if you fail to disclose something then you can expect your policy to be void when it comes to light. If a vehicle is been used for business purposes and the insurance does not cover such use the Police do have the power to seize the vehicle there and then. The Police have no powers to seize any contents, unless they are illegal. The driver should have been allowed to remove whatever they wanted to remove from the vehicle before seizure. Mossy

Cancel your Direct Debit and wait for them to come back to you. Be firm and tell them exactly what happened, you advised them in plenty of time you didn't want to renew so they are not entitled to any fees or charges. If they don't accept this tell them you will take it to the FOS because it's unacceptable. Post back if you get any hassle Mossy

Good to hear that claims are sorting it out as a high priority. You appear to have found the only insurer in the world who does not allow change of vehicles (in future only insure with them if you are not going to buy a new car/ sell your existing car/ write a car off). That really is a joke, I've never heard of such a stupid condition as not allowing a replacement car! With regards to your excess, yes they are correct, any excess will be deducted and it is up to you to claim it back, however from the accident circumstances that should be easy to do in your case. I keep hearing from within the Insurance Industry that a non fault accident does NOT affect your premiums, but I keep hearing from customers that it most certainly does. Insurance premiums are based on 'risk', I fail to see how you are now a bigger risk than you were last month just because someone ran into your parked car. If you can show that your insurance premium has risen as a direct result of this accident then it could be considered an uninsured loss and as such you could try and claim that back from the insurers of the TP when you claim your excess back. (If you want I'll draft you a letter incorporating that item of claim into your overall claim against them). Mossy

I don't see that working 1) I would bet that it wasn't in the terms and conditions of the courier so the customer couldn't be forced into paying it 2) The company accepting delivery has no contract with the courier, so would simply refuse to pay Mossy

I really don't know what to make of this, your treatment is a complete disgrace. Whilst it is true that insurers do quite often refuse to insure certain types of cars and some do change their terms and coinditions so that at renewal date they will no longer insure a policyholder I cannot fathom what is so worrying (to them) about your new car. OK it's a year newer and it is a 1.6 not a 1.4, but they are NOT huge differences and certainly not something to make most insurers decline. In your shoes now I would be ringing claims and demanding settlement of the written off car, and then trying to arrange a new policy with a new Company, that is where I think the priorites are, complaints to FOS etc can be done at a later date (and even if you did them today it would take a while for any results) Mossy

I have Sam and I'm shaking my head in total disbelief. I agree that this needs to go to the Ombudsman, it's ridiculous. I cannot think of anything else to suggest to the OP that might get a quicker resolution. MOssy

Given the current state of affairs I'm suprised the CPS haven't sought to prosecute the driver for leaving a vehicle with the engine running. Mossy

Your photo's are not visible so I didn't know if they were taken at the scene/time or post scene/time. (Time and date stamp is irrelevent since this can be set to show anything desired), but a pinpoint GPS location is good. They have the potential to add some serious weight to your LBA. Mossy

Insurers are very unwilling to go to Court in cases like this because they know the (highly) likely outcome, (50/50 as per Endymions post), so a Court battle would only cost more money but produce the same result. Photographs after the event would not hold that much weight, glass could have been put down/swept up etc, however photographs taken at the scene/time of the accident are ideal, especially if taken from an angle that can identify where on a particular road the accident took place. (Your photographs are not showing BTW) If you can get the file (copy of) from your insurers and at the same time keep them in the loop advise them that you are intending to issue proceedings for the recovery of your outlay direct from the TP then you may spot some inconsistencies in what the TP (and witnesses) say. Another point worth considering is that your outlay is NOT that much, so a carefully worded LBA might just make the TP realise that paying you £25 and dropping his claim is better than getting done for perjury. Mossy

Its a Notice Before Action (otherwise known as LBA Letter Before Action), ie a strongly worded letter stating what will happen if they don't pay up, when I do them I usually a copy of the particulars of claim so they know I'm serious and will have no hesitation in issuing if they don't pay up. Mossy

That could be a clever tactic, I'd certainly be tempted to try it. If the OP gets a 100% recovery of their outlay from the TP it would certainly negate the claim against them/their insurers, it's whether of not the TP could be bluffed into admitting the truth. It's certainly worth the shot though Mossy

And that's the problem. You were asked at the proposal stage if you were the registered keeper and owner (just about every single motor insurer asks that) and you answered that you were, and on that basis the insurer accepted the risk and calculated a premium. Insurance is based on utmost good faith, which isn't present here, you told them something that was incorrect, and fronting is something insurers will not accept. They hold all the cards now, any complaint to FOS would be dismissed, your only option is to contact them and ask them if they will consider dealing with it and explain it was a genuine mistake. If they decide to void the policy (which is quite likely) then you don't really have an argument or anywhere else to go to/complain to. Mossy

It isn't usual for a policyholder to pay the excess for third party damage, normally your excess is only deducted from a claim made by you for damage to your own vehicle (or from a fire/theft claim). It's very rare these days to find an 'all section excess' policy (under one of these policies the excess is deducted regardless of who claims). And yes, if you refund any and all monies paid by your insurers then you haven't made a claim so your NCD would be intact. Mossy

I'm banging my head against the desk in sympathy for your plight here, it's ridiculous. Effectively all you want to do is substitute one car for another on your policy and they won't do that. I could understand it if you had had an 11 year old Escort and had bought a brand new Ferrari, but the difference in vehicles insured is only 1 year and it's the same make and model. This is not rocket science, nor is it anything that insurers do not do day in day out. The only person suffering here is you, you cannot insure or use your replacement car and writing letters and waiting for replies is going to take days, I'd be tempted to ring the complaints department of your insurers and escalate the complaint as high as possible, throw in phrases like 'duty to mitigate your losses' and explain that one of the reasons you purchased the replacement car was to get you on the road again as fast as possible thus reducing your hire car charges/claims for loss of use. I'm hoping if you complain loud enough and escalate in high enough someone will have the sense/intelligence to resolve it for you quickly. Good luck Mossy

Wow, I've never seen anyone get such a runaround before. I think the confusion here is partly because you have so many different people involved (brokers, insurers, next door neighbours cat (OK the cat isn't involved yet but give it time) Can you dig out your certificate of motor insurance, that will identify who the insurer concerned is, I'm thinking it might be Hastings (but lets try and confirm that). This should be the same as the Company who made you an offer on your car. This is the Company you need to ring, ascertain from them what the current state of your claim is, and check if they have they made contact with the third party insurers yet. I am aware that some insurers have terms and conditions that state that if a total loss occurs then the policy is terminated on payout, but that isn't usually the case when the accident was a non fault one and you/they can recover payment from a third party. I'd agree with sailorsams suggestions that it could be time to complain to the FOS, but before doing that I'd suggest some very strongly worded letters of complaint to everyone who has messed you around and/or not been able to explain things to you. MOssy

The first thing I would clarify is what is meant by 'You haven't owned the car long enough', that makes no sense whatsoever to me, no insurance company I know has a minimum period of ownership that must be in place before they will offer insurance on it. Is it perhaps that the replacement car is newer? That would possibly explain some of the rise in premiums. Ring your insurers direct, (not the brokers) ask to speak to a senior claims handler or the manager and explain that your car was parked, you are the innocent party and ask that they personally now get involved with a view to sorting this claim out. Mossy

I wouldn't normally post PM's up here, but it will help to make this thread more understandable and possibly help others with a similar problem Quote: Originally Posted by dolaphonic THanks for the reply. its a tad confusing or not dependent upon your view. my girlfriend got the car for me on finance so obviously the first name on the log book was my girlfriends. shortly after i bought the car i moved to my sisters but had no intention of driving the car for a bit. a friend told me that i had to change the keepers details in case i needed to declare it SORN. once i started driving the car again i intended to change the log book back into my name but bad luck got to me before i remembered. i know my sister would be classed as keeper but i can prove i owned and maintained the vehicle by service and repair records from bmw. what are the odds of them not paying out? as i said there was no fronting involved so i cant form a laymens view see the problem. Quote: Originally Posted by Mossycat It sounds like an honest mistake, you were given wrong advice RE the SORN declaration, but that's of little consequence. It is clearly not a case of fronting or any other attempt to get a reduced premium, so I'd explain this to your insurers and I'd expect them to deal with your claim, if they don't then PM me and let me know what they say. Originally Posted by dolaphonic Hi once again, I have just spoken to my insurance company. During the conversation the gentleman i spoke to said they because of the unusual circumstances i.e finance in the mrs' name and log book in my sisters name that they will be appointing an independent body to ask me a few more questions in order to clarify the claim details. the company is called quest partnership. i've googled them but they have very little if any details about themselves on the site. my question to you is have you ever had any dealings or do you have any knowledge of this particular company or any of its type. If so what can i expect? What do they do? why has the insurance company really appointed them? many thanks in advance for any help given Originally Posted by Mossycat I've never heard of them, I'd be tempted to post this update on the thread you started and see if any of the other insurance guys have. It sounds like they want to investigate it a bit further (which is reasonable), so my advice at this stage is play along and be honest, if they end up rejecting your claim (which I think is unlikely) there are a number of things that you can do, but let's wait and see what they say first Mossy

Usually insurers ask on the proposal 'Are you the registered keeper and owner of the vehicle', if they asked that and you replied 'Yes' then it does look like a case of fronting. (It is worth remebering that the registered keeper isn't necessarily the owner which is why the question is phrased as above) Can you remember if you were asked that, and also what you replied? Mossy

When was your renewal date? When was the first payment of the new policy taken from your bank? When did you first contact Kwik Fit to discuss/complain about the new premium? Mossy

Wait until you get a reply from the insurers, I've never heard of an insurer refusing to pay out on something that was purchased abroad that hadn't been subject to UK import taxes. I'd expect the insurer to deal with the claim, so I think you are worrying over nothing Mossy