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!