Insurance, NCB and no fault

[mike5100]

Just sent this to Adam:

"Hi Adam,

I realise that the text you have sent me below is from a template but I am not sure how many times I need to repeat this, my report is not a claim. The information is provided to you for RECORD PURPOSES ONLY because I am obliged to under the terms and conditions of my policy. The matter has been dealt with by the 3rd party and they have organised and paid for the repairs to my car. Could you talk to your claims manager and point out that as of tomorrow (28th January) the accident will have been 30 days old, and you should be able to close your file.

Kind regards"

[Mossycat]

If that doesn't work try this........

 

Hi Adam

 

I am instructing you as policyholder to close this claim file and confirm that my NCB has been allowed.

 

This was never a claim, I was not seeking indemnity from you, nor was I asking for any help or assistance. the matter has been dealt with, the third party admitted liability and has already paid for the repairs to my vehicle.

 

I have recovered all my losses and the thrid party WILL NOT be contacting you, hence why I made a 'For Record Purposes Only' notification.

 

Kind Regards

[mike5100]

ha ha - guess what - a new renewal notice has just come through from Swiftcover reducing my NCB from 5+ years to 3 and increasing the amount I need to pay from £206 to £357.

Mike

[mike5100]

I feel like a bit of a rant:

If insurance companies behave like this when innocent parties try to comply with the terms and conditions of their policy, then they will encourage people not to comply. Surely it's in their interest to encourage the reporting of no-fault bumps by guaranteeing that the owner will not get penalised (or bogged down in administration), because this will encourage people to keep minor bumps completely out of the insurance system. Of course there is another more cynical explanation. If the insurers penalise people for reporting no-fault accidents, it will encourage the owner to breach their insurance contract which will mean that insurers will be able to wriggle out of any subsequent claims if they discover the first bump.

Mike

[sailor sam]

Makes you wonder dosn't it. I would write a letter of complaint to Swiftcover stating that you expect your NCB to be re-instated as you have NOT made a claim from them. Should they not do so, you will refer the matter to the insurance ombudsman. I would also have a word with a few other insurers to see what they can offer you although being cynical, they are probably all the same! You only find out how good/bad they are when it comes to making a claim in my experience.

 

__________________

Please Note

 

The advice I offer will be based on the information given by the person needing it. All my advice is based on my experiences and knowledge gained in working in the motor and passenger transport industries in various capacities. Although my advice will always be sincere, it should be used as guidence only.

 

I would always urge to seek professional advice for clarification prior to taking any action.

 

Please click my scales at the bottom of my profile window on the left if you found my advice usefull.

[mike5100]

Thanks Sam ... I'm taking the view at the moment that they aren't being dishonest and that it's just their debatably stupid systems that are creating this. From their point of view - I could be lying and a claim from a 3rd party might drop through their door after I had paid the lower premium. This is what their claims guy has now said by email:

"Your file clearly states that you are not claiming and that the repairs have been completed, privately, between your self and the third party.

 

We need to keep the file open for a limited duration in case there is any claim made against you, again this is standard practice for every incident involving a third party. Once the file has been allocated to a file handler, they will review it and decide if they can close the file. "

.... so I'll give them the benefit of the doubt for now. Best scenario is that they send me a revised revised renewal form prior to 20th Feb, which reverts back to the original premium. Worst scenario is that they continue to regard it as a claim, in which case after escalating it within Swiftcover, I will indeed take it to the ombudsman.

Mike

[mike5100]

I'm afraid the story is getting worse:

This is what my space in Swiftcover is now showing:

 

Claim Number:

12345

Policy Number:

123456

Incident Date:

29/12/2009

Insured:

Mike

Vehicle:

Lexus

Registration:

ABC 250

Claim Type:

Accident (hit)

Current Status:

Open

Liability Position:

Fault (Admitted) - NCD affected

Excesses

Compulsory:

Voluntary:

 

£250.00

£250.00

[mike5100]

Thought y'all might be interested in the following calculation. There is an understanding that a not-at-fault accident might affect your premium because there is evidence that people who are involved in such an accident are more likely to be in an at-fault accident in the next 12 months.

 

Well - as you can see Swiftcover have hiked my renewal from £206 to £357 and implied that it's because (for now) they have reduced my NCD from 5 to 3 years.

 

BUT .... from what I can find NCD is typically 30% for the first year, 40 for second, 50 for 3rd, 60 for 4th and 65% for the 5th and subsequent years. If you plug these figures into a simple calculator you can work out what the undiscounted premium is.

 

So before they knew someone had bumped me my undiscounted premium was £588 but now it's £714.

 

If this is true - apart from being a scandal - surely if insurance is aimed at putting me back into the same position I was before the event, I need in effect 5 years of this difference in premium from the guilty party. In my case as well as him fixing my car he should have given me about £600 cash to pay for my increased premiums.

 

Mike

[mike5100]

Hope I'm not boring you guys but I'm using this thread to record the sequence of events as this unfolds (as well as inviting your valued opinions of course)

 

OK - got confirmation of the ncd rates from Swiftcover for each of the years, and using the same arguments I have used in the post above means they used an undiscounted premium of £515 first time round, and £640 after I had informed them of the accident - in other words they seem to want to load my basic premium by £125 for a not-my-fault accident.

Also they have 'kindly' confirmed that I won't be able to take out protected ncd bonus as I don't have 4 or more years ncd on my policy

.... you've got to laugh haven't you

Mike

[mike5100]

Mossey - hope you are still reading this.

I have been trying to get alternative quotes prior to the Swiftcover renewal on 19th Feb, and despite me explaining what has happened other insurers say they can only quote me on the basis of the 3 yrs ncd that Swiftcover have got me logged as. So it looks like they have got me over a barrel, and their plan (if they are that clever) is not to remove this spurious 'fault claim' until after the renewal date.

If I am being extremely generous and warm hearted I can see that it is possible that they may think I'm lying and that a 3rd party claim may drop through their door any minute. But .... and this is the question for Mossey ... might they have internal systems that allow them to believe me, close the supposed claim, but re-open it if indeed a 3rd party does attempt to claim. Of course they might argue that it would be difficult to get the extra money out of me, but surely they would be in the position of power and be able to cancel the policy unless I paid up.

And a connected question - if they wished to be cynical, could they keep open the 'claim' indefinitely?

Mike

[sailor sam]

This really encourages people to report such incidents to their insurers for 'record purposes only' dosn't it!...? Seems to me its just an excuse to charge you a higher premium. You certainly need to complain formally.

 

__________________

Please Note

 

The advice I offer will be based on the information given by the person needing it. All my advice is based on my experiences and knowledge gained in working in the motor and passenger transport industries in various capacities. Although my advice will always be sincere, it should be used as guidence only.

 

I would always urge to seek professional advice for clarification prior to taking any action.

 

Please click my scales at the bottom of my profile window on the left if you found my advice usefull.

[mike5100]

Hey I might be getting somewhere. This is from Adam in the claims department:

"Thank you for your email

 

I have spoken to the file handler of your claim and advised that all repairs have been completed privately.

 

They have now closed the claim for you. "

 

I'll give them a few hours then check if the file has been updated. Hopefully the renewals department will be just as efficient.

Mike

[mike5100]

Looking like a result with Swiftcover, and if it goes through OK, full marks to them. Latest quote now without the courtesy car and legal expenses is back to £210 which is only £4 more than the original renewal notice.

A result ..... but whew it must have taken several hundred quidsworth of my time.

Mike

[Mossycat]

Good to hear.

 

What you have to appreciate is that Insurers have developed systems that are designed to efficiently process a large volume of claims in the most manageable and logical way possible. Obviously these systems are designed around the normal chain of events that ensues after an accident has happened, in this case it didn't follow the normal track, ie you reported it to them after it had all been settled without involving them, hence why it took time to sort it out, the fcat that you were so close to renewal made that time delay all the more frustrating to you.

 

Mossy