Insurance won't pay out after theft, what can I do ?

[wakeymatt]

I recently had my motorbike stolen for the 3rd time and now the insurance won't pay out !

They say when I took out the insurance I didn't inform them of the previous 2 thefts however I didn't see anything on the form asking for that information.

Do I have any rights in this situation that I can fight for ?

I've been a victim of crime 3 times now and if that wasn't bad enough I have lost all my money on this bike and everything I paid in insurance.

 

I don't feel I have done anything that would seriously invalidate my insurance even if what they say is true.

By not declaring a previous theft would do only raise the premium of my insurance of which I would be happy to be deducted from my claim.

On the other hand if they really are insistant on not paying me out for the theft that I thought I had cover for, then what have I been paying them for in the first place ? surly i'm entitled to a refund for my premium if they are not going to honor their end of the deal ?

The letter I have been sent also contains no real evidence to support their claim. I'll upload it incase anybody can help me find something that will help me with this matter.

Peace :

[Mossycat]

When you completed the Inusrance proposal there will most certainly have been a caveat that said if you fail to disclose or hide any material facts your insurance may be invalid/void, if you are uncertain what a material fact is you should disclose the information.Having suffered 2 previous thefts is almost certainly a material fact and you are obviously aware of it because you state that any increase in premiums due could be deducted from the settlement, had that been disclosed then the insurers may well have decided that they wouldn't offer theft insurance.I'm not surprised your claim has been turned downMossycat

[wakeymatt]

I know it sounds clear cut but I honestly had made a genuine mistake on the form. Their is no mention of the word "theft" in relation to claims in fact the actuall wording is " Has the driver had any accidents or losses, whether at fault or not and regardless of blame in the last 5 years" Now to me I thought that was talking about accidents and losses in relation to this and not if I'd had to make a claim from theft.

I would say this wording is not clear and open to misunderstanding hence my case.

Upon inspection of my aplication I also state I have no no claims discount and this would support my evidence in not trying to decive the insurance of my previous claims.

If askied the question "have you ever had and claims resulting from theft in the past 5 years my answer would have been yes !

[Dragons Dennis]

No. Crystal clear I'm afraid. If you have a collision OR theft (loss) whether it is yoru fault or not, it statistically puts you at more risk of another collison/theft. All isnurers will load the premium accordingly. Insurance is a business. They have no actual interest in giving you money, their only real interest is getting it. Thus they will ALWAYS look for a way out. Ah, but you didn't mention.......

 

No use at all saying after the fact that you did not realiuse. The question is crystal clear, 'any accidents OR LOSSES...' You obiously said 'no' when you shoudl have said 'yes'. Had you answered honestly they may have made an additional charge, no additional charge or declined to insure you altogether. As you did not answer honestly, you have in effect lied to obtain insurance and thus nulled the policy. You would be entitled to a refund of your premium paid less any administration charge. No payout for you though.

 

Sorry if that sounds hard lined. That is the way it works though.

[Mossycat]

I wasn't referring to the accidents, claims or losses question.I was referring to the caveat that is on every single insurance policy that says if you fail to mention or disclose a material fact then your insurance maybe invalid or void.You failed to mention a very material fact, therefore you cannot now expect them to deal with the claim.Mossycat

[wakeymatt]

Guys I know what you are saying is fact however I intend to prove that I've not intentionally withheld any information at all. In fact I can prove they had knowledge of one of my claims as the first bike i had stolen was insured with this same company. Also their is a big difference between intentionally withholding information and making an honest mistake. If they don't see it my way then I will sue them if needs be.

[Mossycat]

I'm not saying you withheld information, I'm saying you failed to disclose information and for that reason you will lose if you try to sue them.

 

Mossycat

[wakeymatt]

well I feel its worth looking into more closely but I appreciate your input Mossycat, good to see a fellow from good old Wakey on here

[Dragons Dennis]

Insuranmce companies are not interested in whether you forgot, made an 'honest mistake', had a bad hair day or anything else. They ask youy a question upon which the decision and cost of insurance is based. You said 'no' when you should have said 'yes'. Which ultimately means (for whatever reason) that you did NOT disclose the previous accidents or losses on that form and thus your insurance is cancelled.

 

Furthermore, if they have cancelled your insurance you MUST answer 'yes' in future to the question 'have you ever had insurance declined or cancelled'.

[borisbeaver]

I got caught out when recently insuring my car. I had an accident last year and last month, I agreed to a 50/50 settlement for personal injury. I have had a letter from the previous insurer stating that it was a no-fault accident and I stated this on subsequent car insurance . With the payout of my claim, I bought the new car, again stating on the insurance application that I had a no-fault accident. I then get a letter from the broker stating that my accident was a fault one. It appears that when the claim was settled, an insurance database was updated stating a 50% liability and therefore affected my premiums. The brokers, Swinton, were fantastic. They contacted Aviva and the solicitors and confirmed that I wasn't given the full story. It did increase my premiums by £10 a month though. Moral of the story - if you have had an accident in the past and informed your insurance of this, it will be on record.

[wakeymatt]

so you don't think I have a case for them adjusting the payout to reflect the higher policy if I had properly disclosed the previous claims ?

 

To be honest I don't think i'll be getting theft insurance anymore even if I could, i'm just going to get 3rd party cover that apparently I can't be refused by law.

Much cheaper and it just means I will have to take extra action to protect my property !

Edited June 15, 2011 by wakeymatt

[watchinginvestigation2011]

Unfortunately you will lose if persue it. There is no compassion in the insurance industry for errors genuine or not due and you will unfortunatly have to learn by it as distressing as it is. I am not saying this scenario is you, but how can an insurance company distinguish between deliberate non disclosure and pure genuine error? They cant so have to be hard line with no leeway due to the dishonest people out there xx

 

Whatever it was wether theft or accident it would be classed as' a claim' and needed to be declared to protect yourself just incase wether though relevant or not in either case.

[watchinginvestigation2011]

Lets hope the police on this third occassion manage to find you bike xx

[wakeymatt]

Well interestingly that opens up a hole new bag of worms.

I recently contacted my estate agent about moving flats due to being targeted by thieves. I was met with quite some hostility and was told I would have to pay re listing fees and also if I did move I would have to keep paying rent until my current flat was rehoused. As its just not finically viable to move under these terms i'm stuck where I am until my contract finish's later this year.

I started investigation how I could combat the thieves and started with the most obvious things first the security cameras on our property. Now the cameras in question I was told were a deterrent and not actually operational upon having my first motorbike stolen. Now recently the estate agents have said the cameras now are operational but had neglected to tell us the residents this. This meant that when I reported the theft several months ago I was under the impression their was no operational cctv and told the police as such. If it transpires their was cctv available at the time of the theft and its still on record then hunky dory however if its been deleted do you think I have a case against the estate agents for some kind of negligence ?

[raydetinu]

no!

[wakeymatt]

Ok now i'm trying to get 3rd party insurance and I can't get a quote as I checked the have had insurance cancelled box.

So does this mean I can never get insurance now even though i've never had an accident in my life and only claimed for thefts ?

This is ridicules !

[raydetinu]

who have tried?

suggest specialists:

carol nash

Bennetts

Adrian flux

footman james

[wakeymatt]

I can get insurance from Adrian flux but they are asking for over a grand a year for 3rd party only insurance, I just don't get how they can charge so much for 3rd party cover as i've never had an accident in 17 years of driving and riding.

I'm considering not checking the have you ever had insurance cancelled or voided and using the defence of the issue is in dispute ?

[raydetinu]

dangerous ground, if you have had it cancelled or refused and say no! they can refuse any claim you make in the future.

premiums are always higher even if youve had a no fault claim, and is based on risk!

[wakeymatt]

Yup I know mate, what I don't understand is why i'm getting charged so much for only 3rd party cover when i've never had an accident in all my life ?

[my-spirit-soars-free]

From the insurers point of view, they have lumped you in with other people who have lied on their proposal form, the insurer does not know whether it was deliberate or not.

 

People who tell deliberate lies on their proposal form have proved that they are happy to lie to insurance companies, and are therefore more likely to lie on their claim form - so effectively, you are paying the price for false claims.

[wakeymatt]

So i'm being punished financially with no reason other than they think i'm a liar so I should pay them more money, the actual money i'm paying is to cover what exactly ?

[raydetinu]

I think this something you need to discuss with your insurers.

[my-spirit-soars-free]

Insurers assess who we are, and shove us in a specific group of people, and they think they know roughly what value of claims will come from this group of people. For instance, my risk of having an accident may be 1% - this does not help you predict when I will claim - but if there are 1000 of us with the same level of risk then the insurer knows that approximately 10 will have an accident every year. The premium is therefore calculated at one hundreth of the average claim payout, plus insurers overheads, plus profit.

 

You have been shoved in the same group as people who deliberately tell lies on proposal forms. You are therefore in a group that contains people who use deliberate lies to put in false claims - and even RTA insurance can be used to get a payout for a mate in a "staged accident".

[nicpaice]

From my own experience, Adrian Flux will defend even the most untenable position than show any decency towards their clients. By their own admittance a clerical error left me in uninsured position. Their stance was such that the matter was taken to Financial Ombudsman Service.