Void Insurance Causing Problems

[Franky0707]

Hi all.

I recently had my car insurance made void by the underwriters due to them interpreting my occupation as different to what my business ACTUALLY is.

 

Asda/Southern Rock are claiming I should have put "Door Supervisor" as my occupation in their dropdown box. I selected "Other - Professional" from the first dropdown box, and "Security Services" from the second dropdown box.

 

I argue that even though I was performing Door Supervisor duties at the time my car was maliciously damaged, my business includes Surveillance, Security Guarding, Manned Guarding, and other security duties within the security industry.

In fact, the Nature of Business as described on Companies House is "80100 - Private security activities".

I also argue that if I were to put Door Supervisor as my occupation, and were to perform one of the other duties that my company provides, then Door Supervisor would be misleading to the insurers. Hence, why "Other - Professional" and "Security Services" was the most accurate description from the dropdown boxes.

 

I have complained to the Financial Ombudsman about this.

 

I have a new job starting with Sunwin/Co-Op over the next couple of weeks, where I will be employed, rather than self-employed. The job is a Cash and Valuables in Transit Officer, which mainly involves driving.

 

My question is: Now that the underwriters have made my insurance void, I am struggling to get personal motor insurance.

Will my personal insurance being made void affect me getting insured on my new employer's business motor insurance?

[unclebulgaria67]

Hi all.

I recently had my car insurance made void by the underwriters due to them interpreting my occupation as different to what my business ACTUALLY is.

 

Asda/Southern Rock are claiming I should have put "Door Supervisor" as my occupation in their dropdown box. I selected "Other - Professional" from the first dropdown box, and "Security Services" from the second dropdown box.

 

I argue that even though I was performing Door Supervisor duties at the time my car was maliciously damaged, my business includes Surveillance, Security Guarding, Manned Guarding, and other security duties within the security industry.

In fact, the Nature of Business as described on Companies House is "80100 - Private security activities".

I also argue that if I were to put Door Supervisor as my occupation, and were to perform one of the other duties that my company provides, then Door Supervisor would be misleading to the insurers. Hence, why "Other - Professional" and "Security Services" was the most accurate description from the dropdown boxes.

 

I have complained to the Financial Ombudsman about this.

 

I have a new job starting with Sunwin/Co-Op over the next couple of weeks, where I will be employed, rather than self-employed. The job is a Cash and Valuables in Transit Officer, which mainly involves driving.

 

My question is: Now that the underwriters have made my insurance void, I am struggling to get personal motor insurance.

Will my personal insurance being made void affect me getting insured on my new employer's business motor insurance?

 

Should not affect a commercial motor Insurance arranged by your employer in their name. They are more interested in convictions of any variety.

 

Think the Insurers have made a mistake voiding the policy. The FOS view this as something that should only be done in exceptional circumstances. It is not your fault that the occupation data capture on the online facility is faulty. They should automatically not quote online for anyone in the security industry and ask people to call them. Then this issue could be avoided.

[Franky0707]

Thanks for your reply.

With what you said in mind, would it not be the insurers duty to ring me once "Other - Professional" had been selected so they could find out exactly what me occupation entails BEFORE insuring me?

[unclebulgaria67]

Thanks for your reply.

With what you said in mind, would it not be the insurers duty to ring me once "Other - Professional" had been selected so they could find out exactly what me occupation entails BEFORE insuring me?

 

Yes they should have contacted you for more details. But really they should not have allowed you to obtain a policy online and should have made the occupations stop a policy being issued, with a requirement to call them.

[BankFodder]

Where was the car when it was damaged? Was the damage anything to do with your job?

[Franky0707]

The car was maliciously damaged whilst I was at work, and my car was parked on the road in the city centre near my place of work.

Four out of the five wheel nuts were taken out of the rear-left wheel, and the nut that was left in was loosened. My wheel came off whilst I was driving on the motorway on the way home from work. I had to call recovery at 6.30am in the morning.

[BankFodder]

But you haven't answered the question - was the damage anything to do with your job?

[Franky0707]

I don't understand in which context you mean was it anything to do with my job? Can you elaborate please?

Yes, I was at work when the individuals took the nuts out of my car. The police couldn't find anything on the city centre camera's to convict anyone though.

[BankFodder]

For instance, were the scallys who damaged your car, angry at you because you bounced them out of the club?

Did they know who you are?

Is there any evidence that in some way they damaged your car because of some incident which occurred while you were carrying out your duties

[Franky0707]

No, nobody was bounced out of any club. The individuals who I claim it were didn't/don't know me, and I presume they were just trying to prove a point after being refused entry after closing time by my colleagues. I just happened to be there. I guess I was in the wrong place at the wrong time.

[BankFodder]

In other words, the damage had nothing to do with your job - or to put it another way, your job did not materially affect the risk in any way. In that case I would say that the insurer is acting unlawfully and you can take action against them if you want - although it will take effort and persistence.

If you are up for it - and up to it, come back here tomorrow and I'll tell you what to do. I have to go out now

In the meantime look at ICOBS - r.8.1.2 http://fshandbook.info/FS/html/handbook/ICOBS - because the answer is all in there.

[Franky0707]

Yes, I'll be back on here tomorrow. Thanks for your advice, and I'll read through your link.

[unclebulgaria67]

Yes, I'll be back on here tomorrow. Thanks for your advice, and I'll read through your link.

 

That fact that it happened while you were at work and the Insurers see a connection is the reason for the voidance. But I still think that you did not deliberately give any false information and are a victim of the Insurers internet system being too loose in regard to their underwriting of occupations. The Insurers should realise that anyone in the security industry may carry out a variety of roles and many will have to use their car to travel to their place of work.

 

Did you properly disclose that you were going to use your car to commute to various places of work ? If not, this may be the main reason for voidance.

[Franky0707]

Their reply in writing for voiding my insurance was as simple as "We do not insure Door Supervisors".

[BankFodder]

Insurance companies are not allowed to refuse cover for some reason which does not affect the risk.

 

The usual trick is that they try to say that you must report the incident within 48 hours or else you are not covered. This is unlawful.

 

If yo are prepared to argue that the damage to the car was not related to your job in anyway so that your job did not create or contribute to the risk - then the insurers should have paid out.

If they are not able to show that there is some term which says that they will not cover people in your profession, then they are acting unlawfully.

If you are able to say that you answered the online questionnaire as fully and as honestly as possible, then there is no basis for them to refuse cover.

 

You have gone to the FOS. In addition to this taking a long time, they are unlikley to find in your favour because they don't seem to challenging industry practice and because they don't seem to be keen to cut new ground.

 

If you want to deal with this quickly and seriously then you would have to consider a small claim in the County Court on the basis that the insurers have breached ICOB r.8.1.2 in that they have refused cover for a reason which has nothing to do with the risk - and that they have breached COBS in that they have treated you unfairly in that they did not communicate with you fairly and that they were unfair in rejecting you even though they entered into a contract with you on the basis of information which was correctly entered into their online questionnaire.

 

The insurer will raise a storm about this because they won't be used to being challenged in this way. Insurers regularly breach ICOBS and no one ever does anything about it. Here is your chance to stand up to them if you want.

It won't be straightforward but it would be sporty with a high chance of success.

[Franky0707]

To quote the letter sent from Southern rock, the underwriters:

 

““It has come to our attention that you are a door supervisor.

 

When completing your policy online via (Asda) to commence on ??st October 2012, you were asked to enter your “Occupation” You entered “Other – Professional”, this was clearly incorrect.

 

Had we been aware of the above at inception of the policy, we would not have offered insurance under any terms. This was material information which you failed to disclose.

 

May I draw your attention Asda’s “Terms of Business” which clearly state the following:

 

Disclosure of Information

 

CVD expects you to provide complete and accurate information when you take out your insurance policy, throughout the lifetime of the policy and when you renew your insurance. If you’re unsure about disclosing information please contact us for guidance. Any information that may influence your insurer to accept, amend or decline your insurance proposal or renewal must be disclosed. If you’re unsure about disclosing any matter please contact us for guidance.

 

Failure to disclose any material information or inaccuracies in the information given could invalidate you insurance cover and mean that part or all of your claim not be paid. Any advice we offer will be based on the details you provide.

 

You’re reminded that it is an offence under the Road Traffic Act to make any false statements or withhold any relevant information to obtain a Certificate of Motor Insurance.

 

May I also draw your attention to the “Policy Wordings”, under “General Conditions Applying to the Whole Policy, it clearly states:

 

Your Duty

 

Changes which may affect Your Cover

 

Your insurance cover and premium is based on the information You supplied to Us in the most recent Statement of Information. You must check the details carefully when You take out Your Insurance Policy, throughout the lifetime of the Policy and when you renew Your insurance. If You are unsure about disclosing any information please contact Us for guidance on (Asda).

 

Failure to disclose any information or inaccuracies in the information given could invalidate Your insurance cover and mean that part or all of Your claim may not be paid.

 

Note: If You fail to provide complete and accurate information to the best of Your knowledge and belief when You take out Your insurance Policy or if You do not tell Us about any relevant changes, We may:

 

• Reject Your claim.

• Reduce, make deductions from or pay only a proportion of Your claim.

• Cancel and invalidate the Policy.

• Void the Policy, which means to treat as though the Policy never existed.

• Do a combination of the above.

All changes should be made online at (Asda)

 

You should keep a record of the information You give in relation to this Policy. If You did not or do not give full and accurate information or You fail to notify Us of any changes in circumstances, this Policy may be rendered invalid and We may refuse to deal with any claim You might make.””

 

I argue that I DID give the most accurate information to the best of my knowledge because I used the most viable options that were available to me online at the time.

 

Asda are also saying that they will give a full refund, but this still voids my insurance, not fixing the problem.

 

If I were to accept my car back, will this affect the dispute I have with Asda, even though the car is my property?

Do I now seek legal aid?

[BankFodder]

 

If I were to accept my car back, will this affect the dispute I have with Asda, even though the car is my property?

Do I now seek legal aid?

 

What's the bit about not having the car about ?

You didn't mention this before.

 

You won't get legal aid for this

[Franky0707]

Eldon Insurance, the claim handlers, took my car because it had to be recovered from the motorway. Consequently, it was cat d written-off. And now they are saying they will return my car, and Asda have said today that they will be returning my premium. And my point is that the car is still my property, because the Asda have said the policy is voided from the inception, which means it never existed.

[BankFodder]

Well in that case you have to write them a formal letter.

Put them on notice that you rject their position and that you consider that the insurance is not void.

Tell them that you answered all the questions on their online application as honestly as you could within the constraints of the questionnaire which was designed by them using their own experience and expertise.

 

Tell them that their letter is not accurate as it refers only to the part which mentions "professional". However, you indicated that you are a professional and that you then went on to indicate "security services" and that if they had any questions then they had all of your contact details and could have raised the matter with you but they chose not to.

 

Point out to them the description at companies house.

 

Tell them that you are not a door supervisor but that you are a security professional and that you offer a range of security services. However this has included acting a door supervisor from time to time.

 

Tell them that in any event, the damage which occurred to your vehicle had nothing to do with your professional life but that if they believe that it did, then they should explain in what way this was.

 

tell them that in any event they are attempting unreasonably to reject your claim

(1) non-disclosure of a fact material to the risk which the policyholder could not reasonably be expected to have disclosed; or

(2) non-negligent misrepresentation of a fact material to the risk;

 

as per rule 8 of the FCA's Insurance:Conduct of Business Regulations.

 

Warn them that you consider that they are in breach of their statutory duty and that if they do not restore the insurance and meet the claim as required by the contract, you will be taking action against them in the County Court.

[BankFodder]

By the way, don't expect them to roll over in the face of this letter - you will probably have to take action so be prepared to do it - or don't make the threat

[Franky0707]

So, Asda has said today over the phone that they will stand firm on their decision and send out a final offer of returning me my premium, but still voiding my insurance.

Do I wait until after the letter is received before I threaten them with court action, or do I wait as long as it takes for the likes of the Financial Ombudsman to complete their investigation?

[BankFodder]

Why are you doing anything on the phone?

It should be everything in writing from now on.

 

If you have already begin a complaint to the FOS then maybe you should write to them and tell them that you want your complaint to be considered under ICOBS. However, whatever you do you should realise that nothing will happen as a result of phone calls

[Franky0707]

They phoned me as a result of a letter I sent to them lodging a complaint. I've done all of my part in writing, and will continue to write to them.

Now it's what to write and when.

[Franky0707]

So, if I ask the FOS to consider my complaint under ICOBS, do I still use ICOBS as the basis of my argument when I take it to the County Court?

[BankFodder]

Absolutely. It is the only valid argument that you have. But it is extremely powerful. The FOS is unlikely to go for it - I don't know why but they seem to steer clear of all of the COBS rules.

The court will find in your favour as long as you can convince the judge that your job had nothing to do with the risk