Jump to content


Car Insurers Refusing To Pay Out


aidanoconnor45
 Share

style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2150 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

Afternoon,

 

My colleagues son has crashed his car into a tree which has written the car off, there were no other parties were involved in the accident.

 

He instantly phoned the insurance company and they offered him the full £3800 subject to him sending the v5 in to them.

 

The vehicle is registered in his mothers name (same address as he lives at home) however he was the only person insured on the vehicle.

 

Once he sent the V5 in with his mothers name on, they've now said that the insurance claim is void due to the V5 being in his mothers name and not his.

 

Is there anything they can do with this? It seems pretty harsh to me! :|

 

P.S... the insurance company in question is Markerstudy uk

Link to post
Share on other sites

Its one of those shady insurers based in gibralter too.

Any advice i give is my own and is based solely on personal experience. If in any doubt about a situation , please contact a certified legal representative or debt counsellor..

 

 

If my advice helps you, click the star icon at the bottom of my post and feel free to say thanks

:D

Link to post
Share on other sites

In principle, my reaction would be pretty well the same as I have expressed in this thread here - http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?458189-Do-I-have-any-hope-%282-Viewing%29-nbsp although I should point out that for some people my response has seemed to be fairly controversial – so let me warn you that there are contrary opinions.

 

The administrative failure in that case was that the driver had simply not sent a copy of his CBT to the insurer – and to my mind this is an extremely minor breach of contract.

 

Your situation troubles me a little more because although on one hand, it could be said that the registration issue has not contributed to the accident, on the other hand I think one has to ask whether if the insurers had known about this problem, it would have affected their decision to offer insurance at all or else if they would have offered it on less favourable terms.

 

I think that you ought to explain to us a little bit as to why the car was not registered in the boy's name.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for your reply.

 

The car was bought by the boys father as a surprise present and they are separated. The reason why the car is registered in his mothers name is because the father had put her details down when the car was bought. They had sent off the v5 quite some time ago for the details to be changed into the boys name and they had got nothing back.. Due to busy lives this wasn't followed up.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Then it may well be already tranfered. Speak to the DVLA. Could be that it was lost in the post.

 

Yes, I think that this is the next step and you should do it urgently.

 

Thanks for your reply.

 

The car was bought by the boys father as a surprise present and they are separated. The reason why the car is registered in his mothers name is because the father had put her details down when the car was bought. They had sent off the v5 quite some time ago for the details to be changed into the boys name and they had got nothing back.. Due to busy lives this wasn't followed up.

 

I'm not quite sure what you mean by "my predicament". I'm very certain that insurance companies escape liability on a huge number of occasions simply by relying irrelevant technical requirements in their contracts but which are in fact unenforceable at law.

 

If you find that the transfer has not been made, then have you any evidence that the V5 was actually sent off and that you attempted to make the transfer?

 

Secondly, I think that you need to do some serious research in order to find out what practical difference – in terms of obtaining insurance or the terms of the insurance – it would have made if the vehicle had been correctly registered.

 

If your research returns the result that it would have made no difference at all and that the premium would have been the same then I think that you are in a strong position.

 

If instead you find that the premium would have been more then I doubt that there is very much that you can do.

 

See what you can find out and come back here.

 

One further thing that troubles me is – as often happens on this forum – that we have friends of friends coming onto the forum asking questions on behalf of those other people and I can assure you that eventually the whole thing becomes a game of Chinese whispers and a load of hard work and eventually we find that the person who really needs the help doesn't have the enthusiasm and we all end up dragging them around like a bag of bricks tied around our necks.

 

I suggest that you carry out the research that I've suggested, get the answers – and come back here. If it looks like a runner then I suggest that you get the boy away from his Xbox and get directly involved. It will be good for him because it will provide him with some transferable skills and it will make life easier for all the people who are prepared to help him.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Where would she stand if it were lost in the post on the way there rather than on the way back?

She will be in the same position as if it was never sent off.

 

She would then have to rely on the fact that it made no practical difference at all to the insurer's decision to insure or the terms upon which the insured. This requires a bit of research.

 

I understand the people have busy lives but quite frankly if this element of the insurance contract was forgotten then it is the problems between the husband and wife and their divorce et cetera which has put this boy at risk of driving around uninsured.

 

Not only does this mean that the boy is potentially committing a serious criminal offence, but it also means that if there was an accident in which some innocent third party was injured – and maybe disabled for life, they would have difficulty getting any proper compensation – simply because your colleague and his wife lead busy lives.

 

Slapped wrists? I think so. I think that you should pass the message on.

 

We will be happy to help you but you will need to get the answers to the questions I have posed.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just a side question... If it ultimately was decided that the insurance policy was void, and that he wasn't covered at all, would that mean that he was due a refund for the entire policy?

 

Also if anything, this has reminded me I need to change the registered address on my car as it's still at my old address (parents house), where the insurance is at my new address. I'm also with markerstudy.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes.

 

Also, don't forget that your new address may affect their decision to insure you on the same terms. If they decide that the postcode is more risky in terms of accident rates for likelihood of theft, then they may use that as an excuse to deny loss if you have an accident.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Registered keeper is not the same as owner.

 

If they were the owner and main driver, and weren't using the mother's "keepership" to reduce the premium: they could argue her being the RK was irrelevant to the claim, and that they should be paid out to.

 

I note he lives at the same address as his mother.

Also this wasn't "fronting" as his mother wasn't insured to drive.

 

I'd argue that RK doesn't equal owner.

The mother being the RK hasn't altered the risk, nor (thus) the premium, even if the change in RK from the mother never happened.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Registered keeper is not the same as owner.

 

If you were the owner and main driver, and weren't using your mother's "keepership" to reduce your premium: you could argue her being the RK was irrelevant to your claim, and that you should be paid out to.

 

Do you live at the same address as your mother?

If not, did you have your address listed (or listed as the 'risk' addresss)?

 

I agree, these are significant questions – and these will contribute to the conclusion as to whether or not the failure to register could reasonably affect the decision to insure

Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree, these are significant questions – and these will contribute to the conclusion as to whether or not the failure to register could reasonably affect the decision to insure

 

I've edited my reply since to reflect OP's friend:

Lives at same address

Didn't have mother on the insurance (so not "fronting")

Link to post
Share on other sites

The situation is thus.

 

If you discover Markerstudy would have insured you had the correct information been declared, they're obliged to pay the claim providing they were not deliberately miss led.

 

If you discover Markerstudy would have insured you had the correct information been declared but at a higher premium and / or with other terms applied to the Policy then they're obliged to deal with the claim subject to you paying the extra and / the terms being applied or they can adjust the total loss payment accordingly. Again providing they were not miss led.

 

I doubt either of the above will apply, but are well worth looking into as the protection you receive from the above is statute law.

 

With regards to him being uninsured, this is not the case as Insurance was in place and for obvious reasons the Insurers cannot back date the voidence of his third party cover except in very rare reasons.

 

He's very unlikely to have been committing the offence of driving without Insurance and any innocent drivers etc that he hit would have been able to claim off his policy even if it had been voided, all be it the Insurers may have looked to him to reimberse them after they had paid the claim but again this is rare

 

 

If they're voiding his Insurance then they should refund the premium unless he was deemed to have deliberately miss led the Insurers, even so most would still refund the premium in these circumstances to provide a clean break

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for your reply.

 

The car was bought by the boys father as a surprise present and they are separated. The reason why the car is registered in his mothers name is because the father had put her details down when the car was bought. They had sent off the v5 quite some time ago for the details to be changed into the boys name and they had got nothing back.. Due to busy lives this wasn't followed up.

 

So if they'd sent the V5 to the DVLA and heard nothing back, how were they then able to send the V5 to the insurers?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Good spot!

Link to post
Share on other sites

The situation is thus.

 

If you discover Markerstudy would have insured you had the correct information been declared, they're obliged to pay the claim providing they were not deliberately miss led.

 

If you discover Markerstudy would have insured you had the correct information been declared but at a higher premium and / or with other terms applied to the Policy then they're obliged to deal with the claim subject to you paying the extra and / the terms being applied or they can adjust the total loss payment accordingly. Again providing they were not miss led.

 

I doubt either of the above will apply, but are well worth looking into as the protection you receive from the above is statute law.

 

With regards to him being uninsured, this is not the case as Insurance was in place and for obvious reasons the Insurers cannot back date the voidence of his third party cover except in very rare reasons.

 

He's very unlikely to have been committing the offence of driving without Insurance and any innocent drivers etc that he hit would have been able to claim off his policy even if it had been voided, all be it the Insurers may have looked to him to reimberse them after they had paid the claim but again this is rare

 

 

If they're voiding his Insurance then they should refund the premium unless he was deemed to have deliberately miss led the Insurers, even so most would still refund the premium in these circumstances to provide a clean break

 

Agree with the above.

 

The Insurers appear to have cancelled, as the registered keeper and owner was not as advised when the policy was taken out. The have refused the claim due to wrong information being given when the policy was taken out. They may not have issued a refund, because of the accident event, just in case the accident was not as advised and a third party comes forward trying to claim. Obviously after a period of time, if this does not happen, they should refund remaining portion of the year.

 

Forget about the V5 for the minute, as i am not sure whether the info given is what happened. Sounds like the mother was given this car registered in her name and she let the Son drive it under his own Insurance. The son then crashes the car and the Insurers see the V5 in the mothers name. Not sure the son has realised that he has made a mistake with the Insurance, until the Insurers cancel the policy and refuse the claim.

 

The way forward in my opinion is to submit a written complaint to the Insurers, with a full truthful explanation of what happened. It is not unusual within a family living at one address, for one family member to Insure a car in their name that belongs to another family member. Perhaps the mother can also write a note to go with the letter to Insurers explaining that she was not using the car registered in her name and let her son Insure it in his name. The son has then not realised about the Insurance questions asking about ownership, as it was his mothers car for his sole use.

 

See if the Insurers will reconsider this as an inadvertent non disclosure, based on a misunderstanding of the questions when taking out the Insurance. The FOS have a policy document on their site about non disclosure issues and they will have dealt with similar complaints. It may be worth having a look on the FOS site. As long as the disclosure issue is purely about who registered the car, there is a reasonable chance of success with a complaint.

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

Many of us drive vehicles that are registered to a third party and we insure and maintain the vehicle. The V5 clearly states that registration is not proof of ownership as a car on HP belongs to the finance company and not the person paying the premium or insuring the car?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Many of us drive vehicles that are registered to a third party and we insure and maintain the vehicle. The V5 clearly states that registration is not proof of ownership as a car on HP belongs to the finance company and not the person paying the premium or insuring the car?

 

Yes, but Insurers ask you for registered keeper and owner details when you ask for quotes. Some Insurers won't insure you unless you are registered keeper. Direct Line refused to Insure my sister on a car that was not registered to her at the time.

We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Link to post
Share on other sites

 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...