@SwintonGroup - deny deny deny - Insurance Mistake - ***Won***

[BankFodder]

I didn't know about the Consumer Insurance Act – this is very useful information. Thank you.

 

 

I should put in a comment that your inadvertent error has in no way affected the risk.

[Foxy100474]

I found this on a RAC forum dated 2016.

Quote

 

About 2 weeks ago I was pulled over by the police for having no Insurance, I was shocked at the time as I've been driving for 20 years and never driven without insurance. Anyway after a difficult half hour in the back of a police car my vehicle was seized and I was told I would be fined £300 and given 6 penalty points. I couldn't understand what had gone wrong until I returned home and realised my mistake. My wife and I have 2 cars, both Peugeot's with registrations that both begin with the same 4 letters and numbers. In January I received my renewal and as it had increased slightly so I decided to switch insurance companies, problem was I insured the wrong car leaving one car with 2 policies and the other with none. I appreciate this was my mistake and I would have been happy to pay the fine but I was worried about the points, due to the nature of my work I was worried a motoring offence of this nature might affect future work. So in a desperate attempt for help I was googling around trying to find any answers, when I happened across a thread on the RAC forum from 2 years ago where somebody had experienced the exact same situation. As I read down the thread there was a member called 'dacouch' who explained that the Consumer Insurance Act of 2013 states that if the misinformation to the insurance company was neither intentional or reckless and it was just careless, that the Insurance company should honour the insurance and issue a letter of indemnity for the time of the incident. Dacouch even went on to explain exactly what to say to the Insurance company. So after a week of 'discussions' with the Insurance company they agreed to send me the letter of indemnity. I then sent this to the CPU who have issued me with a letter today to say they will no longer be pursuing the matter! 

 

 

 

BankFodder, thanks for your input, i will wait for Unclebulgaria to cast his eye over it before i send it. 

[unclebulgaria67]

I did not note the Consumer Insurance act, as I did not feel it was totally relevant, when the make/model was the same. Which is why i asked about the risk information being the same.

 

if it is purely a typo, with two letters round the wrong way, then it is silly of anyone from Swinton to say you were never Insured. Yes the MID would not have the correct information, but that can be corrected. Swinton will have a process with the underwriters to correct the data showing on the MID from the correct date.

 

I think your letter can be shorter and clearer.  You need to mention, who from Swinton told you were not Insured and they would not issue any confiirmation you had Insurance from the correct date, when it was simply two letters of the registration entered the wrong way round. 

 

If you say that the Swinton official is effectively voiding insurance for a period due to a typing error, it is much stronger.  

 

And your letter might confuse. You asked third party insurers to deal with repairing your car.  The problem is they won't do so, because Swinton have not confirmed that Insurance was in place and you were not driving while uninsured.  Tell the Swinton complaints manager what you want.  1) correction to MID from correct date showing Insurance in force or 2) At least letter/certificate showing Insurance from correct date to provide to other Insurers.

[Foxy100474]

Thank you all for you input, i have now emailed Swinton and will let you know what they say as soon as i have a reply

[Jamberson]

The policy insures your vehicle, not your registration number. So long as your insurer is happy that it is the same vehicle, I can't see why they cannot confirm cover from the policy's inception. I would get into dialogue with them and get them to confirm cover throughout, and then the other insurer would have no grounds to refuse to pay for your damage. (Indeed, they would be logally obliged to.)

[Foxy100474]

Well I’ve still had no response from the complaints department! Is this normal is should I chase it up??

[ericsbrother]

there is case law that is on your side thought eh circumstances are not identical.

Basically a person cannot rely on an unlawful activity to negate their responsibility.

an example was a car hit a parked car that was on double yellow lines.  it was claimed that as the parked car was there illegally no payout. Court decided that wasnt the case.

 

there are others, your problem si swimming through custard to get the insurer to do the right thing. you might  well have to sue the person wo rear ended you to ake all of the others wake up

[BankFodder]

Further to my post of last Saturday in relation to ICOBS, here are the particular regulations you need to rely upon

 

Quote

Cases where rejection of consumer’s claim is unreasonable: contracts on or after 1 August 2017

ICOBS 8.1.2A G 01/08/2017 RP

1. (1) 

   Cases in which rejection of a consumer’s claim would be unreasonable (in the FCA’s view) include, but are not limited to rejection:

   1. (a) 

      for misrepresentation, unless it is a qualifying misrepresentation (see ICOBS 8.1.3R);

   2. (b) 

      where the claim is subject to the Insurance Act 2015, for breach of warranty or term, or for fraud, unless the insurer is able to rely on the relevant provisions of the Insurance Act 2015; and

   3. (c) 

      where the policy is drafted or operated in a way that does not allow the insurer to reject.

2. (2) 

   The Insurance Act 2015 sets out a number of situations in which an insurer may have no liability or obligation to pay. For example:

   1. (a) 

      section 10 provides situations in which an insurer has no liability under a policy due to a breach of warranty;

   2. (b) 

      section 11 places restrictions on an insurer’s ability to reject a claim for breach of a term where compliance is aimed at reducing certain types of risk; and

   3. (c) 

      sections 12 and 13 provide for the extent to which a firm is entitled to reject fraudulent claims.

ICOBS 8.1.2B R 01/08/2017 RP

For contracts entered into or variations agreed on or after 1 August 2017, a rejection of a consumerpolicyholder's claim for breach of a condition or warranty (that is not subject to and within section 10 or 11 of the Insurance Act 2015) is unreasonable unless the circumstances of the claim are connected to the breach.

Definition of a qualifying misrepresentation

ICOBS 8.1.3 R 01/08/2017 RP

In this section, a “qualifying misrepresentation” is one made by a consumer before a consumer insurance contract was entered into or varied if:

1. (1) 

   the consumer made the misrepresentation in breach of the duty set out in section 2(2) of the Consumer Insurance (Disclosure and Representations) Act 2012 to take reasonable care not to make a misrepresentation to the insurer; and

2. (2) 

   the insurer shows that without the misrepresentation, that insurer would not have entered into the contract (or agreed to the variation) at all, or would have done so only on different terms.

 

[Note: section 4 of the Consumer Insurance (Disclosure and Representations) Act 2012.]

 

https://www.handbook.fca.org.uk/handbook/ICOBS/8/?view=chapter

 

Quote

11Terms not relevant to the actual loss

(1)This section applies to a term (express or implied) of a contract of insurance, other than a term defining the risk as a whole, if compliance with it would tend to reduce the risk of one or more of the following—

(a)loss of a particular kind,

(b)loss at a particular location,

(c)loss at a particular time.

(2)If a loss occurs, and the term has not been complied with, the insurer may not rely on the non-compliance to exclude, limit or discharge its liability under the contract for the loss if the insured satisfies subsection (3).

(3)The insured satisfies this subsection if it shows that the non-compliance with the term could not have increased the risk of the loss which actually occurred in the circumstances in which it occurred.

(4)This section may apply in addition to section 10.

http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2015/4/part/3/2017-08-01

 

And basically what all this gobbledygook means is that if you have breach the insurance contract in a way which has not affected the risk to the insurance company – then they are prevented from rejecting your claim or denying your insurance.

 

It looks to me as if the relevant legislation is the Insurance Act 2015

 

 

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

But see also my post where I have explained that the relevant legislation is probably the insurance act 2012

 I have to say I'm a little confused because I don't really understand how the insurance act 2012 and the insurance act2015 fit together – but clearly they are intended to do so.

[Foxy100474]

Thank you Bankfodder,  I will give Swinton until tomorrow evening to reply to my email then I shall chase it up again. 

[BankFodder]

Yes, good idea – but I wouldn't spend too much time on corresponding. These people generally count on the fact that eventually their customers will give up. They only really take notice when you cut to the chase and they receive the good news.

[Foxy100474]

What’s my next step though?? Do I need to get legal representation to make them listen?

[unclebulgaria67]

Phone them Thursday if no response by end tomorrow

[BankFodder]

You will not need legal representation. You can do everything here with our help. If you get legal representation you will end up with a protracted exchange of letters and a legal bill and you may get nowhere.

Follow the advice above, call them – having implemented our customer services guide. See what they say. Come back here and tell us.

If it hasn't been sorted out by this phone call then if you are prepared to threaten and bring a legal action, we will help you do this. Your chances of success will be much better than 95%.

[Foxy100474]

Ok great thank you. I will post again Thursday evening. 

[Foxy100474]

just received this after putting a comment on Swintons FB page regarding there rubbish customer service!

You'll receive a letter in 5 days’ time confirming that your complaint has been escalated. The letter will also give you contact details of who to call in relation to your complaint, should you wish to call. However, our Complaint Handler is also likely to call you to learn more about your situation and the impact it has had. We have up to 8 weeks to investigate your complaint but aim to get back to you quicker. We'll respond to you in writing about how we are going to resolve it. 

[BankFodder]

Well @unclebulgaria67 may have a different way of dealing with this and you should wait to see what he says. However, I find that their attitude is so outrageous and so unlawful that my approach would be to reject their time scale out of hand and to start taking control by offering them an ultimatum or 14 days or else there will be a legal action.

Wait and see what UB says but consider it all and and monitoring this thread for a fuller reply tomorrow.

 

 

 

 

[Foxy100474]

Ok will do. Thank you. 

[unclebulgaria67]

I am sure that it was just wrong info provided by the Swinton person you spoke to and a phone call to their head office will resolve.  You paid for the Insurance and just need confirmation that the typo error with the registration has been corrected from date you added the car to the policy and that the car has been continually insured. 

[Mwynci]

 

16 hours ago, ericsbrother said:

there is case law that is on your side thought eh circumstances are not identical.

Basically a person cannot rely on an unlawful activity to negate their responsibility.

an example was a car hit a parked car that was on double yellow lines.  it was claimed that as the parked car was there illegally no payout. Court decided that wasnt the case.

 

there are others, your problem si swimming through custard to get the insurer to do the right thing. you might  well have to sue the person wo rear ended you to ake all of the others wake up

 

Yep, bottom line is the Op's property was damaged as a result of a negligent party, the op needs to challenge them on this bases, not just leave this to the mercy of Swinton, the FOS or the courts. 

 

The third party insurers challenge is based on the fraud challenge, - i.e. if you think you have a case stand up in court and say it, leave a court make the decision.

 

I'm sure if the info is as simple as presented a judge would not even take into consideration the lack of insurance, as long as the vehicle was roadworthy and road legal and there was no other evidence to suggest fraud. 

 

The OP needs to make politely clear to the third party insurer that they are looking into the insurance issue, however regardless of this, they still require settlement for their vehicle which was damaged by their negligent customer, and will accrue costs (even if it's just loss of use) until settlement. 

 

The potential to prompt this into action may get this issue resolved, the claims handler may be just having a quick challenge, knowing there's not much chance, the customer can then look into the policy issues without the pressure of the timescales. 

 

People uninsured for whatever reason get their (non  fault) claims settled all the time. 

 

 

Edited January 8, 2020 by Mwynci
errors

[Foxy100474]

Thank you, i will contact the third party insurer and see what they say

 

[Mwynci]

1 hour ago, Foxy100474 said:

Thank you, i will contact the third party insurer and see what they say

 

 

Ok, good luck,  be assertive, from your perspective,  in your honest opinion, you had every right to be on the road, your mistake or no mistake about cover (it's not their business to know the ins and outs) made no difference to the fact their customer hit your vehicle.  

 

 

[Foxy100474]

Hi All,

           So heres an update, after still hearing nothing at all from Swinton today i rang their complaints department, Guess what! nothing on record at all about the email i sent to Carol Banks the head of their complaints department! I was told because she was the head of complaints she wouldn't look at complaints!!!! I then told them that i was astounded that she hadn't even passed it on to a member of her department to deal with! I was basically told that a complaint had now been raised and i would hear back within 8weeks!!!

I really am lost for words.

I was also fobbed off by the third parties insurance saying until they were provided with proof of insurance they would not be able to look into my claim.

What a waste of time!!!

 

[BankFodder]

Did you record the call?

[Foxy100474]

Unfortunately not, i have been unable to purchase a recorder due to work commitments and needed to make the call during office hours which again is hard for me due to restrictions using a phone in my workplace.

 

[BankFodder]

Well I'm afraid that you are losing the opportunity to gather extremely valuable evidence. I really don't know what to say. Are you not receiving calls on a mobile phone and are you not able to install an app?

How did you manage to make the call to them when you discovered that they weren't dealing with your complaints? Have you not read our customer services guide?