Reply With QuoteSorry to hear of your fathers passing
What’s your policy ? sD& pleasure and too and from a permanent place of work?
You’ve clearly said to them you finished work and came home
I would really appreciate some advice if anyone can help . Not sure I should really be bothered at the minute as my father passed away on Wednesday night from heart complications brought on by pulmonary fibrosis. I’m all over the place.
I am not well versed in insurance companies or claims .
I had a minor collision in March this year leaving my road after returning from work. I left my place of work to return home -commute over . I picked my children up after going in my house , preparing them and leaving for school . I class this as a separate journey and under my social and domestic cover .
However when I reported it all to the insurance company I was in such a state of recollection. I said I’d been at work finished , came home , I got my children and they have sort of ran with the fact that I was at work and would not let me backtrack my version of events one bit . But it immediately became apparent this was to void helping pay for the damage . Or at least that’s how I can see it . I tried to explain that as far as I can see the stages of travel were under different circumstances but the insurance lady on the phone insisted i had said that I was at work and “it was on tape” .
I also explained I had camera footage of myself returning and a statement from works manager to show my shift ending .
They have followed up the case today via email to inform me they won’t be paying nothing as I voided the claim being under the incorrect insurance and sign within seven days to prevent a CCJ.
If I am way off the mark then I’ll have to suck it up but I thought best to ask possibly if anyone has experience in this sort of thing .
To make matters worse the car in question is driving round fine , has passed it’s MOT in August this year . I am not ignoring some cosmetic work would of been required as I sought quotes for the other driver and they did also when we discussed dealing with it outside insurance but they decided otherwise later on .
Many people will think I have better things to think of at this time but I’m trying to keep my focus but really would like advice whether this is worth challenging?
Much appreciated in advance.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Sorry to hear of your fathers passing
What’s your policy ? sD& pleasure and too and from a permanent place of work?
You’ve clearly said to them you finished work and came home
Thanks Lewie , much appreciated
I’m social and domestic but I had been at work finished my shift and returned home . Then I stopped at the house and took the children to school. I may have initially said the whole process together to them but within minutes realised what was going on and said it needs breaking down into stages I’d came home from work and took my children to school.
My policy did just cover me for social and domestic but not Commuting to and from work . I’m retrospect for the sake of all this I should have took out all of it .
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Well they always state they recorded conversations on the phone
I presume the position of the car would indicate you were leaving you house (also presume you were working nights )
They must take this into consideration
Unfortunately you are going to need a solicitor for this (but i think the solicitor will need you to prove you are out of pocket otherwise you can’t take the insurance company to court?), otherwise complain to the insurance ombudsman (free)- it is not beyond the realms of belief that you were somewhat ‘shook up’ after the accident. Ask the insurance company for either a copy of the recording or a transcript - bet they wont assist. Who are you insured with btw?
Yes Lewie , that’s correct I’d finished a night shift and we have requested just now via email a transcript . I know what it will show me very nervous and unable to recollect the version or events or me struggling the order or events leading up to it . As soon as I tried to put them in chronological order I was told it’s too late -I’ve said it now and they have to accept what I said initially. Bear in mind this was all during one conversation.Originally Posted by lewie
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Thanks for reading and replying . I’m with or was with 1st National . We have replied just now to the email for a copy . I was nervous I’ will admit after the bump and on the phone and was trying to be as honest as possible but my recollection was blurred . I think I began my recollection of journeys too far back and the insurance company just clung to it immediately and I asked for managers etc but she used the “we have you on tape clause “
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Perhaps a properly presented timeline of the facts in writing might set the record straight before things deteriorate further?
Why should you let it go? You’ve paid for the cover.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
You will need to inform the ombudsman. They will advise whether you will need to exhaust your insurer's complaints process first or whether they will get involved now.
Sent from my SM-A145R using TZ-UK mobile app
Thanks for replying Linocut. I do feel strongly on this and would be happy to present a clear timeline . I tried to initially offer home camera footage and shift rotas but they would not accept it as evidence.
The policy increased dramatically to reflect the repairs or so I assumed and heard no more.
The worse part is my camera footage cloud has erased after so many months - I did not expect this and believed it was only my car they would not offer to repair .
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Last edited by bond; 3rd September 2023 at 20:03.
Thanks . I think your right - I will seek the ombudsman on the matter and see what to do next .
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I expect if you used the car for the commute they are considering that you breached the terms of your policy and therefore the entire policy is void - regardless of the specific circumstance of your claim.
I’ve no doubt their small print will be watertight on this if it is the case.
"Bite my shiny metal ass."
- Bender Bending Rodríguez
Hi Stooo , thanks .
This is the whole argument I’ am presenting to them since the very beginning. The car commute from work to home is outside the policy cover . I can accept that but my paid cover began after that return home journey when I began a social run with my children . Unless there is some time discrepancy they have I am unaware of between the commutes / social runs .
Where does a work commute begin and end or is there an allowance/overlap for a domestic run ? I’m certain returning from work , parking up and leaving with children is a completely separate journey and purpose . I tried to iterate this strongly but it is like they are versed in using any grey area in the book to void my claim . I hope the ombudsman can shed light and clarify
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Last edited by bond; 3rd September 2023 at 20:29.
Stoo’s point is the one that occurred to me. If you don’t have commuting on your policy but admitted to using it to commute, I would think they could use that to void the policy. It wouldn’t matter that the accident occurred during a school run. I’m not sure you can choose what journeys are covered and which are not. Might be useful to speak to someone with some expertise in this. Sounds like a really stressful situation.
Unfortunately I suspect Stoo is correct here - you’ve openly admitted driving on a commute which you’re not covered for so your entire cover is probably void. I get the two separate journey position but I don’t think that will work given your admission.
Very sorry about your father’s passing. Best wishes to you and your family
Thanks . I understand what your both saying . We have got in touch now with a friend who worked in insurance and is hopefully able to help from us requesting the transcript and forwarding to the ombudsman and she will also read it . All in line with other’s suggestions here so I’m hopeful .
It could not of came at a worse time really losing my dear dad on Wednesday night and my wife is a month from giving birth.
Such is life I guess.
Thanks all for the advice
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Thanks for the best wishes much appreciated.
If this is the case then and I’m wrong , I will have to accept it but it just feels rather unjust as they did nothing to indicate termination of the policy only advise to add it to the policy which was done so immediately.
It may be a case of I live and learn in this situation but when they are quick enough to split hairs over journeys then should it not applicable when reversed or queried according to terms of the policy vs actual events ?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I’m certainly no expert so hopefully you can work something out. Good luck
I am inclined to agree with you when put like this - the admittance of a works journey will be the overarching reason it’s voided .
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Thanks anyway Peck . I hope also .
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I’m surprised a social domestic and pleasure policy excludes commuting to work, I understand ( and have ) business use in addition to SD@P but that’s because I do use it for my work.
Cheers..
Jase
Many have expressed this to me and are unable to fathom how they pick and choose wording for journeys. I guess my naivety has been my downfall as I just thought I was insured .
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
It has not generally included commuting for a long time (cynically it helps them make a few extra ££'s).
When you look long into an abyss, the abyss looks long into you.........
You either use the car for commuting to work, or you don't. These are very clear boxes to tick on any insurance policy.
It sounds like you do use the car for commuting to work, but you've stated that the car is only used for Social, Domestic and Pleasure, hence insurance saying your policy is void.
It doesn't matter what time the accident happened, you lied about how you use the car.
I might be missing something but it sounds like you were breaking the terms of your insurance.
Commuting to work to a residential street to park for a night shift about a mile away . I’ll admit I should of looked at it closer in retrospect and I’m only the secondary driver - the kicker is I didn’t even take out the policy , I’m a recently passed driver and my only excuse is I never dealt with it before. It was all done for me through compare the market .
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Last edited by bond; 3rd September 2023 at 22:00.
I think you are looking to redefine what will be well defined, contract clarified, or accepted terminology.
You should put serious thought into taking the hit and moving on so you can focus on the loss yourself and your family are sadly going through.
"Bite my shiny metal ass."
- Bender Bending Rodríguez
Probably right . Thanks stoo.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Frustrating situation, but unfortunately I think the insurer is probably in the clear on this one if you've taken a policy that excluded commuting.
On the bright side at least it's not much worse, just think how bad the situation could be if the accident had been more serious. You were effectively driving around uninsured. Could have hit a Rolls and then you'd be really upset..!
My professional liability insurance precludes ‘manual work’ and there is a specific clause the voids the cover should it be shown that I did perform ‘manual work’ during the cover period - even if completely separate from any other claim aspect. (And from memory - in prev years)
I guess it takes a significant claim to warrant a full investigative job.
So - I can see your issue.
As others have said, this will be due to the fact that the policy you took out was only for SDP and did not include commuting too and from a place of work.
Insurers started offering this a number of years back to help reduce peoples premiums and try and remain competative when premiums rose dramatically due to "cash for crash" and the "Wheres there's blam there's a claim" culture.
A lot of accidents occur during the commuting journey as typically these are done at peak traffic times (a lot of insurers now ask if you drive in peak traffic times), and as a lot of people no longer use the car to commute one way to reduce the risk and lower premiums slightly was to offer a policy without commuting.
Unfortunately when a lot of people take out insurance they just see the price and choose the cheapest option, assuming everything is covered, often without realising that things may have changed since last year, or that the policy may be completely different if it's not the same insurer as last year, which is why insurers alsways tell you to read through all the documents carefully.
In the OP's case, it seems a bit harsh that they are refusing to cover his claim as the ombudsman has made it clear that if the "non disclosed risk" (in this case commuting) is one that the insurer would have normally accepted, they can't cancel the policy and should just charge the increased amount that the premium would have been if they had known this from the start.
Ahh as others have said looks like you’ve not been insured for the drive to work- so you’ve breached your policy
Sorry to hear
You have to abide and use the vehicle as insured- I don’t insure my bike to carry a pillion ( I don’t like it) so I’ve removed the rear pegs
Last edited by lewie; 4th September 2023 at 08:38.
Pay very close attention to the wording of the letter from your insurer. If there is a suggestion that they decline to offer insurance this must be disclosed when you renew and this may attract an increase in premium.
As others have said, get proper advice.
I'm sorry to hear about your insurance woes, bond - it will work out OK, one way or another. But I'm much more sorry to hear about your father - my condolences to you and your family. With best wishes, Jonn
Assume your quote history and profile will still be logged with Compare the Market. Every comparison site I have used asks what level of cover is required , where the car is parked during the day and at night “company car park” etc. Double check what you declared. Obviously if the quote cited a works car park it is reasonable to accept the assumption of cover would be for SD&P to and from a place of work.
Naturally this approach would not excuse you of any omissions as you have the responsibility to check the wording of the policy when redirected from the comparison site to purchase the product, but it would indicate that you had not intentionally misrepresented your circumstances to take advantage of a cheaper price.
On a related point - unless you have a rear cowl, a pillion pad and no pegs - is an MOT fail.
Good point. Used to get this a lot with policy holders failing to declare modifications. Fitting an aftermarket exhaust but not informing the insurer was not grounds for voiding and refuting a claim for example.
Sorry to derail the thread
Oh really
I never knew that - by pad do you mean seat? The pegs and hangers are removed and deletes are installed - my seat is a 1 piece
I will keep this in ind in a couple of years when it has its 1st MOT
Neither of my old IT’s even had pillion pegs
Akro by biglewie, on Flickr
Last edited by lewie; 4th September 2023 at 10:50.
Is non-disclosed the same thing as giving wrong info though? I can see how that applies to a car modification for example, where it wasn't specifically asked about, but if in the insuring process he said he doesn't commute I wouldn't have thought that would then count as a non-disclosed risk?
Not last Saturday it wasn’t. Although I too believed it was.
Doesn't seem harsh to me (sorry OP).
What's to stop everyone not disclosing commuting, paying a reduced premium every year and just paying the difference if they have to claim.
It’s tricky when you sort your insurance online- when I owned a convertible I was astonished that the first few companies I got quotes for through compare the market specifically didn’t cover the roof against damage. If it was damaged in an accident it was covered but not if somebody took a Stanley knife to it. I found a specialist that did cover such an eventuality but it was a fair bit more expensive (although not the £1500 - £2000 cost of a new hood!) - you can tick all the boxes you like on their website but you have to read the reams and reams of paperwork! - when I spoke to a broker they were shocked the roof wasn’t covered by their competitors (the car was parked overnight on a garage in a sleepy part of the uk so I was just being careful - but that’s what insurance is for imho!)
In that context, if he disclosed he does not commute (when he does) then it's a falsehood. This may impact future insurance applications.
When you look long into an abyss, the abyss looks long into you.........
I think what a lot have missed it’s not his policy, he’’s just a named driver. The insurer seems to working to the letter of the policy, they all will to get out of paying for something. I doubt he’ll get any joy out of the ombudsman and should just put it down to experience and make sure the policy cover him for whatever he’s going to use the car for in the future. At our place we have to provide a copy of our insurance to cover business use just to be able to be sent to different sites as commuting doesn’t cover that.
Sent from my iPhone using TZ-UK mobile app
The OP too, referring to ‘his’ policy.
Anyway, don’t see that this will alter the outcome…
He definitely says ‘my policy’- also are you saying that you are needing to pay for the 3rd party’s damage - did I miss who was at fault in the accident ?
There are two conflicting statements, but it would appear he is a 'named driver'.
But - the insurers ask "will the vehicle be used for commuting?" not whether each driver on the policy will use it for different purposes.
I think the failure to state accurately what the car would be used for will cost the OP. As someone above rightly says - if all it took was to pay the difference retrospectively - it would undermine the whole insurance concept.
Sorry to hear about your father. Take care.
This commute to work bit is a total con to raise a few £
If I use it to get to work then what difference is it to them?
It seems very arbitrarily why not ask if I use the car for the school run or perhaps I need to see on my elderly parents every morning or any number of daily yet cost free activities.
I can see if it’s used for work purposes but not just because I am going to my place of work.
Total scam
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Yes, it's a ruse to get more premium (it used to be included on most policies by default), but there IS justification for it.
If you commute to work it is generally true that traffic is higher during the accepted commute times of day and that you use the car more often than someone who leaves it parked most days and just visits friends/relatives and does the shopping. Therefore risk of an accident is higher.
I understand that but going to work is singled out from other possible daily activities like school run or visiting elderly parents just for example
Every day our neighbour’s children visit as the parents are getting on a bit the old man a couple of doors up takes his car to get his paper and rolls then stands at the corner and chats to folk for an hour before returning home.
Why am I subsidising these activities just because I use my car for work. Just another con that of course can be reasoned but the cart is leading the horse and the sheep follow without a care
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Posting Permissions