Rapscallion

[QUOTE=Saxo Boy,Jul 13 2006, 03:23 AM]
I'm currently trying to find where the legal requirement to do this is set out. What constitutes an 'accident' that requires you to inform your insurance company? If you write off three cars and kill 10 people in a blazing fireball its clear cut that your insurance should know. What if someone scuffs your car though and you spend all day Saturday with

Saxo Boy

You can start to see why the pikeys just don't bother with insurance. I've paid,

Dan Hale

Cool - it says "please ensure you include all claims OR accidents. . ."



"why didn't you tell us about your accidents"

"I decided I'd tell you about the claims instead"




Shouldn't they actually have AND there instead.

Saxo Boy

Well spotted and I agree with your position

euan

Nayhting that's a "material fact" has to be disclosed to them normally, under the terms.

It's not "the law" as such, as the insurance contract is civil, but if you don't tell them a material fact, then there is breach of contract, you aren't insured, and you then break a real "law".

What is a material fact is debatable, but put yourself in the insurance companies shoes and think what would make you wary about taking on a risk. Given a choice between insuring someone with and without a no-fault accident, I would go for the "without". I always inform my insurers about my venison and mutton interfacing incidents, although as I paid for the repairs myself and they only amounted to c

Saxo Boy

"Material Fact"

Ok, my car is insured for Social, Commuting and Buisness Class 1. They know that I work as a Town Planner and they know that I work with a Local Authority. They will therefore know from all these facts that I will very likely be an Essential Car User with the relevant Authority and thereby required to supply my car to perform my duties. This is confirmed by my request for buisness cover which costs more and I wouldn't have if I wasn't going to use it.

All this being the case the company knows that I will use my car daily, for work purposes and that I'll park it in a Local Authority car park - they can make their risk assessments accordingly. My car was hit by another driver in said Council car park, whilst being parked for said work purposes. All of this is in accordance with the risk assessment they would have made based on the information I provided them with. I therefore argue that the minor damage incurred is not material as all of the facts have previously been fully assessed and embodied within my most recent renewal offer.

If I had parked it in Tesco's long stay car park which is used by Council employees as an overflow then that would be a material fact as the insurance company would not have previously known that I am prone to parking in a public car park during the day and would want to take due recognition of that fact.

SiDHEaD

[QUOTE=euan,Jul 13 2006, 01:45 PM] I always inform my insurers about my venison and mutton interfacing incidents, although as I paid for the repairs myself and they only amounted to c

lower

Playing devils advocate here because i don't want to seem unsymapathetic.

The insurance company knows all of the above, but it doesn't know the exactly how tight your car park is, and it doesn't know how many muppets park in it that can't drive. The however know, that statisically, people who make one claim are more likely to make another. Hence they load you premium even though the accident wasn't your fault because statistically you're likely to make another claim.

The easy way out of this is to shop around at renewal time.

Gee Whizz

Very interesting post guys. I too suffered from a non fault accident 2 years ago and I am still paying the price for it now through increased insurance premiums.

Unfortunately I was stupid enough to get one of these "free" solictiors to pick up my case as they were associated in some way with the bodyshop my car was in. They successfully pursued the 3rd party and I was awarded the total loss value of my car plus