Insurance claim woes

Jono · 19 Jan 2016 at 12:32

Ask them to describe YOU.

Uther · 19 Jan 2016 at 12:33

Oops wrong thread!

robj20 · 19 Jan 2016 at 12:39

Uther said:
Good luck with sorting it out, I'd be surprised if the dealership admitted it was damaged before they sold it, surely that could open them up to all sorts of issues.

Wrong thread maybe?

Uther · 19 Jan 2016 at 12:43

robj20 said:
Wrong thread maybe?

Very much so!

Iamzod · 19 Jan 2016 at 12:47

Steve2000 said:
They did it with me as well, I ran a quote a couple of years ago to see out of curiosity (following a pub conversation) what an IN10 would do to the premium (£1000 more). They sent me a recorded letter along the lines of "You failed to declare your IN10. Your insurance will be declared void in 3 days unless you provide proof otherwise".

I rang them immediately and explained the situation, it took a scan of my license and a three way conference call with the DVLA to prove my license was clean. Even then the tone of his voice suggested he still didn't believe me. What if this had happened while I was away on holiday or away on business for a week? I'd be driving back up the motorway completely unaware I was driving uninsured. Guilty until proven innocent.

I'll never use them again.

What happens if i run quotes for someone i don't like with a drink drive conviction? If they actually act on it they have broken the data protection act surely?

wingman · 19 Jan 2016 at 17:47

Finally a response, despite being naff;

In relation to the above reference.

I have reviewed all evidence available and have requested that the third party representatives return to their client for further information as at present the only information they have provided that matches the policy is the registration.

Once we have a response from them I will return to you with an update.

That's all, a little dry I feel. No aplogies for time, inconvenience or worry that's been caused to me. And furthermore no reassurance about the standing of my policy. I'll avoid Admiral in the future if I can help it.

teenwolf · 19 Jan 2016 at 17:49

they think your guilty of it simple as.

wingman · 19 Jan 2016 at 17:52

teenwolf said:
they think your guilty of it simple as.

I'm certainly no insurance expert but as my agent shouldn't they be looking for out for me in at least some capacity?

Also, it strikes me odd that this apparently happened almost two months ago. Why wasn't it reported sooner?!

Nodiggidy123 · 19 Jan 2016 at 17:53

Based on the information admiral must have known previously. Could it be construed that admiral tried to defraud you?

I'd get the ombudsman involved asap

teenwolf · 19 Jan 2016 at 17:56

wingman said:
I'm certainly no insurance expert but as my agent shouldn't they be looking for out for me in at least some capacity?

Also, it strikes me odd that this apparently happened almost two months ago. Why wasn't it reported sooner?!

they are going to shaft you, go and get some free legal advise.

rodenal · 19 Jan 2016 at 18:32

Some daft replies - escalate through admiral and contact the ombudsman as soon as the prescriptive process tells you. You don't need any legal advice at this stage ( sorry if that was tounge in cheek)

No emails, everything in writing. Explain quite calmly why you have a problem with their handling and tell them what they should do to resolve the problem. Give an expected timeframe for it to happen

wingman · 19 Jan 2016 at 18:47

rodenal said:
Some daft replies - escalate through admiral and contact the ombudsman as soon as the prescriptive process tells you. You don't need any legal advice at this stage ( sorry if that was tounge in cheek)

No emails, everything in writing. Explain quite calmly why you have a problem with their handling and tell them what they should do to resolve the problem. Give an expected timeframe for it to happen

Thanks chap, will heed this advice when the next step is (if at all) called for.

Looking back through my Admiral folder on my e-mails, I've found the last joke they threw my way last year, re; my "modded" car;

It has come to our attention that you have not declared the following information

Undisclosed unacceptable modifications:

Unclassified Modification

Suspension other (not lowered)

Engine chip 11-25% inc BHP

You will recall when you contacted us for a quotation that we asked you several questions in relation to these details. We then recorded the answers you gave on a Motor Proposal Confirmation form and sent you a copy. We asked you to check this form and tell us if any of the details were wrong. As you did not make us aware of any changes we continued your insurance based on your answers remaining the same.

As we have no other way of assessing the risk you asked us to undertake, we relied on your answers to these questions. It is important we hold accurate details, as any misrepresentation of information can result in us cancelling or voiding your policy.

To help us decide whether we will exercise this option, please provide a written explanation within 7 days telling us why you did not disclose this information previously

I must inform you that if we do not receive a reply within the next 7 days you will leave us with no alternative but to cancel your policy. According to General Condition 4 of the Guide to your Admiral Cover, this is your FORMAL 7 DAYS NOTICE OF CANCELLATION OF YOUR POLICY

If we do not receive any correspondence from you within this time, your policy will be cancelled from 21/09/2015.

What if I'd have been on a two week holiday with no access to e-mails when this happened? I'd have had to drive back from the airport with no valid insurance.

Great, aren't they?!

Kenai · 19 Jan 2016 at 20:16

wingman said:
Thanks chap, will heed this advice when the next step is (if at all) called for.

Looking back through my Admiral folder on my e-mails, I've found the last joke they threw my way last year, re; my "modded" car;

What if I'd have been on a two week holiday with no access to e-mails when this happened? I'd have had to drive back from the airport with no valid insurance.

Great, aren't they?!

They just took money from me...

A check of your policy details against our system records has highlighted a discrepancy in the details you gave us. The information differs to that recorded on another quote with us or another company within the same group.

We have included the omitted vehicle modifications. See the enclosed Motor Proposal Confirmation Form. Please note extra condition 11 of your policy applies in respect of non-standard parts replacement.

As a result of this change a balance of £20.68 is due which we will shortly debit from the card details we hold on file. This balance includes any relevant administration charges.

wingman · 19 Jan 2016 at 20:27

Ugh, the more I read about them the more the hatred grows!

Steve2000 · 19 Jan 2016 at 21:51

Admiral are often the cheapest on the comparison list, but as you can see this is for a reason. You get what you pay for.

Kuros · 20 Jan 2016 at 14:41

Alas, this is the reason why most people end up putting fake names whilst running insurance quote jobbies. Open it up in a private window or whatnot and away you go.
I remember looking into getting a quote for commuting to my workplace when I was at uni, I got a call a couple of days later informing me that I had to pay an increase in premium as they had good knowledge that I was using my car to commute (I wasn't as it was on a bus route, I was purely looking for convenience sake).

faheemrazzaq · 20 Jan 2016 at 15:17

muon said:
If this went to court for example, you would provide evidence you weren't in Wigan, have no matching damage with an independent mechanical report etc. and you'd be doing this out of your own pocket.

There are also many people who do get into accidents and then feign ignorance.

I will look at it other way around. It's the other party who are making a claim. It's their job in first place to prove that it was OP that they had the collision with. Do they have any witnesses, any images?

Otherwise some day I can lose some paint from my car by driving against a wall and provide a random number plate to make a claim.

Doesn't sound right. Admiral should be asking the claiming party to provide evidence and not the other way around.

muon · 20 Jan 2016 at 17:01

faheemrazzaq said:
I will look at it other way around. It's the other party who are making a claim. It's their job in first place to prove that it was OP that they had the collision with. Do they have any witnesses, any images?

Otherwise some day I can lose some paint from my car by driving against a wall and provide a random number plate to make a claim.

Doesn't sound right. Admiral should be asking the claiming party to provide evidence and not the other way around.

Yes but you would still defend yourself.

Turning up and thinking there is no way they could prove anything may fail. Also remember Admiral don't know the truth and the third party might have a wealth of evidence in which case they should prepare counter evidence asap.

GSXR Gaz Mc · 30 Jan 2016 at 21:54

is this all done with now? how did u get on ?

wingman · 30 Jan 2016 at 22:06

GSXR Gaz Mc said:
is this all done with now? how did u get on ?

Nothing yet, all I've had is another email to say the the driver of the Clio, who I allegedly rear ended, owns the mobile number of the person who rear ended them, and will contact them to confirm the reg number. Shock horror, my phone hasn't rang...

That was a Thesday just gone.

Fortunately my insurance renewal isn't due until September so the pending claim doesn't greatly effect me as of right now. I am interested in buying a new car very soon though, and it's going to complicate that somewhat.