Hello all
In September i had a very minor car incident on a country land in
Cornwall. Narrow road my car and another had a little squeeze and
there was a little damage to both vehicles.
2 insurance adjusters came out to see my car and view the damage....
that was over 4 weeks ago and i had heard nothing. I was working in
Dublin for that period and thus did not need my car. However on my
return i called the insurance company to see why i had had no contact
from them and why my car had not been taken away for the work to be
done.
I was told my insurance had been suspended because they discovered i
had modified the vehicle without telling them and therefore my
insurance is invalid! i have a Rav 4 which has tinted windows in the
rear... it came like this 2nd hand from a dealer. Apparently the
windows are not standard i didnt know that and that if i had informed them at the time
of insuring that i had tinted windows they would have not insured me.
I find this a bit ridiculous to say the least and am at a loss as to
what to do.
I genuinely did not mislead them and had no knowledge that this was in
fact a "modification"! I have had an insurance claim and bodywork
done on the same vehicle by a different insurer in the past and this
was never mentioned or an issue? Are they just trying to wriggle out
of the claim? Who should i talk to? Any advice much needed and
gratefully received!!
Many thanks
|
I am no legal expert but the law has an element of common sense. You need to do seek legal action ASAP as this could effect you getting insurance in future.
It may be worth contacting the financial onbudsman at some point too.
There is a website which is full of lawyers but I can't remember the name of it :(.
They are just trying to wiggle out of a claim on a legal technicality but you can also argue your case. If you had none standard alloys, lowered suspension etc they have a point.
I had a MK4 Fiesta with none ford wheel trims and I had to declare them as a modification, thats how mad it was, although they didn't charge me extra for that.
|
Legally they have a case. It is up top you to disclose any non standard features of your car when taking out the policy. If you do not they can void the policy from inception.i.e you have no insurance.
In the circumstances however the decision, whilst legally correct, does seems harsh so I would write a letter to the Insurance Company explaining the situation and asking them to reconsider their decision. If still unsuccessful I would refer the matter to the financial ombudsman.
www.financial-ombudsman.org.uk/
Good luck
|
|
As a start is it possible to establish whether the window tint is definitely an after market modification (eg by aplication of film) and not a factory fit option?
|
We have that argument about my dads alloys, they are original Ford (the standard four spoke ones fitted to Fiesta Ghias) but it I have seen plenty of Fiesta Ghias the same age without them which suggests it was an option.
We ended up having to declare them as a modification even though they were fitted by Ford in Essex.
|
>> I was told my insurance had been suspended because they discovered i
>> had modified the vehicle without telling them and therefore my
>> insurance is invalid! i have a Rav 4 which has tinted windows in the
>> rear... it came like this 2nd hand from a dealer. Apparently the
>> windows are not standard
They are on dodgy ground. To make it easier, find out whether there was an option to buy "pimped glass" when the car was new. If there was, you can tell them. A Toyota dealer may be able to advise . It sounds as though they're trying it on - the tryer-oner could be just the first contact you had in the claim, it might not be genuinely a problem. You could also read the small-print in your policy, and possibly contact a "legal advice" firm if you paid for this as an add-on to insurance.
Re windows, se:
www.carpages.co.uk/toyota/toyota_rav4_15_12_04.asp
Ask about your car on:
toyotaclub.co.uk/
|
>> To make it easier, find out whether there was an
>> option to buy "pimped glass" when the car was new. If there was, you can
>> tell them. A Toyota dealer may be able to advise .
>>
I wouldn't go down that route immediately. Manufacturers chop and change specs according to what is available at the time of build.
My car has folding door mirrors the model year later they were an optional extra then the following year became standard again. It's a bit much to expect the middle year owner to have to declare them, especially if bought as a used car by someone who just wants a car to get them from A to B.
If the OP still has the advert with pics show the car as bought with any supporting documents use that to show you did not modify the vehicle.
|
>> of the claim? Who should i talk to? Any advice much needed and
>> gratefully received!!
>> Many thanks
>>
talk to LucyBC, she is/was dealing with a case just like yours here:
www.honestjohn.co.uk/forum/post/index.htm?t=84967
Last edited by: John H on Thu 14 Oct 10 at 14:49
|
|
Here in Germany any mod you do to a car it must have a TUV certificated if not your in bother its not a free for all like the UK and aleviates any problem like this.An example would be new alloy wheels if the new wheels do not have a TUV certificate to say they are compatible with your type of car you forfit your insurance and could have a massive fine especially if you are invovled in a accident.
|
Who was your insurer?
It is quite unusual to refuse the claim for this! Usually modification which affects performance or safety of the car can have this implication.
|
Admiral declined to offer cover for my old 205 diesel becuase it had been fitted with the steering wheel from a scrapped GTi.
Car had served in a driving school; the OE thing was manky beyond belief while the GTi version was faux leather. Same diameter and everything.
|
When asked "any mods" by my insurance company my response is always "not so far as I am aware".
Assuming those tinted windows are legal, I cannot see how they can wriggle out of the entire claim. If they are not legal (too heavily tinted, for example), then it may be quite a different matter.
|
>> When asked "any mods" by my insurance company my response is always "not so far
>> as I am aware".
>>
>> Assuming those tinted windows are legal, I cannot see how they can wriggle out of
>> the entire claim. If they are not legal (too heavily tinted, for example), then it
>> may be quite a different matter.
>>
The same here, you can only answer the insurance companies' questions in good faith . I have no clue whether my 4th hand 14 year old Vectra has been modified.
I recall when this came up on the BR some time back a bit of digging of the insurance ombudsman's findings showed that in most cases the punter's insurance was declared valid despite the insurance companies' protestations about 'modifications'.
|
|
Interesting read, I've fitted a dog guard and an additional mat to the X1 (all BMW sourced and fitted) does this mean I have no insurance !?
|
I would certainly give them a ring. I was unsure about my wheel trims so I phoned Directline and they advised they had to be declared but there would be no extra charge.
With insurance companies it is better to be over the top to avoid this game.
|
As Rattle says, over the top is best.
I even mentioned I was on blood pressure tablets the last time I took out my policy on the phone and they said if I hadn't mentioned it there would indeed have been an issue in the event of a claim, so you do have to think of everything.
At least they can't hold that one against me if it ever comes to it.
|
Just thinking of my own car, I have bought some FIAT mats from my FIAT dealer, they say Panda on them, I wonder if I have to declare them?
I have a boot tray in the back of my boot, and a clip on LED light which is AA battery powered.
I think there really needs to be a court case to test what insurance companies cannot and can legally get out of paying for.
I would guess 80% of cars have sort of modification that insurance companies refuse to pay out for.
|
|
i have a suspicion that the OP's insurance company is one of those that you wouldnt look at twice even with two brown bags on your head at renewal time though
|
the OP's insurance company is one of those that you
>> wouldnt look at twice even with two brown bags on your head at renewal time
I thought the same and would like to know the name of the company for future reference.
Would you care to name them OP.
|
>>
>> With insurance companies it is better to be over the top to avoid this game.
>>
But how over the top do you go?
PU's dog guard is a good example, is that a modification?
I've put non OEM wiper blades on my lovely Vectra - modification?
How about mudflaps?
Where does it end?
|
Blimey, that's got me thinking now...
The 10 year-old Megane I bought recently came with 185/65R15 tyres, whereas I know they should be 185/60 section. I suspect the previous owner fitted them on the grounds of cost (the correct size is nowhere near as popular). They are all pretty new, so I'd be loathe to replace them :-(
I'd imagine the real-life difference is minimal - but could an eagle-eyed assessor cause problems should I be involved in a costly accident?
|
>> could an eagle-eyed assessor cause problems
>> should I be involved in a costly accident?
I do not see how they can expect the average driver to be aware or check for such technicalities. If you replaced them at that size against advice, perhaps...
|
|
OMG ! Get your tyre valve caps nicked and you now have a modified car.
|
Does a nodding dog and dangling dice count as a modification?
Or a chrome exhaust trim?
Or a tasteful gold stripe along the sides?
Or a blow up doll in the passenger seat?
|
I wonder if the tint is ileagal and that is the issue - i.e. obscured view caused the accident. If that were the case then I would say that was fair.
www.parkers.co.uk are usually pretty good for specs and options on used cars - may help you establish if it was a factory fit
|
Oh no......
I didn't use Ford oil when I serviced my Mondeo....
... Or Ford screenwash.
In fact, I didn't use genuine Ford water either.
Any one know what make of petrol was used 12 years ago in the factory in Genk?
|
The insurance company is 1st central. I wont be using them again and neither will a lot of people i know in the media business. i am a Cameraman that also works on watchdog and will keep them in the loop too.
Does a SAT NAV in the front windscreen count?
A childs sun visor (ie tinted window) in the rear count?
They have said "its in the hands of their underwriters" and are not telling me who that is!?
The windows are not too dark they are the same colour as the vehicle and are in the rear passenger section only, not the rear windscreen. Not even visable by the driver whilst driving!
Its ridiculous.
|
How do you feel about taking them to court? I think the press could get involved here too. If they don't budge they need showing up as you have not done anything wrong and I am sure the law will see that.
If you threaten them witht he FSO I always find it does the trick too.
It looks like you have the media connection to really show them up. I think us motorists need to do know where we all stand on this. I used my LED light today in my boot and I was thinking does this count as a mod?
|
I've been looking at their site www.1stcentralinsurance.com/download/PolicyWording.pdf
Seems more is not covered than is!
There's an 'interesting' piece on page 10
''if, following an accident, you or anyone named in the Certificate of Motor Insurance as entitled to drive, is convicted of driving whilst under the influence of alcohol or drugs, the insurers liability will be limited to the cover required under the Road Traffic Act and the insurers will reserve the right to recover any amounts the insurers are required to pay''
Note there is no timescale mentioned.....
reads to me, that say, if in 10 years after a claim, if someone you had on your policy gets done for d&d then you may have to pay back the costs of the claim!
here's the bit that their using as the get out (also page 10)
''any modifications unless they are standard fittings or manufacturers optional extras''
|
It reads to me if they are convicted of being under the influence of drugs or booze as a direct result of the accident which is fair enough.
Admiral told me on the phone "if the named driver is under the influence of drink or drugs after an accident we can refuse to pay" which is fair enough.
However what is under influence? It dosn't have to over the limit does it?
|
maybe I'm reading more in to that piece than I should, but I don't see were it states the offence has to be at the time of the accident, or in fact the person found guilty had to be driving that car at the time of the accident.
''if, following an accident, you or anyone named in the Certificate of Motor Insurance as entitled to drive, is convicted of driving whilst under the influence of alcohol or drugs, the insurers liability will be limited to the cover required under the Road Traffic Act and the insurers will reserve the right to recover any amounts the insurers are required to pay''
Surely it should state something like;
''if, following an accident, you or anyone named in the Certificate of Motor Insurance as entitled to drive, is convicted of driving at the time of the accident whilst under the influence of alcohol or drugs, the insurers liability will be limited to the cover required under the Road Traffic Act and the insurers will reserve the right to recover any amounts the insurers are required to pay''
The way it reads (to me) is any of the named drivers if found guilty, after a claim, could cause the insurance company to reclaim any monies paid.
|
It would never stand up in court though, the statement surely has to be ilegal.
|
SwissTony>> here's the bit that their using as the get out (also page 10)
>> ''any modifications unless they are standard fittings or manufacturers optional extras''
No, I don't think so. That seems to say that if you've paid £100 extra to have your windows tinted, AND have told the insurance company so that the premium is increased and then the windows are broken, then they won't pay the extra £100 for the tinting.
|
>> also works on watchdog and will keep them in the loop too.
>>
It would be a great service to consumers if this sharp practice by Insurers gets referred as a "super complaint" to the OFT.
www.oft.gov.uk/OFTwork/markets-work/super-complaints/
|
www.oft.gov.uk/OFTwork/markets-work/super-complaints/
> is this not just another useless quango thats going to the pyre?
|
>> i am a Cameraman that also works on watchdog and will keep them in the loop too.
I hope you told the insurance company that - many will not offer cover for people with your job(s).
|
Exactlly it is getting very very sillly but I fear until a case goes to court insurance companies can carry on trying this on.
|
Having just bought one and researched the models/specs...
In 2007 Toyota went from a XT-3 and XT-4 spec (with spare wheels on the back but no privacy glass) plus SR-180 (no spare but with privacy glass) to XT-R spec only with no spare wheel and rear privacy glass.
In 2008 they tweaked the models to add cruise and bluetooth telephone as standard but kept rear privacy glass.
Does this help?
|
Just realised that's who my insurance is with...................
The good folks over at moneysaving expert speak highly of them.....NOT
Also just noticed that on fully comp policies they DO NOT cover you to drive other cars
|
|
OP thanks for letting us know who to avoid, hopefully you're in the right job to be able to exert some media pressure and get a just outcome, the whole thing smacks of sharp practice.
|
Toyota RAV 4 - Insurance wriggling out of payments! - RattleandSmoke
