daviep
|
| posted on 4/3/12 at 04:05 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by vanepico
Hmm, that completely defeats the point of insurance then doesn't it!
If you have to pay for the 3rd party, my £2000 a year is going down the toilet. You might aswell just not have insurance and pay it to them straight.
Why would you expect an insurance policy to cover you when you are not complying with the terms and conditions stipulated in the policy?
The terms and conditions of cover are quite clearly printed on your policy, you can even read them before accepting a policy, should you choose not to
do your homework then it seems fair and reasonable that you should suffer the consequences.
Cheers
Davie
“A truly great library contains something in it to offend everyone.”
|
|
|
|
|
vanepico
|
| posted on 4/3/12 at 04:27 PM |
|
|
in that example before about the alloy wheels, how would they prove that those are modifications or how would you prove they weren't? There is
an infinite amount of things the insurance company could say is not 'safe' on your car or something else to invalidate the insurance.
I have never had to claim anything on insurance luckily but this is a bit scary that the insurance company can turn round and say "hmm that
keyring on your keys has obviously caused your car to crash" and there's not a thing you can do about it.
I bet they'd claim if you'd put a cable tie to hold a wire on they'd say that was a modification if it got them out of paying up.
|
|
|
daviep
|
| posted on 4/3/12 at 04:45 PM |
|
|
quote:
Originally posted by vanepico
in that example before about the alloy wheels, how would they prove that those are modifications or how would you prove they weren't? There is
an infinite amount of things the insurance company could say is not 'safe' on your car or something else to invalidate the insurance.
I have never had to claim anything on insurance luckily but this is a bit scary that the insurance company can turn round and say "hmm that
keyring on your keys has obviously caused your car to crash" and there's not a thing you can do about it.
I bet they'd claim if you'd put a cable tie to hold a wire on they'd say that was a modification if it got them out of paying up.
You need to learn to read properly, no where does anybody say the wheels were dangerous or contributed to the crash.
When you accept a policy you are entering in to a contract where both parties have obligations, where the insurer thinks they can prove that the
claimant has not fulfilled their obligations then they will say the contract was broken by the other party and refuse to honour their side of the
deal.
Cheers
Davie
“A truly great library contains something in it to offend everyone.”
|
|
|
Ivan
|
| posted on 4/3/12 at 04:54 PM |
|
|
Does Britain not have an effective ombudsman to fight unreasonable decisions off insurance companies like that re the wheels?
|
|
|
morcus
|
| posted on 4/3/12 at 09:33 PM |
|
|
There are ways to check if something has the correct wheels but most people wouldn't bother. It has nothing to do with safety.
Someone I work withs cousin was once hit by a bus and his car had slightly unusual wheels which the insurance company for the bus (Whose fault it was,
recorded by it's own camera system) claimed they didn't have to pay out because the car was modified and thus not insured. Fortunatly
though the wheels were fitted ordered with the car when new, and amongst the paper work he'd gotten from the previous owners he found a reciept
proving this which he had to produce before he could claim. Thats just how it works.
None of these things being moaned about are as bad as anyone is making out, if they didn't do this then more money would be spent paying for
accidents caused by illegal driving, ultimatly paid by everyone who buys any form of insurance.
In a White Room, With Black Curtains, By the Station.
|
|
|
alistairolsen
|
| posted on 15/3/12 at 06:45 PM |
|
|
Some of the new cancellation refunds are also absolutely mental, Ive just dragged right choice insurance brokers (RCIB) through the ombudsman
My Build Thread
|
|
|
JoelP
|
| posted on 24/3/12 at 07:25 AM |
|
|
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-17489887
Agrees that they have to cover third party losses by law whatever has happened, so they can only bill you if it specifically says they can.
Beware! Bourettes is binfectious.
|
|
|
vanepico
|
| posted on 24/3/12 at 10:45 AM |
|
|
I agree 100% that if you've dui'd you don't deserve your car fixed, but what if you hit someone else? they should definately payout
then. I hope they do when I inevitably end up getting hit by a drunk driver -_-
|
|
|
