Even if you ascertain your insurance company and the whole industry doesn't know about the incident now, what about the possibility it may surface later?
Yes, it is frustrating if your premiums go up, but personally I wouldn't risk it
Yeah I don't disagree, and the part about premiums increasing is a whole different issue (which has been covered by hundreds of threads and articles around the web).
I just wondered whether this sort of thing would be recorded centrally, since I didn't involve my insurance company and was only in contact with theirs, as they admitted fault (via their insurance co) within a day of it happening. I realise now that technically I should have, but I also don't want to shoot myself in the foot.
Edited by Bronan the Brobarian on 14/12/2017 at 12:24
|
|
Just by way of an update I've done a couple of quotes to compare. One declaring the incident and one not. £420 vs £480, so it adds on about 15%. I guess it could be worse!
Not that I wasn't going to declare it at renewal time, that's not what this thread was about, but it's interesting to note.
Edited by Bronan the Brobarian on 14/12/2017 at 15:59
|
|
I had a claim settled by the other partys' insurance. I was insured with the RAC at the time and they assured me it would not affect my renewal or future insurability. It didn't. I did however declare this fact on future proposals, not with the RAC and it didnt seem to affect the policy. However I have no way of knowing if they loaded it a few percent or not. The quotes always seemed reasonable and in line with other similar companies. I suppose if you want to sleep at night it is better to declare or you may not be insured at all!!!
Cheers Concrete
|
I suppose if you want to sleep at night it is better to declare or you may not be insured at all!!!
Very true, although if you check my link above, you'll see that the insurance isn't invalid due to a non-disclosure, they merely have the right to charge you what the premium would have been had you declared initially (or if you've not declared something very serious, they have to prove that they would not have covered you at all).
Across the board my premium increases if I make this declaration on online quotes. E.g. one quote for a car I did was from £800 with an "incident - no claim" declared, or from £655 without any incident. That's a 20% increase. It's criminal.
You're lucky your preium stayed the same, RAC don't seem to be on comparison sites, and Direct Line aren't either, so when the time comes I'll shop around a lot more, but it's pretty clear that it does increase the premium for the majority of companies.
Edited by Bronan the Brobarian on 18/12/2017 at 11:50
|
|
"That's a 20% increase. It's criminal."
Of course, from the point of view of the individual consumer, it seems unfair.
However, the insurance industry, like the bookmakers, calculate their risks very carefully, using the best information they can obtain. Sometimes however, as in your case, it seems that a very crude assessment of your supposedly increased risk has been made.
People who have no-claim incidents are clearly, taken as a group, a greater risk than those who do not.
That's why we should all drive defensively, to minimise the possibility of accidents, whether it's our fault or not. Note - I'm not in anyway casting aspersions on this particular case.
Edited by FP on 18/12/2017 at 12:34
|
|
A 20% increase is quite a hike. Especially for a blame free incident. It certainly makes you think about declaration. Interesting point about invalidation. I think the policy is invalid if they regard the information not declared as 'material' rather than a minor oversight. My guess is they would regard it as the former and you would end up arguing the toss with them, in the event of a claim, not a good situation to be in. They seem to hold all the cards here. This is one case where a good broker could do you some good, if there are any left out there. Online is strictly limited when it comes to understanding a given situation. Keep shopping around, you may get lucky. Good luck.
Concrete
|
|
I'm afraid even no fault accidents tend to increase premiums. Three years ago my car was hit by a prematurely lowered barrier while leaving a municipal car park. At the time I thought it's only hit the Berlingo's longitudinal roof bar so didn't worry. Only noticed the 'ding' in the roof edge 30minutes later at the supermarket.
Council paid up without demur so no loss to me. But my premium still went up at renewal.
The answer to the 'are claims recorded centrally' thin is without doubt yes.
In early 2016 I sought quotes before renewing with LV. When talking to Admiral I forgot to mention the barrier claim (though I did mention a later 'at fault' claim). Not only was the operative at Admiral able to find date etc the barrier incident but she also told me there was a more remote link with a claim in May 2013. At about that time my daughter's boyfriend had bumped a housemates car while parking. The only link we could make was that my daughter was named driver on both his policy and mine.
Edited by Bromptonaut on 18/12/2017 at 16:41
|
|
Well Bromptonaut, that is really interesting. Worrying and reassuring at the same time. Quite a level of detail 'they' have on us, I suppose it just pays to be honest and shame the devil. On most policies the previous 5 years seems to be the main interest to them, but I wonder of they go back further when assessing the risk. I wouldn't put it past them.
Cheers Concrete
|
|
|
|
Without doubt you need to declare to your Insurance company at renewal. Ok they quote you higher premium so go shop around. Tell the truth an you will most likely end up with a cheaper quote elsewhere.
So now to the fact that you have had a no blame crash so this does not make you a worse driver. Think again !
Insurance companies work on risk. I don't need to state that the bigger risk you are the more likely is you will claim and hence the higher premium you should pay. On the positive the smaller risk you are the more profit for the Insurance company and the cheaper your premium is. Sorry for teaching granny here but the Insurance company needs to work out what risk you are. As we can all appreciate how much information is asked for when quoting all this determines the risk in you costing them money.
Insurance companies are also clever. They know that in about 80% of crashes the innocent party could have either avoided the crash or severely mitigated it. How you ask ?. Well simple, by being a more skillful driver. So Insurance companies think if there has been a claim, regardless of blame then there is an 80% chance that that driver is a greater risk and puts up the premium. They are not interested in how that Audi span across 3 lanes of traffic and crashed into the back of your car while you were waiting for Mrs Miggins to cross the road in front of you at a Zebra crossing. They deal in facts and the fact is that if you have had a crash regardless of blame you are more likely to have another one !.
So advice is be honest but shop around for the best deal on Insurance each year.
But if you shop around each year and drive a bit more defensively the roads will be a safer place. Would recommend going to speak to your local IAM or RoSPA group.
Edited by Cris_on_the_gas on 19/12/2017 at 09:49
|
|
I doubt that there is any true statistical evidence that if you are involved in a no-fault claim you are more likely to make a claim in the future. It is an argument the insurance companies use to raise premiums which you are not in a position to counter argue.
|
I doubt that there is any true statistical evidence that if you are involved in a no-fault claim you are more likely to make a claim in the future. It is an argument the insurance companies use to raise premiums which you are not in a position to counter argue.
There is and it's about your attitude to risk.
If 80% of crashes could be avoided by innocent party taking different action then even no fault crashes could be avoided. A driver with a no fault crash is statistically more likely to crash again. A lot of research has been done on this by the Police Foundation.
I think in reality Insurance companies need to raise premiums to make money in a very competitive environment. They do this by inventing charges such as these to increase premiums on the people who can't be bothered to shop around each year.
|
I think in reality Insurance companies need to raise premiums to make money in a very competitive environment. They do this by inventing charges such as these to increase premiums on the people who can't be bothered to shop around each year.
Right, although I may not have been clear, this is an increase I experience when doing quotes, and it's an increase from every provider (admittedly only using gocompare). No matter how much I shop around, I doubt that I will be able to avoid paying more.
|
Insurance companies are also clever. They know that in about 80% of crashes the innocent party could have either avoided the crash or severely mitigated it. How you ask ?. Well simple, by being a more skillful driver.
Chris, I'm not disagreeing with anything you say, but you're writing as if you're trying to sell a self-help book or a workout ebook ;P haha
""Think again! How you ask? By following my super secret workout regime! Only ten easy payments of $29.99"
You keep answering questions you pose yourself. Please stop writing like this, it does make it genuinely more difficult to take seriously. And like I said, I don't disagree with anything you're saying, as this is certainly how insurance decisions are made.
They could definitely be more intelligent with their decision making, and look at each case on an individual basis (in my case, there is literally nothing I could have done other than simply not be there), however, this wouldn't allow them to make blanket decisions based on stats and push up everyone's premiums. The internet is littered with stories of perfectly well parked cars being hit by idiots, and the victim's premium increasing.
Edited by Bronan the Brobarian on 20/12/2017 at 11:27
|
Insurance companies are also clever. They know that in about 80% of crashes the innocent party could have either avoided the crash or severely mitigated it. How you ask ?. Well simple, by being a more skillful driver.
Chris, please back up claims like this with evidence. I simply don't believe that 80% part one bit. Also, you state that they deal in facts, but you then go on to make a generalisation. It is not a fact that if I have an accident I am more likely to have another one, it is ONLY a statistaical likelihood. There is a big difference. They do not deal in facts, they deal in stats. And you know what they say about stats - there are lies, damn lies and...
Edited by Bronan the Brobarian on 20/12/2017 at 11:45
|
|
Hello Bronan.
Great thanks for your reply.
How about asking one's self the last time I had a no fault crash could I have avoided it by taking a different action leading up to it ?
Edited by Cris_on_the_gas on 20/12/2017 at 13:01
|
How about asking one's self the last time I had a no fault crash could I have avoided it by taking a different action leading up to it ?
I've only ever been in one crash (the one above), so ifyou're hitting things all the time I suggest you examine your own skills.
Secondly, there was nothing I could do without being able to see into the future. You are making unevidenced generalisations. Any accident can be avoided in hindsight, but then if we could act on hindsight, we'd all win the lottery.
|
Great thanks for your reply.
How about asking one's self the last time I had a no fault crash could I have avoided it by taking a different action leading up to it ?
Who is this arrogant a***? Classic victim blaming. Probably thinks that the victim of every car park ding should have somehow known to park somewhere else.
I notice he failed to provide evidence for his statistical claims too, and instead went with a deflection tactic.
Edited by DaveL90 on 21/12/2017 at 15:26
|
Who is this arrogant a***? Classic victim blaming. Probably thinks that the victim of every car park ding should have somehow known to park somewhere else
What a lovely person you are !
I am not going to sink to your level by trading insults.
All I was trying to say was that we can learn from previous experience, good or bad. That is how we become better drivers and people.
Hope 2018 is a good year for you
|
|
|
Really interesting Concrete, just goes to show the big brother level of data they store about you. I really wish there was an alternative to going with companies like this. It's a purchase we must make by law, but then we're limited to these nasty, profit-oriented surveillance junkies.
I can demonstrate that it affects quotes simply by removing or adding the declaration. It adds around 20%, comparing the two cheapest quotes on gocompare. When the time comes to renew in a few months I'll shop around more, but I'm resigned to the fact that it'll add something.
Edited by Bronan the Brobarian on 20/12/2017 at 11:50
|
|
|
|
I think the policy is invalid if they regard the information not declared as 'material' rather than a minor oversight. My guess is they would regard it as the former and you would end up arguing the toss with them, in the event of a claim, not a good situation to be in.
I agree, when it comes to renewal, but not during a policy (as policy increases in the case of accidents do not occur until the next policy).
Edited by Bronan the Brobarian on 20/12/2017 at 11:19
|
|
Interestingly, Direct Line's quote does not increase with the addition of a "third party hit me - recovery made", but their quote is so rediculously high to start with (Currently I pay £420, their quote with no details changed is £1090!)
Edited by Bronan the Brobarian on 20/12/2017 at 12:08
|
|
|
|
Not too sure about that Bronan. They probably regard the fact you were involved in an incident as a material fact which affects the policy now. This would alter the level of risk and they may impose a loading. I did this when caught by a speed camera and it cost me about £70 when they loaded the policy for the rest of the term. They may already know about it if another insurer was involved or they may examine the data base which collects all the information about claims. Either way technically you may be in jeopardy if they get awkward in the face of a further incident. I would be inclined to tell them and see what their reaction is. At least you would know for sure you are insured in the event of a claim against you. Peace of mind and all that.
Good luck
Concrete
|
|
|
|
|
|
