|
|
 |
 |
FORUM |
|
> Browse and post on our forum |
|
|
|
 |
|
 |
| Author |
 Topic  |
|
pcoventry
Junior Member
United Kingdom
235 Posts |
 Posted - 23 June 2012 : 13:48:59
|
Am I allowed car insruance on a monthly plan if the total amount is under £500? am I right in thinking It can be over aslong as the lender knows I am BR? Or is all forms of credit out?
I managed to keep my car and buy the OR's interest. Now I need to get it back on the road but my insurance seems to have doubled to what it was 4 months ago before BR. |
|
|
Skippy
forum expert
United Kingdom
3290 Posts |
Posted - 23 June 2012 : 13:53:00
|
You can pay monthly for insurance but it depends whether the insurer will allow it.
There has also been a thread on the sister IVA forum recently where one of the experts, an insurance professional, has confirmed that people should notify their insurers of the BR as it is classed as a material fact.
View my blog at http://skippy13.blogs.iva.co.uk/
Only when the last tree has died, the last river has been poisoned and the last fish has been caught will we realise that we cannot eat money.
Last IPA payment made on 28th June 2010 and I'm now looking forward to getting married in September 2012 - I'm proof that you can go BR and come out the other side. |
 |
|
|
Niobe
Administrator
United Kingdom
4590 Posts |
Posted - 23 June 2012 : 15:28:12
|
Agree with Tracey - you can pay monthly but some posters on the sister forum have been refused with some companies.
You should declare that you are BR as Tracey says.
Ascend may you find no resistance
Know that you made such a difference
All you leave behind will live to the end
The cycle of suffering goes on
But memories of you stay strong
Someday I too will fly and find you again
|
|
|
|
year 2029
Average Member
590 Posts |
Posted - 23 June 2012 : 15:31:55
|
I've not been able to find anything in my insurance that says it should be declared.
There doesn't seem to be any companies that I have done a random look at, that ask the question if you've been declared bankrupt or not either.
Unless you're referring to when an insurance policy is over £500?
--------------
Views expressed are my own personal views, based on what has happened during my own BR process unless otherwise stated.
Professional advice should always be sought. |
Edited by - year 2029 on 23 June 2012 15:33:19 |
|
|
|
Niobe
Administrator
United Kingdom
4590 Posts |
Posted - 23 June 2012 : 18:04:29
|
If you look at the sister site and visit Coveritall (the insurance expert) and his recent posts then he does say that you should declare BR and IVA when taking out insurance otherwise you may find that you have a problem if you try and and claim.
Ascend may you find no resistance
Know that you made such a difference
All you leave behind will live to the end
The cycle of suffering goes on
But memories of you stay strong
Someday I too will fly and find you again
|
|
|
|
pcoventry
Junior Member
United Kingdom
235 Posts |
Posted - 23 June 2012 : 18:10:48
|
Thanks for the advice all.
I was with swift cover - and they said they didn't care if I was BR or not. They were happy to let me pay monthly however in the 4 months since I cancelled (and paid up in full) my insurance it's rose £400 and they say it's due to " dummy claims"
Ive managed to find a company though go compare who are quoting me £400. If they will let me do monthly happy days. If not then I will pay then upfront. I;d rather do the latter because then at least it's done and I save £120 over the year.
DO I need to tell them even if I pay in full? Could they simply bump it up if they find out? |
|
|
|
Skippy
forum expert
United Kingdom
3290 Posts |
Posted - 23 June 2012 : 18:10:59
|
This is a copy and paste of Coveritall's post on the IVA forum:
Every insurance policy in the UK is a legal contract between the Policyholder and the Insurer. The insurance contract is based on “utmost good faith” – the Insurer is legally obliged to disclose to you everything about the policy, and equally you are legally obliged to disclose to the Insurer any fact that is “material” to the contract. Unfortunately the insurance industry has for years refused to define “material”, and simply says that if you are unsure whether a fact is material or not, then to be safe you should disclose it.
What is not in doubt is that being in an IVA is a material fact – as is still the fact that I was bankrupt from October 1995 to October 1998.
Not disclosing a material fact does not mean your claim will not be paid, but it does mean you will never know whether a claim will be paid until you submit it. You are left with the worry that if the Insurer finds out, you have given them an easy way to avoid the claim, to cancel the policy, and to keep the premium ! You are simply gambling that they won’t find out.
There is a way to be absolutely safe - TELL THE INSURER. If then they won’t cover you, that’s the proof that they wouldn’t have paid the claim anyway - and you’ve established this without losing your premium and ending up uninsured.
The very worst scenario is for this to happen to your car insurance, because if your motor insurance policy is cancelled by the Insurer, not only are you left with a potentially huge bill, YOU ARE ALSO IN TROUBLE WITH THE POLICE, because driving whilst uninsured is an offence.
Although it is now 17 years since my discharge, every time I complete an insurance contract I DECLARE MY BANKRUPTCY TO THEM IN WRITING, and insist that they confirm back to me that this does not impact on my policy in any way.
Why do I go to all this trouble ? Because I have worked in the insurance industry for 46 years, and I know what it can be like.
Do yourself a huge favour, don’t gamble on the Insurer not finding out about your IVA, make sure your insurance protection PROTECTS YOU, not the Insurer. It took my firm five years to persuade an Insurer to allow us to endorse our Insurance Certificates with “The Insured has disclosed to us that they are currently in an IVA, and we confirm that this does not impact on this policy in any way, it does not increase the premium, it does not change our Underwriting decision, and it certainly does not impact in any way on our claims settlement”.
If your Insurer won’t give you this confirmation, WALK AWAY, and find another that will.
View my blog at http://skippy13.blogs.iva.co.uk/
Only when the last tree has died, the last river has been poisoned and the last fish has been caught will we realise that we cannot eat money.
Last IPA payment made on 28th June 2010 and I'm now looking forward to getting married in September 2012 - I'm proof that you can go BR and come out the other side. |
|
|
|
Niobe
Administrator
United Kingdom
4590 Posts |
Posted - 23 June 2012 : 18:14:30
|
Thanks Tracey.
Ascend may you find no resistance
Know that you made such a difference
All you leave behind will live to the end
The cycle of suffering goes on
But memories of you stay strong
Someday I too will fly and find you again
|
|
|
|
year 2029
Average Member
590 Posts |
Posted - 23 June 2012 : 18:19:48
|
Probably down to personal choice then?
Would be interesting to know who in an IVA or currently going through BR has declared it without being asked?
There must be quite a few other instances where it could be argued that you should declare your financial situation?
However, it isn't laid out under the Insolvency services guidelines. Everything else is quite black and white.
--------------
Views expressed are my own personal views, based on what has happened during my own BR process unless otherwise stated.
Professional advice should always be sought. |
|
|
|
pcoventry
Junior Member
United Kingdom
235 Posts |
Posted - 23 June 2012 : 18:22:04
|
| Then let it be noted about Swiftcover. They don't care at all. if you can pay - you can play. Even monthly |
|
|
|
Niobe
Administrator
United Kingdom
4590 Posts |
Posted - 23 June 2012 : 18:39:37
|
Some companies will accept you on monthly payments but do be aware that there is always the possibility that if you need to claim they may check and refuse to pay out.
Ascend may you find no resistance
Know that you made such a difference
All you leave behind will live to the end
The cycle of suffering goes on
But memories of you stay strong
Someday I too will fly and find you again
|
|
|
|
year 2029
Average Member
590 Posts |
Posted - 23 June 2012 : 19:15:28
|
That could probably be said of most insurance companies, even for those without an IVA or BR in progress! ;-)
--------------
Views expressed are my own personal views, based on what has happened during my own BR process unless otherwise stated.
Professional advice should always be sought. |
|
|
|
Skippy
forum expert
United Kingdom
3290 Posts |
Posted - 23 June 2012 : 22:18:34
|
I declared it to Churchill when I insured with them when I was BR. At the time they said it wasn't a problem providing I paid up front.
I am currently insured with the Co-op and I asked them if a previous BR was an issue and it wasn't. I don't know their policy is different if you are still BR though.
View my blog at http://skippy13.blogs.iva.co.uk/
Only when the last tree has died, the last river has been poisoned and the last fish has been caught will we realise that we cannot eat money.
Last IPA payment made on 28th June 2010 and I'm now looking forward to getting married in September 2012 - I'm proof that you can go BR and come out the other side. |
|
|
|
pcoventry
Junior Member
United Kingdom
235 Posts |
Posted - 23 June 2012 : 23:45:31
|
Well Co-op are £680. I doubt they would be. It would go against their ethos of being BR friendly surely?
Ill go to them if I have to though. as my account is now with them. |
|
|
|
year 2029
Average Member
590 Posts |
Posted - 24 June 2012 : 11:11:27
|
My take on 'material facts' relate to what is asked on an insurance form, and with particulars to the vehicle in question, not my financial situation.
Otherwise, taking things to extreme, if you have a family bereavment, should you phone your insurer as you're state of mind has changed?
With that in mind, I did some digging around.
Here's a slightly different perspective quoted below,
Its from the financial odbudsman service.
QUOTE
non-disclosure in insurance cases
"Non-disclosure" refers to the situation where a customer fails to reveal a relevant fact when applying for – or renewing – an insurance contract. It is widely recognised that in some situations involving non-disclosure, applying the strict legal position can result in an unduly harsh outcome for the customer. For this reason, when we deal with insurance cases involving non-disclosure or "misrepresentation" – an incorrect statement made by a customer – we take account of both the law and good industry practice.
the legal position
An insurance contract is a "contract of utmost good faith", which means that all parties to the contract are under a strict duty to deal fully and frankly with each other. Customers must disclose all facts that are "material" (or relevant) to the risk for which they are seeking cover.
A "material" fact is one which would influence an underwriter when they were deciding whether to accept the risk, and the terms and conditions that should apply. If a customer fails to disclose (or misrepresents) a material fact and this induces the insurer to accept the proposed risk, the legal remedy is to "avoid" the policy. This means the insurer is entitled to treat the policy as though it never existed. Unless fraud is involved, the insurer will normally return the premium and will not pay out on any claim made under the policy.
good industry practice
The Association of British Insurers (ABI) provided important safeguards for policyholders. It published statements of practice which said that insurers should ask clear questions about facts they considered material. In deciding whether to avoid a policy, insurers should rely only on the answers given or withheld. They should also only avoid policies where the non-disclosure or misrepresentation was deliberate or reckless, not where it was innocent. The ABI made it clear that customers were required to answer questions only to the best of their knowledge and belief.
Most of the ABI statements have been withdrawn since the introduction of the Financial Services Authority’s Insurance: Conduct of Business Rules (ICOB) on 14 January 2005. The principles found in the ABI statements remain useful examples of good industry practice, and as such we still take them into account. The ICOB also outlines some of those principles.
For example, ICOB Rule 7.3.6 provides that:
an insurer must not:1.unreasonably reject a claim made by a customer;
2.except where there is evidence of fraud, refuse to meet a claim made by a retail customer on the grounds: 1.of non-disclosure of a fact material to the risk that the retail customer could not reasonably be expected to have disclosed;
2.of misrepresentation of a fact material to the risk, unless the misrepresentation is negligent
ICOB Rule 4.3.2(3) deals with advising and selling standards, and states that:
In assessing the customer’s demands and needs, the insurance intermediary must… explain to the customer his duty to disclose all circumstances material to the insurance and the consequences of any failure to make such a disclosure, both before the… insurance contract commences and throughout the duration of the contract; and take account of the information that the customer discloses.
ICOB Rule 4.3 goes on to stress that:
In relation to ICOB 4.3.2(3), an insurance intermediary should make clear to the customer what the customer needs to disclose. For example, in relation to private medical insurance, this could include any existing medical condition where relevant, or in relation to motor insurance, any modifications carried out to the vehicle.
the Financial Ombudsman Service approach
Taking account of the law and good industry practice, we approach non-disclosure/misrepresentation cases in three stages. We summarise these three stages below, before describing each one in a little more detail.
1.When the customer sought insurance, did the insurer ask a clear question about the matter which is now under dispute?
2.Did the answer to that clear question induce the insurer; that is, did it influence the insurer’s decision to enter into the contract at all, or to do so under terms and conditions that it otherwise would not have accepted?
3.Only if the answers to both (1) and (2) are "yes", do we go on to consider whether the customer’s misrepresentation was an honest mistake, a dishonest attempt to mislead or due to some degree of negligence.
1. clear questions
The insurer must first provide evidence that it asked the customer a clear question when the customer asked to take out or renew a policy. The insurer may ask questions via a traditional proposal form, which records the answers.
In many cases the transaction will have taken place over the telephone. If there is no evidence, such as a call recording and/or a copy of the statement of facts that the insurer has sent the customer, then we will have to decide what is likely to have happened. If the customer gives a credible account of events, we may find it more likely than the insurer’s version.
A similar statement of fact would be required for internet sales; as would some evidence of the questions asked during the website process,as it existed at the time of the application.
In order for non-disclosure to occur, the insurer must show that it asked clear questions.
2. inducement
Legally, the insurer must establish that the non-disclosure or misrepresentation "induced"(or influenced) its decision to enter into the contract. This was established in Pan Atlantic Insurance Co Ltd v Pine Top Insurance Co Ltd (Reported [1994] in Volume 3 of the Weekly Law Reports at page 677).
If the insurer cannot prove inducement then the policy will remain valid, even if the non-disclosure was deliberate. The burden of proving inducement will not be high in clear-cut cases. For example, if a customer fails to disclose that their house has serious cracks, we are likely to believe the insurer would not have offered them full buildings insurance.
However, it is rare for cases to be this clear-cut and we will usually require evidence that inducement took place. This may be in the form of a statement from the underwriters and/or a copy of the underwriting manual.
3. the customer’s state of mind
Not all instances of non-disclosure or misrepresentation breach the duty of "utmost good faith". We have identified four types of non-disclosure (deliberate, reckless, innocent, and inadvertent) to help us decide whether, with regard to all the available evidence, the customer acted in breach.
It is possible to deliberately non-disclose without being fraudulent. While dishonesty is one of the essential criteria for fraud, there must also be deception, designed to obtain something to which you are not entitled. For example, a customer might deliberately withhold information they are embarrassed about. Although, in doing so, they are acting dishonestly and deliberately, they are not acting fraudulently because there is no deceitful intention to obtain an advantage.
Only where there is clear evidence of fraud should the insurer retain the premium. In all other cases of deliberate or reckless non-disclosure, the premium should be returned, not least so as to protect the insurer’s position. Retaining the premium could be interpreted as an intention to affirm the contract and/or waive the right to "avoid". Our experience is that most insurers return the premium in any event.
deliberate
Customers deliberately mislead the insurer if they dishonestly provide information they know to be untrue or incomplete. If the dishonesty is intended to deceive the insurer into giving them an advantage to which they are not entitled, then this is also a fraud and – strictly speaking – the insurance premium does not have to be returned.
reckless
Customers also breach their duty of good faith if they mislead the insurer by recklessly giving answers without caring whether those answers are true or false. An example of recklessness might be where a customer signs a blank proposal form and leaves it to be filled out by someone else. The customer has signed a declaration that "the above answers are true to the best of my knowledge and belief", but does not know what those answers will be.
innocent
Customers act in good faith if their non-disclosure is made innocently. This may happen because the question is unclear or ambiguous, or because the relevant information is not something that they should reasonably know. In these cases, the insurer will not be able to "avoid" the contract and (subject to the policy terms and conditions) should pay the claim in full.
inadvertent
A customer may also have acted in good faith if their non-disclosure is made inadvertently. These are the most difficult cases to determine and involve distinguishing between behaviour that is merely careless and that which amounts to recklessness. Both are forms of negligence.
Inadvertence occurs when the customer unintentionally misleads the insurer. This can occur just by failing to read and check the questions and answers thoroughly enough. When this happens there is no breach of the duty of utmost good faith.
For example, a policy application may contain a clear question about motoring convictions and penalty points. The customer discloses a careless-driving conviction but fails to disclose that they have three penalty points for speeding. In that situation, we might believe that the customer genuinely overlooked his conviction. The customer clearly did not intend to mislead the insurer because he disclosed the more serious offence; he simply failed to realise that penalty points were also part of the question. So the insurer should act as it would have done if it had been in possession of the full facts.
Where there has been inadvertent non-disclosure or misrepresentation, we expect insurers to rewrite the insurance. This should be done on the terms they would originally have offered if they had been aware of all the information. In some cases this may result in a proportionate payment; in others it may result in no payment at all. This is because the inadvertently-withheld information would, if disclosed, have led to the firm declining the application altogether.
Everything turns on the individual circumstances. Customers will find it more difficult to prove that they acted inadvertently if they answered several questions badly. To get one or two questions wrong may be regarded as inadvertent; to get several wrong starts to look like recklessness.
UNQUOTE
As before, just food for thought, for a balanced view.
--------------
Views expressed are my own personal views, based on what has happened during my own BR process unless otherwise stated.
Professional advice should always be sought. |
Edited by - year 2029 on 24 June 2012 11:18:18 |
|
|
|
Skippy
forum expert
United Kingdom
3290 Posts |
Posted - 24 June 2012 : 12:40:43
|
The Co-op are a mixed bag - don't forget they won't allow anyone who is BR to have a savings account.
Year2029, I have to say I agree with you but Coveritall is an expert in this area and I'm not!
View my blog at http://skippy13.blogs.iva.co.uk/
Only when the last tree has died, the last river has been poisoned and the last fish has been caught will we realise that we cannot eat money.
Last IPA payment made on 28th June 2010 and I'm now looking forward to getting married in September 2012 - I'm proof that you can go BR and come out the other side. |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
|
|
| bankruptcyhelp.org.uk Forum |
© bankruptcyhelp |
|
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
Am I allowed car insruance on a monthly plan ?
