Car Insurance 'Knockback'

[OldSwitcheroo]

Bit of a long story this, but I'll stick to the facts...

Joined insurance company A last year with 9 years no-claims discount.
Crashed said car a couple of months ago.
My fault.
Claim goes through.
My car a write off.
After two-ing and fro-ing settlement is agreed, policy is ended.
I take a new policy with a new insurer.
They require confirmation of no claims bonus.
I obtain information from insurer = 4 years NCB.
This is lower than I was lead to believe or was told by insurance company during the settlement period (should be 2/3 years taken off max they said).

I ring up to question this, am told that the underwriter only deal with 6 years total NCB in the event of an accident, even though they took the policy based on my 9 years NCB.
Insurer confirm that 2 years was taken off for the accident, after the 3 years deduction, hence the 4 years left as NCB.

Am told that the underwriter changed their T&C's halfway through the policy and updated all documentation from that point.
They neglected to tell me, as an affected policyholder though.
It is not in the policy smallprint they sent me when I took the insurance out.

If I had known this knockback was taken, I wouldn't have taken the policy.

Question
Have I got a case to take up with the insurer to get my 3 years NCB back?
Current insurance policy would have been cheaper with 7 years, rather than 4, that's for sure...

 

[Badger0-0]

That seems well wrong, but I'm not surprised.
Insurance companies seem to do what they like.

Fwiw, I had an accident when I had 9 years NCB.
My insurance was reduced to 2 years!

 

[Kebabhead]

That seems well wrong, but I'm not surprised.
Insurance companies seem to do what they like.

Fwiw, I had an accident when I had 9 years NCB.
My insurance was reduced to 2 years!

That why people should take out NCB protection sometimes it pays

 

[Badger0-0]

Oh, I agree.
I was just skint at the time.
And it used to be the case that they only took 2 years off.

 

[qwerty321]

I don't think there is any regulation as such. Some insurers only have an option for a maximum of 5 years, some 7 and some more.

You'd have thought there was was some standard for it!

 

[OldSwitcheroo]

Agree with all posters - although this is the underwriter causing the pain. All my policy documentation states 9 years no claims with regards the policy, not one thing about taking a maximum of 6.

My insurance company have already confirmed they have only taken 2 years for the accident, not 5 but the underwriter has decided me to punish me 3 years for having the "cheek" for making a claim...

It was hard to stay calm on the phone to the very helpful call centre lass.

Financial Ombudsman will be getting a call about this - I'm pretty sure they can't change terms and conditions without letting you know about it.

I should have protected my no claims, but I shouldn't have had to, when I should only lose 2 years bonus, not 2 plus a 'Making a claim' 3 years NCB penalty', which is what this is.

 

[Stoofa]

I "shouldn't have" to protect my NCB - I've currently got 19 years NCB, so I could have half a dozen "at fault" accidents and losing only a couple of years each time I'd still have 7 years.

But...I'm aware that it doesn't work that way and need to deicde each year if protecting my NCB is worth it or not.
It isn't cheap, but at the same time it can pay for itself after just one accident, so I always add it on.

 

[OldSwitcheroo]

I "shouldn't have" to protect my NCB - I've currently got 19 years NCB, so I could have half a dozen "at fault" accidents and losing only a couple of years each time I'd still have 7 years.

But...I'm aware that it doesn't work that way and need to deicde each year if protecting my NCB is worth it or not.
It isn't cheap, but at the same time it can pay for itself after just one accident, so I always add it on.

Appreciate the comments but a little confused. If you had 19 years NCB (no insurance takes more than 9 or 10 into account though these days, but thats a different issue), and you had 6 accidents in a year, you would lose 12 years with unprotected no claims. If you had my underwriter you would lose 3 years straight away before those 12 years were taken off, leaving you with 4 years NCB. If I had protected my no claims, I would still only have 6.

My issue is that an underwriter took off 3 years JUST for making a claim in the first year of a policy (without telling me that was their policy and only making it known after an accident and subsequent claim took place).

For anyone interested 3 years NCB currently works out around 10% difference in premium, so not to be sniffed at really.

 

[OldSwitcheroo]

Appreciate the comments but a little confused. If you had 19 years NCB (no insurance takes more than 9 or 10 into account though these days, but thats a different issue), and you had 6 accidents in a year, you would lose 12 years with unprotected no claims. If you had my underwriter you would lose 3 years straight away before those 12 years were taken off, leaving you with 4 years NCB. If I had protected my no claims, I would still only have 6.

My issue is that an underwriter took off 3 years JUST for making a claim in the first year of a policy (without telling me that was their policy and only making it known after an accident and subsequent claim took place).

For anyone interested 3 years NCB currently works out around 10% difference in premium, so not to be sniffed at really.

Bit of an update with this, went through the financial ombudsman route and received a call the other day saying they were confirming I was getting the 3 years back and as a gesture of goodwill for being raffled about, sending me a cheque for £50. My current insurer confirmed they will base my current policy on 7 years, not 4 so will be getting about £70 back there too.

 

[sdb123]

Bit of an update with this, went through the financial ombudsman route and received a call the other day saying they were confirming I was getting the 3 years back and as a gesture of goodwill for being raffled about, sending me a cheque for £50. My current insurer confirmed they will base my current policy on 7 years, not 4 so will be getting about £70 back there too.

Good stuff.

 

[KelvinS1965]

Playing devils advocate here, but if you've made a claim, then really you haven't any 'no claims' left as you've made a claim, regardless of how many years you haven't made a claim.

I better not say any more as I'm driving on a 'mirrored' no claims insurance and if I make a claim, it's my OH's insurance that goes up as it's mirrored to her insurance.

 

[blackrod]

I always thought you lost all your ncb when you had a claim thats why I have always protected mine?

 

[Daddy k]

No you step down. Generally if you have say 6 years ncb and have a fault claim you will drop to 4 years, 5 years to 3 years. 3 years to 1 year. Look in the small print of your policy docs to confirm YOUR policy's NCB step back level

 

[Daddy k]

Playing devils advocate here, but if you've made a claim, then really you haven't any 'no claims' left as you've made a claim, regardless of how many years you haven't made a claim.

I better not say any more as I'm driving on a 'mirrored' no claims insurance and if I make a claim, it's my OH's insurance that goes up as it's mirrored to her insurance.

Her insurance won't go up on the car with actual NCB due to loss of ncb by a fault claim on the car running mirrored NCB. it simply will mean a loss of NCB or any NCB being built on the car/policy that your currently relying on mirrored bonus to reduce the risk.

If she crashes in your/the car that has the mirrored bonus then she must declare to her insurers that she has been involved in a claim, however it will not effect the NCB she is actually using on the other car. If you crash the car with the mirrored ncb it has no effect on the other policy in relation to loss of ncb, of course your risk will go up if your involved in a accident OR claim in any car, but the NCB will remain on the original car UNLESS the accident/fault claim is on this actual car

Does that make sense?

 

[KelvinS1965]

Her insurance won't go up on the car with actual NCB due to loss of ncb by a fault claim on the car running mirrored NCB. it simply will mean a loss of NCB or any NCB being built on the car/policy that your currently relying on mirrored bonus to reduce the risk.

If she crashes in your/the car that has the mirrored bonus then she must declare to her insurers that she has been involved in a claim, however it will not effect the NCB she is actually using on the other car. If you crash the car with the mirrored ncb it has no effect on the other policy in relation to loss of ncb, of course your risk will go up if your involved in a accident OR claim in any car, but the NCB will remain on the original car UNLESS the accident/fault claim is on this actual car

Does that make sense?

Kind of...I'll read it again in the morning with a clear head. Thanks.

 

[Daddy k]

Basically you can only loose bonus from
The policy your claiming from. (assuming your not driving under a driving other vehicles extension)

Let's say the car with mirrored bonus is a BMW the car with actual bonus a jag.


You or the mrs has a fault claim in the BMW the BMW policy covers it. As such the jags insurance never gets involved and bonus is safe.

If however you crash in the jag then you will loose some bonus depending on step back, HOWEVER any bonus your building on the BMW will remain, as the BMW policy has not paid out. so you would have 1 years NCB on the BMW Even if you crashed the jag.

 

[KelvinS1965]

I see what you're saying. The only issue is that I was specifically told that I won't build any no claims myself on the mirrored policy, even though they are fully aware I'm the keeper and the main driver.

I only did this as my company took their time producing a proof of my driving history otherwise I would have taken out my own policy rather than my OH sorting it out. I have a company car so don't have any no claims (my RS2000 is on a classic policy) and wanted to buy a little convertable for the summer, so in your scenario I'm the one in the BMW (Z3) and the OH is in the [-]Jag[/-] er Mini.

 

[Daddy k]

I take it the new policy is in the mrs name with you as a ND again?

 

[KelvinS1965]

I take it the new policy is in the mrs name with you as a ND again?

It's on her 'account' but I'm the main driver and she's a named driver on it. If my HR had pulled their finger out I could have just set up my own policy for a fraction more, but I'd build up my own no claims. I'd mistakenly thought I'd be able to insure the Z3 on a classic policy like my RS2000, but I couldn't get one sorted out that would allow it (apart from one which was £900 for 5,000 miles a year, the one I've got cost £290 for 8,000 miles a year, not bad for a 3 litre I reckon). Hopefully by next renewal I'll have proof of my driving experience from HR...