My son has just bought himself another car to use for commuting, he's wisely decided to make the Subaru a toy.
During his discussions with his insurance broker, they somehow got onto the subject of the job situation.
The broker told him that there had been 2 cases he knew of where people had lost there jobs and become (hopefully temporarily) unemployed, but didn't inform the insurance companies.
They subsequently had claims and both were denied as null and void due to non informing of changed situation.
Apparently some companies wil not insure unemployed people, even if the unemployed person took out there policy whilst in work.
Is this correct? If so it disturbs me greatly.
|
Yep it really is quite stupid and I think the government need to bring out a new set of laws to stop insurance companies try any slight technicality to get out of paying.
If person X had a job when they took out a policy if they loose the job how are they any more risk? I can completly understand having to tell insurance companies if you change your job etc but this just seems daft.
|
Unemployed people are more likely to skimp on servicing, tyres, brakes, road tax..Do unpaid taxi driving,
It significantly increases the risk and the company have a right to withdraw a policy under those terms.
|
Unemployed people are more likely to skimp on servicing tyres brakes road tax..Do unpaid taxi driving
what complete drivel
|
Unemployed people are more likely to skimp on servicing tyres brakes road tax..Do unpaid taxi driving
what complete drivel
An insurance company with 50 years of claims and risk data will say other wise. I think they know better than you.
|
SNIPQUOTE!An insurance company with 50 years of claims and risk data will say other wise. I think they know better than you.
you know full well that insurance companies and others will use statistics to manipulate joe bloggs and seperate him from his hard earned cash or (giro) for that matter, being unemployed doesnt make one automatically irresponsible or indeed neglecting in ones responsibilities as a road user
Edited by Dynamic Dave on 13/05/2009 at 14:27
|
|
|
|
I guess it must have something to do with your risk matrix. Being unemployed, you likely will be in the car at different times and more often than would usually be the case. That upsets the insurance company risk calculations. That is the only explanation I can think of.
Makes you wonder whether divorce or separation makes a difference too, because they do ask your marital status on application forms, don't they?
|
This doesn't add up, if the unemployed person can't afford to service their car, how come they can increase their use of the car when they have no money?
|
I suppose it is to cover their risk when said driver crashes due to having no brakes or bold tyres as we all know unemployed people all drive ilegaly .... yes I am being a bit sarcastic.
I can see their logic but I think it is another unfair clause in the policy. I but 50% of us have an invalid policy without even realising.
|
|
|
|
Everything does what what annoys me is what if we don't use the car for an undeclared job? Say I decided to bribe my old manager and get my old part time job back (I hated so left) would I have to declare it on my insurance even though I would get the bus to that job and back?
|
Some unemployed are also likely to take jobs for a bit of cash - a couple of nights a week delivering pizzas etc etc.
Rattle any change in material circumstances has to be reported to your insurance company.
|
|
|
|
|
|
To state the obvious, the insurance business is putting a value on risk. I think if insurance companies stuck to the letter of the law in all cases, then few people would ever benefit from making a claim. There's a difference too between becoming unemployed 5 days before an accident (go to court, no jury would dismiss it) or falsely claiming online that you have 5 years' no claims when, in fact you have 1 in order to get a lower quote.
Maybe I'm a bit strange as well as naive, but I'd have a job remembering to phone my insurance company immediately having been laid off. Because, if you don't inform them before you drive home (because you're now unemployed), they're going to tell you to sling your hook?
|
But it the insurance companies job to look at these things:-
Mr X looses his job so works as an ilegal taxi driver on the side, has an accident insurance is clearly void.
Mr X looses his job takes his mother to shops as always on a Sunday afternoon has an accident - insurance void because he forgot to tell them he has lost his job the day before.
There are a lot fo peole trying to fraud insurance companies but my insurane is done to the letter and I have to pay nearly £1k a year for it. I am sure some people must lie about their no claims etc and probably get away with it for many years.
|
Rattle,
I have a feeling you should have chosen Mr Y for your examples
|
i was just going to say the same thing
after all we dont even know if he runs a car
|
after all we dont even know if he runs a car >>
Mr X has avoided answering b308's and HJ's question even though Mr X has been posting since then:
www.honestjohn.co.uk/forum/post/index.htm?v=e&t=74...0
|
|
Non of your business. I don't post my personal details all over the internet for security reasons, especially as it has become clear that plod trawls this site night and day.
Edited by Mr X on 12/05/2009 at 23:43
|
especially as it has become clear that plod trawls this site night and day.
something to hide?.......;-)
|
|
|
Non of your business. I don't post my personal details
See other thread.
|
>> Non of your business. I don't post my personal details See other thread.
As I can't respnd on the other thread, all I'll say is that I am really saddened by you feeling that way and it restricts you from many interesting discussions, however its your choice and I respect that. End of as far as I'm concerned.
(PS Mods, as I was the originator I'd prefer this to be transferred to the other locked thread if poss!).
|
|
|
|
|
|
"looses" ?
I notice this is a common spelling error by the IT guys.
Edited by jbif on 12/05/2009 at 23:37
|
I'm sure at some point he said he had a Beemer but I've slept since then.
|
Just to clarify my example of Mr X is just what I say, he has nothing to with Mr X the member of this site (hopefully).
Actually I just thought of something, I am insured for business use but I wonder if I am insured for social use? I just assumed I was, I best double check my policy.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Apparently some companies wil not insure unemployed people
Must say that this is something I've never thought about. I know when I first opted out of my company car I struggled to find a job description that would fit with Liverpool Victoria's insurance so I called them and they it doesn't matter, we don't rate on occupation. Since then I haven't worried about it, and I'm sure I'd never have thought to tell them if I, or any of the named drivers, lost our jobs.
The ridiculous thing is that now I could quite properly say that I'm a company director, but what on earth does that mean these days? Plenty of scoundrels are directors.
|
I've heard of cases whereby a person has a four/five seat car, they are only actually insured to carry one!
|
|
|
It means a person has signed companies house form ten or what ever that is called these days! I was nearly a company director with my cousin selling budget hosting in the late 90's but he didn't understand so pulled out (it was his money I planned to use!).
10 years later I am a humble proprietor in the eyes of my car insurance. The joke is they didn't even care what job I did :(. I had to answer a view questions "I am a musician or journalist" otherwise they didn't care if I owned a computer company or a coal mine.
|
|
Rattle, insurance companies have rules under which they operate and I've no doubt you do as well.
Edited by L'escargot on 13/05/2009 at 07:41
|
|
|
|
|
Perhaps this is what you get if you go for the cheapest insurance. For instance I run several vehicles including tractors.
My insurance is not the cheapest I can get, but they are prepared to transfer between vehicles as I need to use them on the road.
I used to use cheaper companies who would not even give a refund let alone transfer vehicles.
I am not unemployed but self employed, and without asking I am covered for carriage of other people's goods which presumably includes pizzas!
|
this is amazing,
I work in engineering, and 4 year ago was made redundant from a telecomms company, and was out of work for 6 weeks, during that time i never even thought of telling my car insurance company,,why would I....and when after 4 weeks of being without a job i signed on at the job centre, no one there said about car insurance, surly they would have made this important anouncement when you first claim job seekers allowance..also how else are you meant to attend job interviews...i live in a village where we get buses on tuesday and thursday at 10am and the return bus is 2pm. They even told me that I could claim petrol money to interviews....
was also made redundant in nov08 and found another job a few weeks later...
as far as not paying for servicing etc etc total tosh..
my 03 plate scooby has covered 33k and i've already got the service parts (fuel filter,plugs,airfilter, gearbox oil,diff oil,engine oil) ready for its 40k service....
|
The OP speaks of the unemployed people NOT NOTIFYING their insurance company of a material change and then subsequently making a claim.
This is not the same as losing your job and notifying them and then making a claim.
I also believe that these days you are always insured for losses claimed by a third party because of EU Regs enacted into UK law as long as you have a policy in force.
|
The moans of car insurers that they are losing millions due to the number and higher costs of claims will only lead to one thing - the tightening up of the pay outs. We've seen it with travel insurance and personal health insurance where by failing to dot an ' i ' or cross a ' t' results in a claim refusal.
Insurers are there to make money for the names and you don't do that by paying out with out question.
|
Can't see the beef here, unemployment is a significant change in circumstances and should be notified.
Or put another way, job status appears on the proposal form, so if you lose that job, the proposal is no longer truthful.
As the above poster says, insurance companies will use any excuse to avoid paying out, so why present them one on a plate?
|
ifithelps uses the term "significant change" in circumstances and I think my own policy uses the same idea but with "material" instead of "significant".
If you go right back to the proposal, an insurance company asks your job to see if they want you for a risk: most companies won't go near actors, musicians, jockeys etc, as we all know.
I can see that if I stopped being a clerical worker, say, and became a jockey that would be a material change.
But if I lost my job as a clerical worker and became unemployed? Will I cover more miles on my reduced income? We've got 2m+ people unemployed currently. Are all the drivers having car insurance problems?
I see no harm in telling the company so they can keep the info with all the other rubbish they hold onto. It still irks me that that my company records as an "incident" on my renewal info someone bumping into me, admitting liability and their company paying for the repair. When I asked the company, they just said as far as they were concerned it was an incident.
What's the old joke? People who work in insurance are those who would find accountancy too exciting!
|
|
I think that is because as drivers if we have an accident which is not our fault sometimes there is still something we could have done to avoid it. It does seem very unfair though.
|
Gulp! This has got me worried. My renewal notice has relegated my Peugeot 406 to LX trim rather than GLX. I'm guessing a 'G' could make all the difference to them paying out a claim if needed.
Getting on the telephone right now.
|
|
Just wrench the "G" off the bootlid !
|
|
|
|
|
I was made redundant in March. Never thought to tell my insurers (never claimed in 30 years. Thats the kiss of death I know). Does not make me more likely to have a fraudulent claim though (lucky enough to get a decent pay off) .Will phone up my insurers now and see what they say.
|
I've had a letter from my employer this week to let me know that in a few weeks they will no longer be my employer....motor insurance is at the moment well down my list of priorities. Something else to sort out though....
|
|
|
|
|
RAC told me they had not heard of this. They said I,m probably less of a risk now I, m not commuting every day so don,t worry about it. To appease me they have noted this in my details though.
|
RAC told me they had not heard of this. .... they have noted this in my details though. >>
They [whoever took your call] should know better.
However, much of the above discussion is much ado about nothing as it is based on a false premise.
The fact is that it is necessary to inform Insurers of a change of occupation, as it is material to deciding the risk.
The change may result in a reduced or higher premium, depending on the change in risk plus any admin charges. However, unless your occupation has changed so drastically that they no can no longer take the risk, the insurance will stay in place until your next renewal time.
At that time, you will find that some insurance companies will not quote for unemployed people; eg. one a well known company says:
" Our Insurance is aimed at average drivers, and offers sizeable discounts for the over 50s ? although under 21s and the unemployed aren't welcome. "
|
|
Which insurer is doing this?
|
|
|
|
I await the posts from people telling us that, having informed their insurers they were no longer employed, a cut in premium was offered........
|
|
Gosh....just remembered, I ought to tell my insurance company that I retired 5 weeks ago. Is that different to unemployed? After all, I am 11yrs from pensionable age.
|
|
|
|
. one a well known company says:" Our Insurance is aimed at average drivers and offers sizeable discounts for the over 50s ? although under 21s and the unemployed aren't welcome. "
No they don't - that statement is someone else's opinion of that insurance company.
|
|
|
|
|
What about the 'self-employed'?
Do they have to inform their insurers when 'times ain't been too good, guvnor'?
Edited by OldSock on 13/05/2009 at 18:12
|
No they don't - that statement is someone else's opinion of that insurance company. >>
Sorry to say old mate, but that is exactly what it says in the letter from the said insurance company to another old mate who is a Broker.
What about the 'self-employed'? Do they have to inform their insurers when 'times ain't been too good, guvnor'? >>
Yes, if your original Insurance quote was based on that information.
|
Well i phoned my own ins co today just to query and they seemed astonished that i should even ask, no such problems i am assured.
I spoke to my son again, it seems that the broker he's dealing with only have a couple of companies on their books who will quote for unemployed people, and some others that will terminate the policy immediately upon unemployment...unflippinbelievable.
As someone said above, maybe it's the cheapest quoters that do this....doesn't always pay to go too cheap i find with insurance and many other things too.
It does seem rum to me that just because some poor blighter loses their job, they are immediately classed as some sort of low life, a horrible generalisation.
It could be any of us in this situation next week.
|
gb,
There's a difference between declining a new proposal from an unemployed person and refusing to insure an existing customer who becomes unemployed.
I don't think anyone is suggesting policies are being cancelled, although I can forsee problems if a period of unemployment coincides with renewal.
Edited by ifithelps on 13/05/2009 at 19:02
|
|
|
|
Yes if your original Insurance quote was based on that information.
Based on what information? I doubt that the level of income from self-employment is ever asked by insurers - in the same way that employee's remuneration is not asked, either.
|
|
|
|
|
