No Claims Bonus Lie and now had car crash

[TheGuru2010]

I think you may have misread my post as I didnt say that insurance dont void policies. I was saying its very hard for them to do so apart from certain circumstances. Cancelling 3rd party liabilities is even harder.

I know all about the Mib I have used them in the past.(dodgy broker).


Mib isnt a government fund either

My appologies it was setup by the goverment but funded through the insurers who then in turn charge us on our premium's !! Bit of a pain if you ask me

 

[Mpg]

We should have a visible system and isure the vehicle rather than the driver.

A us style plate that get renewed yearly that shows tax MOT and Insurance.

It'll also give the inmates something to do

 

[Michael Gerard]

Some info that may bring a little optimism to the poster: www.yourmotorinsurance.co.uk/advice_what_if_i_give_wrong_details.htm

 

[drounding]

I think the basic minimum third party insurance should be built into the price of fuel.

 

[Mpg]

My appologies it was setup by the goverment but funded through the insurers who then in turn charge us on our premium's !! Bit of a pain if you ask me

trying not to be pedantic.

But
The Motor Insurers' Bureau (MIB) was founded in the UK in 1946 as a private company limited by guarantee and is the mechanism in the UK through which compensation is found for claims against uninsured drivers, and hit and run incidents. Uninsured drivers cost the average motorist about £30 a year.

Its role was and is to enter into agreements with the Government as to how compensation claims from people who have been involved in accidents which were caused by uninsured or untraced drivers may be compensated. The Road Traffic act 1988 requires every insurer dealing with compulsory motor insurance to belong to the MIB and to contribute to its funding.



Pedantic mode off.

 

[TheGuru2010]

We should have a visible system and isure the vehicle rather than the driver.

A us style plate that get renewed yearly that shows tax MOT and Insurance.

It'll also give the inmates something to do

I personally think we should be harder on the uninsured, if you get done for no insurance you will prob get 6 points and a £200 fine - not enough in my eyes!!!

 

[Mpg]

No its not enough at all.

I was given 8 points and a £160 fine. On a £1000 per year policy 18 yrs ago.

Again not my fault I was eventually aquited at crown court after i could prove i paid my premium and had a cover note its just that my dodgy broker never informed the Insurance company and kept my cash.


I also think points needed before banning need changing. I do 100k per year so 10 x the avg. if the avg get caught speeding every 50k then thats twice a year for me. so a ban is a bit harsh

 

[TheGuru2010]

No its not enough at all.

I was given 8 points and a £160 fine. On a £1000 per year policy 18 yrs ago.

Again not my fault I was eventually aquited at crown court after i could prove i paid my premium and had a cover note its just that my dodgy broker never informed the Insurance company and kept my cash.


I also think points needed before banning need changing. I do 100k per year so 10 x the avg. if the avg get caught speeding every 50k then thats twice a year for me. so a ban is a bit harsh

I think i may know the broker your are rffering to here !! not to mention names though!

 

[robertt]

I think the basic minimum third party insurance should be built into the price of fuel.

So those who drive more pay more? Hardly fair.

I would say do it on car tax or MOT etc - however if you cant be arsed to get insurance right they are unlikely to get those done either.

I dont have a solution either, I am just having a whinge

 

[MikeJ]

Why isn't it fair that those that drive more, pay more? That seems very fair to me.

 

[LicensedToTrade]

Why isn't it fair that those that drive more, pay more? That seems very fair to me.

Like pay as you go...

 

[robertt]

Why isn't it fair that those that drive more, pay more? That seems very fair to me.

How is an insured, taxed, mot'ed bloke who drives 50,000 miles a year more responsible for chavvy non-insured types than the bloke who potters about doing 10,000 miles pa?

Not talking road tax / congestion / green issues here - its effectively subsidising the system based on people out to save a few quid.


The OP dodges insurance costs and 'cost' to him could be a max of £200. Makes economic sense to try it on if you are the gambling type.

If it fails, others pick up the pieces.

 

[Mpg]

It needs to be the other way round. The more miles you do the less you pay. Well as your doing more miles your paying more anyway. Lets get britain moving again

 

[directmarketingadvice]

The Guru is correct: 'Uberrima fides' - Utmost good faith

It is not hard for them at all to cancel a policy and void the insurance where the insured has not been truthful in procuring the cover, and hence I will be amazed if the insurer in these circumstances would make any payout to a third party. In all probability they will cancel the insurance and void the policy for breach of a material fact.

I'm no lawyer, but based on common sense, this should be the case.

If you agree to a contract with someone and the price is based on a piece of information they gave you, then if you find out that that information is incorrect, surely you should have the right to tear up the contract?

Otherwise, wouldn't it make sense (though immoral) for everyone to say they have no claims?

Steve

 

[LicensedToTrade]

I'm no lawyer, but based on common sense, this should be the case.

If you agree to a contract with someone and the price is based on a piece of information they gave you, then if you find out that that information is incorrect, surely you should have the right to tear up the contract?

Otherwise, wouldn't it make sense (though immoral) for everyone to say they have no claims?

Steve

I agree, if you were to enter into a contract to supply someone with 10,000 units over the year and you gave them a cost based on these volumes you wouldn't be too pleased to get an order totalling 500 units in the year. This would expose your business to costs beyond your calculations just as the insurance company are exposing themselves to uncalculated costs based on a lie.

 

[Mpg]

The rules for the 3rd party liability is a little different. The Insurance companies accept some risk in order to provide cover.

I'll dig out some of my old research notes.

 

It needs to be the other way round. The more miles you do the less you pay. Well as your doing more miles your paying more anyway. Lets get britain moving again

In spite of the fact you are doing more damage to the roads and the environment allied to depleting a scarce national resource.?

Not to mention that the risk of an accident is increased the more time spent on the road with the huge costs that may be involved in that scenario.

Earl

 

[Mpg]

In spite of the fact you are doing more damage to the roads and the environment allied to depleting a scarce national resource.?

Not to mention that the risk of an accident is increased the more time spent on the road with the huge costs that may be involved in that scenario.

Earl

I meant % wise. we may be doing more damage but we also put a damn site more into the governments pockets by doing so. We go through over £5k per month on fuel. What is it 64% fuel duty

 

I meant % wise. we may be doing more damage but we also put a damn site more into the governments pockets by doing so. We go through over £5k per month on fuel. What is it 80% fuel duty

The fact that governments syphon off cash to subsidise other causes does not alter the basic premise.

Earl