DON'T LET YOUR INSURER GET AWAY WITH IT: PART 2

Renewing your car insurance? I have already alerted you to one development which your insurer might use to justify a premium increase (see my Don't let your insurer get away with it post on 5 January 2017).

Here's another.

Insurer to you: "It isn't necessary for you to shout at me, sir. A European order coming in on 1 March 2017 means that we must pay more  money to the Motor Insurers Bureau to cover any claims by victims of negligent drivers who were uninsured or have never been traced. That is going to cost us an arm and a leg and we are having to pass that extra burden on to our policyholders. All insurers are doing it. It really hurts us, be assured. Our chief executive officer has been up at night worrying about it. But there you are. Thank goodness for Brexit but it hasn't happened yet. We very much appreciate your loyalty to us over the last 30 years and would you mind answering a customer survey when we have finished?"

DON'T LET YOUR INSURER GET AWAY WITH IT

As from 31 December 2016, your motor insurance policy must include cover for damage to property (be it someone else's car or their brick wall) for up to at least £1.2m. This is an increase of £200,000 on the previous figure. Happily, most insurance policies already provide even more cover than the new minimum figure. If any don't, the insurer must now up the figure. 

When you come to renew your policy, your insurer might conceivably ask for an increased premium. Really! They may rely on increased car repair charges, the cost of fraudulent whiplash claims, that the name of your street starts with an 'R', the time of day or....compulsory insurance cover for damage to property having gone up by £200,000. On the last point, don't let them get away with it. The government consulted on raising the figure and they were told by insurers that few £1m property damage claims were made and that they did not think the increase in the minimum cover would lead to any significant increase in premiums.

GOOD WEEK FOR LIARS, BAD WEEK FOR INSURERS

I'm not recommending that you lie to your insurers when making a claim. What I am doing is saying that if you do lie but is wasn't a whopper, the insurers may no longer be able to use it to escape paying you out.

The Supreme Court has given its blessing to a change in approach where the insurer has been told a collateral lie - something which is irrelevant because the claim was justified whether that something was true or false. Say you are making a claim after your house burnt down in an accidental fire and you lie to your insurers that you dropped the match in the living room when, in fact, you dropped it in the dining room. Probably irrelevant and collateral. 

However, be in no doubt that your insurers can send you packing if your claim is fraudulent or you have exaggerated it. And probably also where one part of the claim is genuine but the other part is fraudulent.

In the case before the Supreme Court on 20 July 2016,  the collateral lie to the insurers of a ship whose engine room was flooded was not fatal. The claim by the owners was for over 3,000,000 euros.