Are you overpaying for insurance?

The insurance on one of my cars has been requoted 10% less than last year, and one of my son’s has a car with NFU that has been renewed at more than 10% lower than last year, without any change in circumstance and without negotiation. My house insurance has not changed either.

I insure with NFU Mutual to avoid premium hikes. I have breakdown insurance with NFU too, so that I don’t have to deal with disreputable breakdown insurance companies that reward a claim-free year with a price hike.

Before then I did not haggle for a price reduction but switched companies and made a courtesy call to explain why had gone elsewhere.

I insure a car with NFU also and am very satisfied with the price but have not, yet, fortunately had to test their claims service.

RAC basic cover is included – extra cost for a higher level – but cannot be extended to cover more than one vehicle. I want other cars included. RAC service has not been well rated by Which? and others whereas the AA are. I have had extremely good service from them over many years. However, each year they send me a renewal at an excessive premium and each year a brief phone call results in a much lower, and recently the new customer price, without argument. Whilst I do not condone the practice I easily achieve a good deal with a good provider.

Oh dear! I hope you never experience the misfortune of claiming from NFU!

Based on Which? ratings I insured my car with NFU and was quite happy with the annual premiums, due mainly to a clean driving licence and 8 years NCB, until I had the misfortune of being hit by another car, causing superfluous but repairable damage to the right front offside wing of my vehicle.

“The incident,” (as is commonly referred to by the Insurance Industry) occurred in a car park and as there were no obvious security cameras and no witnesses present I was treated with the utmost contempt by NFU’s claims dept. with threats to take my car, with genuine very low mileage, and sell it for scrap as they considered it a write off, and after deducting excess charges, would leave me with no car, precious little compensation with very little hope of claiming back excess from the third party involved, who failed to report the accident, who disappeared without trace for about 2 months and decided it was in his best interests not to make a claim from his insurance company.

I refused to concede to their ruthless demands and decided to keep my car and pay for the damage caused myself. It was restored as new by an independent competent and recommended bodywork repairer who did a fantastic job.

Some new security evidence has since come to light with video footage that witnessed the whole unfortunate incident and has the capacity to prove I was the victim of negligence by the driver of the other car.

NFU are now telling me they have been unable to make contact with the security company who could settle this dispute once and for all, and to compensate have increased their payment to me, also admitting my car was not, in fact, a write off, but here’s the rub, they have also doubled the amount of my next premium, saying the claim is still ongoing, leaving me with no other option than to pay the inflated premium, thereby preventing me from switching to another provider until they finalise this whole unfortunate circumstance.

Which? need to investigate more fully the bully boy tactics and procedures implemented by insurance companies and not rate them on false declarations used to gain ‘brownie points’ as the reality is often quite different from their inflated proclamations.

It is my intention to report NFU to the ombudsman.

Oh dear, that is not good.Had you thought of speaking to Which? Legal about pursuing your claim for your car and for your expenses and distress. I’d have thought a half decent solicitor would make mincemeat of NFU from your account of your treatment.

My son’s car was side swiped by a Polish lorry driver – accidentally, as they normally drive on the wrong side of the road 🙂 – requiring the replacement of much of the side of the car. NFU dealt with it very well indeed.

You do not know how good your insurer is until they have to part with money.

Yes Malcolm, I did contact Which? Legal at the time who were only able to advise on obtaining alternate estimates for my cars value but seemed reluctant to become involved further.

Without witnesses at a vehicle accident you are deemed guilty until proven innocent by insurance companies. Something, to date, NFU are claiming they are unable to do, despite providing them with potential evidence to prove who was responsible for the accident.

I am assuming your son was able to obtain witness statements at the time of the incident.

He also had a video camera in his car, Beryl. That reminds me, i have one but have not yet got round to fitting it…. life has been so busy.

I’m sorry to hear of all your hassle; it must have been time consuming and distressing to have to deal with unhelpful people; not what you would expect.

In early February I hit a dog when ran across the road when it was getting dark. It seemed OK but died after being taken to the PDSA. I rang NFU the following morning (Saturday) and they arranged for someone to collect the car for repair and a car hire company to deliver a loan car. So far I cannot fault NFU but I wonder what will happen to my premium at renewal time. Even though the dog had escaped and a lady was trying to recapture it, it’s my fault for hitting the dog.

I hope you get this sorted out, Beryl. We all know people who have been let down by insurance companies. As a motorcyclist an insurer wanted to settle a claim on a knock for knock basis despite the other party having admitted to causing the accident.

Depending upon the circumstances, if the dog was not on a lead – as it presumably was not – the owner could be held liable for the accident and compensated you or your insurance company. Sad maybe, but dog owners do have responsibilities and should have 3rd party insurance – possibly as part of their household cover if not specific to the animal.

The sorry story is somewhere in The Lobby, Malcolm. The dog had belonged to an old bloke, who passed it on to the RSPCA to put into foster care. The foster carers had promptly let it escape. The old chap’s stepdaughter and someone else had been trying to recapture the dog most of the day. I understand the RSPCA were the owners and I’m not going to take action, though in other circumstances I would.

That’s very interesting to know Malcolm as the potential video evidence I supplied to NFU was also a camera in a security car parked directly behind the scene of the incident.

I will certainly invest in one of these cameras when my car is up and running again and I would hope you will soon find time to install yours.

The most irksome part of this whole ghastly business is the fact that the other party is not accepting any responsibility for the damage and hassle it has caused me.

That is what you pay your insurance company to do of course – act professionally on your behalf.

I hope you have success with the ombudsman and I’m sure you’ll keep us informed. Can Which? help in any way?

Out of interest, was the repair cost more or less than your insurance excess?

If you did not go ahead with the claim, what is the justification for doubling your premium, Beryl? I had assumed that a protected no-claims discount – a common feature – would offer protection, at least against one claim.

A protected NCD does just that – preserves your discount but does not stop your base premium being increased.

Reporting an incident, even if you do not make a claim, can make you more of an insurance risk and, hence, affect your premium.

You have to be careful in not reporting an incident in case the other party decides to.

Malcolm and Wavechange

I got so fed up with NFUs pitiful compensatory offers and being left without a car and nowhere near enough to buy even a used car, it worked out much cheaper to pay for the repairs myself and keep the car.

I did however, enjoy some interesting conversations with the guy who took very great care of me as well as my car by transporting me to and from the train station to his workshop and who also agreed with me insurance companies will try it on when they happen to come across a classic low mileage vehicle. Their engineers have contacts in the vehicle repair business who will carry out the necessary repairs at an agreed price and sell them on at auction at a nice profit.

They doubled my premium Wavechange because when I reported the incident, (as one is supposed to do) I claimed I was not responsible, and as my premium was coming up for renewal and there were no witnesses I was considered suspect, so I had no choice, I had to pay it otherwise I couldn’t drive my car to be repaired without insurance.

It was when I remembered a security vehicle was parked opposite the incident they decided to increase their payment and so, to answer your question Malcolm, until I am In a position to claim the excess charges from the other driver I am still out-of-pocket, until this is settled, but at least I do still have a car to drive. Unfortunately, making a claim against another insurance company’s client is considered justification for doubling ones premium.

Another insurance company will be reluctant to take you on whilst a claim is still ongoing and those who may will probably charge you a higher premium than the present one. As long as you want to continue to keep your car on the road, they know you have to pay up or shut up.

There is a urgent need to address the fraudulent practices carried out by the insurance industry to stop people being ripped off and I hope Which? will take on board some of the concerns reported on this forum, including carrying out more thorough and extensive research when rating them.

Thanks for the update, Beryl. Let’s hope that you have more luck with the ombudsman.

I recall that you asked how a friend fared over a burglary earlier this year. The case is still ongoing because jewellery receipts were mislaid during a house move. She might know soon and I’m surprised that NFU has not wanted to close the case.

When you are ready to buy a camera it might be worth reviving one of these Convos in the hope that you can get some advice: https://conversation.which.co.uk/?s=dashcam&cat=0 If I was in the market, I would want a camera that continues to record when the car is parked.

Malcolm – I appreciate that a claim can lead to a future increase in premium but I’m surprised that Beryl was asked to pay double. If you don’t report an accident and the other party does you have no-one to blame but yourself and I assume that insurance companies are still allowed to share information despite GDPR.

Thanks for the link Wavechange. It didnt occur to me until sometime after the incident that security vehicles will leave their dash-cams switched on when leaving their cars parked, but on reflection it is probably more important particularly when they are collecting cash takings from retail and supermarket outlets.

I hope your friend received better treatment than I and she will receive a fair settlement for her missing jewellery, although nothing really compensates for items of sentimental value from loved ones passed.

I would advise anyone to install a camera in their car to protect themselves if and when they are unfortunate enough to become involved in a no witness accident.

For the record, the main reason for the huge hike in premiums is, insurers claim following a car accident you are more likely to be involved in another fairly soon
afterwards.

Most of the jewellery belonged to her mother and had not been valued recently, adding to the uncertainty. Using photos and the old valuations a jeweller was able to produce an up to date valuation.

I suspect that the ‘robust’ behaviour of insurance companies towards claims is culturally ingrained, not based on reason or rational appraisal of the situation. Psychologically, it could also be a subconscious reaction to the prevalence of unjustified, exaggerated and fraudulent claims cultivated by greed and the attitude that everything has its compensation and it must be claimed at an inflated level to offset the likelihood of being beaten back.

I am somewhat surprised at Beryl’s experience of NFU Mutual because I had always assumed that, while not the most economical insurer, they were one of the fairest. I have never used them myself as I have always been content with my existing motor insurance company, but I have never put them to the test with a claim.

I think you are right, John, and it’s hard for honest to be treated in the same way as those who exaggerate claims. The usual advice is not to accept an insurance company’s offer if a car is written off.

Normal (market value) car insurance will not enable you to buy an equivalent car in the event of theft or if it is written off. We may be offered a good trade for an old car, but that is offset by a higher cost for a new one. The alternative is to pay more for an agreed value policy.

The general principle of insurance was to put the policyholder back in the position they were in before the event that led to a claim. That does not seem to apply in the case of motor insurance and ‘new for old’ is not an option either. Trying to keep insurance cover affordable means that companies require their policyholders to make compromises – whether or not to claim, how much excess to carry, and how much to haggle over premiums and over claims offers. The customer is always on the back foot because they do not have access to all the information needed to make the market work fairly. That is a fact of life and we have had to learn to put up with it.

I have occasionally wondered how many write-offs actually get scrapped. Those that are ‘totalled’ obviously do, but they still have a scrap value. Others get sold down the trade, depending on their condition and type, for rebuilding/repairing or for parts recovery. Insurance companies like their customers to understand that they make absolutely nothing out of a write-off and that they are doing them a favour by taking it off their hands and disposing of it safely for them. How much of this is official and on the books is difficult to judge; it is not unheard of for people whose car has been badly damaged to be chased by companies peddling compensation claims and there is the suspicion that such leads come from inside the insurance industry.

It is extremely frustrating that I am stuck with this rogue insurer indefinitely with an inflated annual premium until they finalise this claim. This anticompetitive stance means I am unable to switch to another provider due to their suspicious and dubious claims they have contacted the security company holding potential evidence that could exonerate me from any liability, by phone, email and letter but have received no response from them and, furthermore, they are not hopeful of receiving any but the case is still ongoing???

They also refused to disclose the insurer of the other driver and so I paid a fee to obtain this from the online auto data base.

This is not what one expects from a Which? top rated
Insurance Company.

I recall seeing a posting on another website from a woman whose insurer claimed her car was a write off and she let them take it away. Unbelievably a couple of months later she was driving around and came across someone else driving around in her old car!

PS: John we don’t have to put up with it, especially when you are are an innocent victim of a negligent driver who fails to report an accident and goes missing without trace for 2 months afterwards. Nothing will change if these fraudulent tactics are allowed to continue unabated.

Beryl, I’m sure you will have done this but just in case……….. You could contact the chief executive of NFU Mutual insurance. CEOemail.com is invaluable in finding such contacts but is not always up to date. Currently they show Lindsay.Sinclair@nfumutual.co.uk.

My commiserations Beryl.

When someone scraped my car when it was parked, I managed to get some security footage. Luckily the loss adjuster took my side as my car was in otherwise excellent condition and the other driver had his very tatty car repaired where it scraped mine. Do you know who has the security footage and can you get them to give you a copy. You would need to tell them the date and time it took place.

An internet search says you don’t have to stay with an insurance company mid-claim. Have you tried talking to a broker like the AA or A-Plan for a quote? A-Plan are usually very helpful. If NFU are going to double your premium, it might be worth switching now rather than stay with them.

Your discussion with your repairer is probably what was behind when I had car stolen and crashed many years ago. The loss adjuster refused to discuss it with me but wanted my permission to have it taken to a scrap yard. It was my company car that I had just paid around £5000 for and they wanted to give me £1200 for the write-off. After much wrangling, the car was repaired and kept for many years.

I agree entirely with what you are saying, Beryl, and deprecate the way you are being treated.

What I said we have had to learn to put up with is not such appalling treatment by your insurance company or by the perpetrator of the damage to your car, but the overall situation where the car owner is always at a disadvantage. The insurance market is neither fair nor transparent because the companies have a monopoly of the relevant information which they share amongst themselves for mutual protection but will not disclose to the affected party. It is an unfortunate characteristic of a market that does not serve consumers’ interests properly and seems to be impervious to reform. It takes unfair and monopolistic advantage of the essential legal obligation for people to insure their motor cars.

I wish you well with your claim and endorse Malcolm’s advice to escalate this within NFU Mutual. It would make a good ‘brief case’ article in a consumer magazine.

alfa, the security company is a well known large international that operates on a world wide scale.

I naively thought a large top rated insurer acting presumably in my interest could use their corporate influence to secure the info that would absolve me from any liability in this case. Isn’t that what we pay them to do?

Until this case is wrapped up other insurers will feel obliged to keep the premiums high until my insurer confirms I am not responsible for the accident. NFU are aware of this and as long as they insist on keeping this case ongoing without providing evidence of pursuing it further, which in turn, could provide evidence as to who was liable in this case, this will keep me tied to them and prevent me from claiming excess charges from the other driver who has now seemingly become invisible!

Malcolm before taking a complaint to the ombudsman one has to first put your complaint to the insurers complaints dept which I have already done but I am not satisfied with their reply so I hesitate to approach the CEO at this stage in the procedure.

I just want this over with so I can get on with the rest of my life and exercise my right to switch to another provider who will act in my interest rather than that of the other party.

One little-used car is insured through a broker who survey providers each year and make a recommendation; for the last couple of years this has been Sabre. Another is insured with LV. I have not had to use their services but LV (who took on Nationwide’s motor insurance) get a thumbs up from Which?.

I don’t disagree as I intimated.

The same organisation charging people different prices for the same service is not uncommon among reputable organisations. Which? Legal and magazine subscriptions seem an example.

I renewed my energy contract recently; a good deal offered on Which?Switch was denied me because my existing (expiring) contract was with that particular supplier. No such problem going via USwitch. What was very disturbing was that both the Which? and USwitch offers were not available direct from the energy company and were very substantially cheaper – like 30%. I’m surprised Which? participate in what seems to be a rigged market.

By all means let us try and change what we think are bad practices. But, in the meantime, educate people in dealing with them.

I assume that Which? magazines and subscriptions to Which? legal are on a temporary basis and not annual costs.

I do agree that switching companies should not offer tariffs that cannot be obtained direct from the companies. If your council is running a collective switching scheme, that might be the best value for money and that won’t feature on U-Switch etc. The drawback is that you could end up with a company with poor customer service.

Good points, Alfa.

One of the traps with insuring contents is that if you have a claim and the insurer considers that you have not purchased sufficient cover they can either repudiate the claim altogether or, more likely, “average” it so that if, say, they believe you have insured for only 60% of the value of all your contents they will only pay out a maximum of 60% of your claim because it is a condition of the insurance that your sum insured covers the full extent of any potential loss. I wouldn’t replace absolutely everything in the event of a total loss so I don’t see why I should insure it. Like most people we have obsolete things, broken or worn-out products, too much furniture, surplus articles, unfashionable clothes that we wouldn’t be seen dead in, and hundreds of books and ephemera that could not be replaced and would not need to be.

I favour insurers that set a high inclusive value [e.g. £1 million] for contents but nonetheless treat a claim in a reasonable and sympathetic way without the need for an argument over the value of individual items. I would not want insurance where the company specified or provided the replacement products but this has been a recent trend.

Many years ago I suffered a burglary and had to deal with a loss adjuster employed by the insurance company; it was a most exhausting and stressful experience that left me extremely dissatisfied.

Pricing insurance cover is an arcane but profitable technique and, as Wavechange says, it is almost impossible to make proper comparisons of value for money as purchasers do not have the perfect knowledge required to make the market work properly.

Graham – Some insurance companies are probably more reasonable over handling claims and will see the value in quickly settling a well-itemised claim, but others send in a loss adjuster straight away – as you say., to mitigate the company’s losses [and they are probably paid a results-related commission to incentivise their efforts]. The only defence against this is to for the claimant to instruct their own ‘loss assessor’ whose job is to maximise their client’s recovery. That comes at a price but could be worth it if there is a significantly better settlement than would otherwise be achieved.