A tree fell onto my car whilst parked on private property during a storm and completely wrote it off. The insurance is in my name but the vehicle was in the possession of a friend whom is listed as a regular driver on the policy. The insurance company is demanding a full driving history record from myself and all listed drivers. Is it mandatory for the listed drivers to provide all documentation being requested and if they refuse can the claim be denied? I don’t understand how any of it can be relevant when the vehicle was parked on private property and no one was in the vehicle at the time of the accident.
VIC Can claim be denied if third parties don’t provide documentation that is not relevant to claim?
- Thread starter BecRidge
- Start date
I'm only guessing, but I assume that insurance companies don't distinguish between someone being in the car at the time or not and I think they use the driving records to determine the excess. Also, I would think that a better way to handle this would be to claim under the insurance for the property if has the appropriate cover.
@Zerojay used to work for an insurance company, so he might be able to provide some clarity for you. (He'll see that he's been tagged on his next login, but he hasn't logged in since mid November. Might be on holidays.)
@Zerojay used to work for an insurance company, so he might be able to provide some clarity for you. (He'll see that he's been tagged on his next login, but he hasn't logged in since mid November. Might be on holidays.)
Not on holidays - just busy.
It is not unusual for insurers to ask these questions when a claim is made even though there is no relevance to the cause of the damage. What the insurer is doing is making sure your policy was not issued to you on the basis of a misrepresentation of you and any other named insured being an acceptable risk. In other words, if the driving record of a person was bad, and the insurer, if they had been made aware, would not have issued cover in the first place, then the insurer may have grounds to refuse the claim and cancel the policy. But this is complicated and depends on questions asked and answers given when the policy sold and/or renewed, what the insurer’s underwriting guidelines are, the policy and renewal wording etc.
If you do not have a bad record or you did make full disclosure when you bought or renewed the policy, then you should have no problem.
I do not like your chances of claiming against the property owner when storm appears to be the cause rather than his negligence.
I do not give legal advice, just my opinion based on working for an insurance company for over 20 years.
It is not unusual for insurers to ask these questions when a claim is made even though there is no relevance to the cause of the damage. What the insurer is doing is making sure your policy was not issued to you on the basis of a misrepresentation of you and any other named insured being an acceptable risk. In other words, if the driving record of a person was bad, and the insurer, if they had been made aware, would not have issued cover in the first place, then the insurer may have grounds to refuse the claim and cancel the policy. But this is complicated and depends on questions asked and answers given when the policy sold and/or renewed, what the insurer’s underwriting guidelines are, the policy and renewal wording etc.
If you do not have a bad record or you did make full disclosure when you bought or renewed the policy, then you should have no problem.
I do not like your chances of claiming against the property owner when storm appears to be the cause rather than his negligence.
I do not give legal advice, just my opinion based on working for an insurance company for over 20 years.
I should have added, if the situation is that the nominated driver has a bad history, and your history is okay, then it is unlikely the insurer can cancel the policy and refuse your claim. This is because the insurer would still have offered insurance cover to you, so they may be restricted to just removing the nominated driver from cover.
A typical policy wording will say there is no cover when the vehicle is being driven by an unnamed driver. Which of course is different to an unnamed person being in charge of the vehicle whilst it is parked and unattended.
A typical policy wording will say there is no cover when the vehicle is being driven by an unnamed driver. Which of course is different to an unnamed person being in charge of the vehicle whilst it is parked and unattended.
Thanks, that’s essentially what I needed to know. Because it was a somewhat new policy the insurance company is trying every avenue to get out of it. They’re more than happy to take the money for the premium and the $1000 excess but don’t want to cough up the cash for the car. Very frustrating.
Unsure if your claim is still progressing, however having worked at an insurance company for many years, a history is merely a routine request for a write-off.
Similar threads
