Quote:
Originally Posted by isleaiw1
I'll just leave this here....from The Insurance Act 2015, applicable to all policies from mid 2016...
Duty of fair presentation
Scope of the duty The 2015 Act replaces the existing duty on non-consumer parties to disclose all material circumstances (including any circumstances which it ought to know in the ordinary course of its business) to insurers before entering into an insurance contract.
Knowledge of the parties The 2015 Act specifies what both an insured and an insurer (a) know; or (b) ought to know/are presumed to have known.
Remedies for breach The remedy of avoidance for material non-disclosure will no longer be automatically available to an insurer. Instead, a tiered set of remedies will be available based upon the insured's intent for the breach (whether deliberate or reckless) and the insurer's appetite for the risk in the non-disclosed circumstance (whether the insurer would have still contracted even if on different terms or at a higher premium).
the duty of fair presentation under the 2015 Act and prohibition of "basis of contract" clauses only apply to non-consumer insurance contracts (because the duty of fair presentation and prohibition of basis of contract clauses already applies to consumer insurance contracts under the Consumer Insurance (Disclosure and Representations) Act 2012); and
the application of the 2015 Act to consumer insurance contracts is mandatory and cannot be contracted out.
So my interpretation:
You have to tell them everyone that you know or should reasonably have known...
if you dont they have a tiered set of remedies - the first thing is whether you were reckless in not telling them and the second whether they would still have insured...
So if you dont tell them you have changed the grille, you will probably be covered.... If you dont tell them you have a switchable tuning box that you had fitted on a car you bought new they would probably claim that was willful and reckless on your behalf and would try to avoid liability and you may have to bring a claim via the ombudsman to test that.
Its not how I would want to be living post a serious accident... but each to their own.
|
Think that Act is pretty much entirely for non-consumer contracts only so wouldn't apply to usual personal car insurance?
As far as I've seen an insurer can 'void' the insurance (treat it as if it never existed) on the grounds of deliberate non-declaration of modifications.
Given it could be argued any tuning could contribute to the majority of accidents (unless you were parked and someone hit you) and therefore the insurer can void on non-declaration, especially if they wouldn't have agreed to cover the risk - eg my insurer cover no mods therefore if I claimed and didn't declare they'd argue they would never have accepted the risk in the first place and void it - why bother insuring beyond third party? I get the prices can get eye watering, but just from a selfish point of view if I crashed my expensive motor I'd be an idiot to knowingly under-declare as there's a very good chance they'd happily dodge the payout.
Given the very kind of accidents you want cover for - the ones where your car has suffered thousands in damage or is written off - are exactly the ones insurers will start utilising vehicle examiners in, its not worth it IMO.
Oh and you should see the level of inspection carried out if it's a fatal collision, your car will have every little bit examined and if you're already in the sights of the law for a driving offence, the nail in your coffin will be undeclared mods because that'll just be more evidence of recklessness. If they were unsure on fault this could also go against you same as being under the influence - the starting point is pretty much the drunk person was at fault.
Plus you'll get hit with no money for your motor and then being sued by the insurer for their losses in paying out which will bankrupt you and all your assets.