How long does non disclosure remain on your file?

jtmturner

Hi all

First post here, please forgive me if this is in the wrong place, I'm not a big forum user

The basic question is, how long does non disclosure remain on your file? and can you get it cleared?

The full story goes -

My wife is having some bother with our car insurance.

It turns out they believe that when she renewed in 2012 she failed to disclose an accident she had in 2011.

Now they are quoting us double what they were quoting us before they came across this issue and have informed us the insurance we've been paying for has been void all along.

My wife has nothing to hide with the accident, it was very minor and both parties played by the rules completely.

She does not remember them asking on the phone if she had ever been in an accident, and if they had of asked she would have told them, but since its the same company that covered her for the accident it makes no sense that they wouldn't know about it. She asked to hear the tapes of her "failing to disclose" but they said the conversation was irrelevant as they have a signed document. The document she signed came from the broker and was filled in by their computers, except for an 'X' marks the spot for the signature and date. The section for previous accidents was left blank by their computers which my wife missed and just signed.

Now we're trying to get quotes from other brokers, but as soon as they hear that we have a non disclosure on our file with someone else they won't even talk to us and end the conversation.

So yes, she should have added the accident details herself or alerted them to the mistake, but she didn't. It was an honest mistake she just signed as the information matched a conversation she had had with them on the phone a few days prior. Now she is worried this non disclosure will remain on her file for years, meaning we're stuck with whatever price our current broker wants to set.

It feels like our insurance broker company are holding us to ransom, for a simple mistake partly made by my wife and partly by them (not including it on the form or asking).

What can we do?

Jack

power pants

Try a broker? I was contacting insurance companies last week and every single one asked numerous times if I had been in accident in the last x amount of years or anything pending.

Hopefully a broker will sort you out

dh0011

Might be worth threathening the insurer with the insurance ombudsman. They dont like this at all as any complaint to the ombudsman regardless of whether it is upheld or not results in a few hundred euro of a cost to the insurer.

colm_mcm

Was your wife not surprised that her premium hadn't shot up after the accident?

Premium doubling would be normal enough.

Henry Ford III

I'd imagine the premium is increased for one of 2 reasons:-

1/. An open claim
2/. A loss of NCB due to an own fault claim.

dollybird2

Do you have to inform other insurance companies of the non disclosure or can they access this information themselves, out of interest?

With re: to the non disclosure, there is a legal duty on the motorist to disclose all facts relevant to attaining insurance when renewing/purchasing a policy. Legally, the courts tend to seperate non disclosure into two categories - fraudulently witholding facts and the innocent omission of facts. I'd threaten the ombudsman also stating that your wife didn't commit a fraudulent act but innocently assumed the insurance company had the details on file as they were the company covering her at the time of the accident. I don't know if this will work but it's worth a try.

Always read a contract before signing in future!

unkel

Welcome to boards, Jack

jtmturner wrote: »

What can we do?

Probably not much. Phone calls are recorded by insurance companies and they probably have your wife say no to the question "have you had a claim in the past 5 years"

And evidence that there was a claim...

Shop around by all means though!

Barr

dh0011 wrote: »

Might be worth threathening the insurer with the insurance ombudsman. They dont like this at all as any complaint to the ombudsman regardless of whether it is upheld or not results in a few hundred euro of a cost to the insurer.

How exactly does it cost the insurer money? I thought the ombudsman was independent.

dh0011

The insurer is supposed to have a complaints procedure in place to deal with any issues that arise. If the insured feels this is not adequate and takes the matter up with the ombudsman then the insurer must cover the cost.

I thought it was a bit mad myself (did an internship with a large insurer) but thats the way it works.

You are right Barr, the O is impartial and independent.

Barr

Interesting. Not to be on the side of the Insurer but they have to pay for a complaint made against them no matter how spurious :eek:

dh0011

It is not the worst system as the insurer is the one who will always be the cause of complaint. For example if the insurer is not satisfied with a claim it doesnt pay. There is an incentive for the insurer not to pay (getting to keep your money) so there should be consequences if the insurer doesnt pay when it should.

Hal1

Might be worth trying xsdirect.ie. They should quote you since you haven't been convicted of anything illegal.

Del2005

jtmturner wrote: »

Hi all

First post here, please forgive me if this is in the wrong place, I'm not a big forum user

The basic question is, how long does non disclosure remain on your file? and can you get it cleared?

The full story goes -

My wife is having some bother with our car insurance.

It turns out they believe that when she renewed in 2012 she failed to disclose an accident she had in 2011.

Now they are quoting us double what they were quoting us before they came across this issue and have informed us the insurance we've been paying for has been void all along.

My wife has nothing to hide with the accident, it was very minor and both parties played by the rules completely.

She does not remember them asking on the phone if she had ever been in an accident, and if they had of asked she would have told them, but since its the same company that covered her for the accident it makes no sense that they wouldn't know about it. She asked to hear the tapes of her "failing to disclose" but they said the conversation was irrelevant as they have a signed document. The document she signed came from the broker and was filled in by their computers, except for an 'X' marks the spot for the signature and date. The section for previous accidents was left blank by their computers which my wife missed and just signed.

Now we're trying to get quotes from other brokers, but as soon as they hear that we have a non disclosure on our file with someone else they won't even talk to us and end the conversation.

So yes, she should have added the accident details herself or alerted them to the mistake, but she didn't. It was an honest mistake she just signed as the information matched a conversation she had had with them on the phone a few days prior. Now she is worried this non disclosure will remain on her file for years, meaning we're stuck with whatever price our current broker wants to set.

It feels like our insurance broker company are holding us to ransom, for a simple mistake partly made by my wife and partly by them (not including it on the form or asking).

What can we do?

Jack

No offence to your wife but any time I get an insurance quote I'm asked if I've had any claims in the last 3/5 years, some even ask about any claims with no time. Also the proposal form she just signed is a legally binding document, IRCC it says at the top to carefully read and make sure all the details are correct. I've often made ammendemnts to proposal forms and never had a quote changed. The fact that she didn't read the proposal from is her's not the insurance company's fault, she has made a false declaration and the company is within it's rights to not quote.

The only recourse open now is the Insurance Ombudsman, hopefully it'll come out in your favour.

ironclaw

Heres the thing though, she had an accident that she is admitting to. Her premium is going to increase no matter the outcome of an ombudsman or solicitor. You'd just be going through the motions. The onus is on the insuree to declare their affairs and previous accidents, not the insurance company to ask. I certainly would be upfront if I had an accident when renewing a policy, there is no reason to hide it. Had she had an accident this year, they probably would have flagged the previous undeclared accident and had a canary either way.

Why bothering 'fighting' it? Just shop around and be honest.

MugMugs

Sorry but feck this.

Your wife had an accident while Insured with ABC Insurance. ABC Insurance were notified of the claim and dealt with it. Come renewal ABC didn't consider the claim and your wife retained her policy with them.

Then ABC come along and say it's Non Disclosure?

Bull sh1t it is!

Yes, she should have checked the proposal form fully and amended any details that were incorrect (like the claim) and sent it back but they were equally wrong in not noting the claim had occurred.

And if your policies were void all these years, ask them why a cheque isn't coming back with the premiums owed!

Here's what you do.

Send your insurance company a letter outlining a minor error on your part. Point out the gaping error on their part and request a final response.

Refer this on to the Ombudsman who will nail this crowd to the wall for their incompetence. Have any trace of Non Disclosure removed and shop elsewhere.

By the way, there's no "file" for all Insurers to see Non Disclosure. That falls under Utmost good faith. Other insurers can only see your claims record if they bother checking.

jtmturner

Thanks all

and thanks to MugsMugs for completely seeing where I'm coming from.

We phoned the ombudsman today but were told since they have a signed document there's very little that can be done. Still needed to check so I'd advise anyone in a similar boat to start there.

We will go with our original broker, and their new extortionate quote, for a year and then see where we are after that.

Thanks all

MugMugs

jtmturner wrote: »

Thanks all

and thanks to MugsMugs for completely seeing where I'm coming from.

We phoned the ombudsman today but were told since they have a signed document there's very little that can be done. Still needed to check so I'd advise anyone in a similar boat to start there.

We will go with our original broker, and their new extortionate quote, for a year and then see where we are after that.

Thanks all

I really wouldn't be giving up that easily. The Ombudsman shouldn't really be commenting until you've exhausted the companies complaints procedure and they can investigate the matter in full which costs you nothing.

IF I were you, I'd renew with the current quote and then issue out your complaint and push this the whole way.

I'd imagine the increase in premium is more to do with the claim than with Non Disclosure.

amen

I'd imagine the premium is increased for one of 2 reasons:-

1/. An open claim

Can you explain why an open claim should lead to an increase in premium ?

MugMugs

amen wrote: »

Can you explain why an open claim should lead to an increase in premium ?

An open claim has a potential for a few Million in a payout.

Until it's closed then the exact cost of the claim is unknown therefore an insurer is unable to determine how much of a risk that driver actually is.

Generally open claims attract bigger loadings than closed claims.

djimi

MugMugs wrote: »

Sorry but feck this.

Your wife had an accident while Insured with ABC Insurance. ABC Insurance were notified of the claim and dealt with it. Come renewal ABC didn't consider the claim and your wife retained her policy with them.

Then ABC come along and say it's Non Disclosure?

Bull sh1t it is!

Yes, she should have checked the proposal form fully and amended any details that were incorrect (like the claim) and sent it back but they were equally wrong in not noting the claim had occurred.

And if your policies were void all these years, ask them why a cheque isn't coming back with the premiums owed!

Here's what you do.

Send your insurance company a letter outlining a minor error on your part. Point out the gaping error on their part and request a final response.

Refer this on to the Ombudsman who will nail this crowd to the wall for their incompetence. Have any trace of Non Disclosure removed and shop elsewhere.

By the way, there's no "file" for all Insurers to see Non Disclosure. That falls under Utmost good faith. Other insurers can only see your claims record if they bother checking.

Ultimately the customer signed the final document to declare that they had no claims in the past x number of years. I dont see why it matters what the insurer should or shouldnt know; a false declaration was made and signed. There may be incompetence and blame on both sides, but as far as I can see if the significant portion lies with the customer, not the insurer. The insurer made a mistake in the paperwork, but asked the customer to check everything, amend where necessary and then sign to say that all is correct.

MugMugs

djimi wrote: »

Ultimately the customer signed the final document to declare that they had no claims in the past x number of years. I dont see why it matters what the insurer should or shouldnt know; a false declaration was made and signed. There may be incompetence and blame on both sides, but as far as I can see if the significant portion lies with the customer, not the insurer. The insurer made a mistake in the paperwork, but asked the customer to check everything, amend where necessary and then sign to say that all is correct.

Run it down a bit then

I have an accident. I have a claim as a result and I renew my policy unknowingly signing off that I didn't have an accident with the same company on renewal.

I crash my car and cause carnage and we end up in court.

Judge to company: So MugMugs had a claim with you, you renewed his policy without the claim added to the same and now you're attempting to renege on the policy due to Non Disclosure of a material fact despite the fact that you the corporate professional outfit were previously aware of the claim as you'd dealt with it yourselves.

There's negligence on behalf of the Insured but there's blatant negligence on behalf of the Insurer.

OP - Did you change Insurer but stuck with your Broker?

I'd assumed you were with the same Insurance Company.

Also, have you had a policy cancelled as a result of this Non Disclosure or were you refused renewal with this company as a result of the non disclosure?

I can't see what question is tripping you up on getting quotes from other companies.

ThisRegard

MugMugs wrote: »

I can't see what question is tripping you up on getting quotes from other companies.

"Have you had an accidents or claims in the last 3/5 years ?". Won't stop him getting a quote, but will stop him getting a competitive quote.

djimi

MugMugs wrote: »

I have a claim as a result and I renew my policy unknowingly signing off that I didn't have an accident with the same company on renewal.

This is the point that I have a problem with. They didnt unknowingly sign off on anything. The insurer sent out a document with all the details and declarations on it (or not, in this case), with the instructions to read through it, amend where necessary, then sign that all the above information is true. There was a mistake on the document, but the fact that the customer just signed it without reading it properly and amending where required to me suggests that they are the ones that are squarely at fault. They are the ones who ultimately signed a document and sent in a false declaration.

MugMugs

ThisRegard wrote: »

"Have you had an accidents or claims in the last 3/5 years ?". Won't stop him getting a quote, but will stop him getting a competitive quote.

Agreed and already stated so in a previous post but the OP is saying they are being refused as a result of Non Disclosure.

djimi wrote: »

This is the point that I have a problem with. They didnt unknowingly sign off on anything. The insurer sent out a document with all the details and declarations on it (or not, in this case), with the instructions to read through it, amend where necessary, then sign that all the above information is true. There was a mistake on the document, but the fact that the customer just signed it without reading it properly and amending where required to me suggests that they are the ones that are squarely at fault. They are the ones who ultimately signed a document and sent in a false declaration.

So the Man walks away scot free and the Customer pays the price?

ThisRegard

MugMugs wrote: »

Agreed and already stated so in a previous post but the OP is saying they are being refused as a result of Non Disclosure.

Maybe something lost in translation somewhere along the line. He could have answered yes to the question which asks if you've every been refused or had insurance cancelled, been asked why and told them they didn't disclose a previous accident/claim and insurer says at this time we can't offer you a quote.

djimi

MugMugs wrote: »

So the Man walks away scot free and the Customer pays the price?

"The Man" is not the one who signed the false declaration. Be it by accident or otherwise, there is a reason why you are supposed to read any contract/document thoroughly before signing your name to it.

MugMugs

djimi wrote: »

"The Man" is not the one who signed the false declaration. Be it by accident or otherwise, there is a reason why you are supposed to read any contract/document thoroughly before signing your name to it.

So in your view the company are clear from blame despite being aware of the accident?

djimi

MugMugs wrote: »

So in your view the company are clear from blame despite being aware of the accident?

Im saying that the significant portion of the blame lies with the person who signed the false declaration.

MugMugs

djimi wrote: »

Im saying that the significant portion of the blame lies with the person who signed the false declaration.

I'd disagree personally. I'd say the lions share is with the negligent company.

djimi

MugMugs wrote: »

I'd disagree personally. I'd say the lions share is with the negligent company.

Fair enough. As far as Im concerned the onus is on whoever is signing the declaration to ensure that what they are signing is correct; its all written in front of them in plain English and they have the opportunity to correct any errors. If you put pen to paper without reading it first then you really cant complain if what you sign comes back to bite you in the ass. Just my opinion.

Del2005

MugMugs wrote: »

Agreed and already stated so in a previous post but the OP is saying they are being refused as a result of Non Disclosure.



So the Man walks away scot free and the Customer pays the price?

MugMugs wrote: »

I'd disagree personally. I'd say the lions share is with the negligent company.

The company where negligent, but they are covered by sending out the proposal form asking the proposer to read it to make sure everything is OK. The OPs wife signed off as not having had a claim. She submitted a signed contract which provided false information to the insurance company, since insurance is based on utmost good faith the fact the they lied means it's her that's to blame.

I've been ringing a few companies to get insurance quotes and you want to hear the terms and conditions for your policy from Adelaide and MCE when you ring them. The insurance companies have highly paid lawyers who make sure that they don't do anything illegal, as the Ombudsman told the OP when they called.

ironclaw

If you sign a contract without fully reading it then you are the negligent party in my eyes. Especially with car insurance where the first thing I would think about was checking a previous accident (Had I claimed) been listed on it. Anyone who didn't check or 'forgot', to me, would read like they were trying to hide it.

People are too quick to blame the companies when they themselves have to take responsibly for their actions.

joeguevara

dh0011 wrote: »

The insurer is supposed to have a complaints procedure in place to deal with any issues that arise. If the insured feels this is not adequate and takes the matter up with the ombudsman then the insurer must cover the cost.

I thought it was a bit mad myself (did an internship with a large insurer) but thats the way it works.

You are right Barr, the O is impartial and independent.

This is incorrect. The insurer does not pay on a case per case basis. Each financial service provider(FSP) pays a levy to the FSO on an annual basis (size of levy depends on the type of financial services provider and their turnover). It does not matter how many complaints are forwarded to the FSO.

An interesting point is that the FSO sides with the FSP about 80% of the time. Not because they are biased but because the complaints procedure of the FSP was adequate.

In this case, the fact non-disclosure happened is not the major factor of the increase in premium. The fact that there was a claim and a loss of NCB would more than likely be the deciding factor.

MugMugs

Del2005 wrote: »

The company where negligent, but they are covered by sending out the proposal form asking the proposer to read it to make sure everything is OK. The OPs wife signed off as not having had a claim. She submitted a signed contract which provided false information to the insurance company, since insurance is based on utmost good faith the fact the they lied means it's her that's to blame.

I've been ringing a few companies to get insurance quotes and you want to hear the terms and conditions for your policy from Adelaide and MCE when you ring them. The insurance companies have highly paid lawyers who make sure that they don't do anything illegal, as the Ombudsman told the OP when they called.

With respects, I haven't disputed anything in the first paragraph.

With respects to your second paragraph...... you'd think so, wouldn't you?

IF this was pushed all the way, I could see a court stringing out the company. They were just as negligent in their assumptions than the OP's wife was in theirs.

joeguevara

MugMugs wrote: »

With respects, I haven't disputed anything in the first paragraph.

With respects to your second paragraph...... you'd think so, wouldn't you?

IF this was pushed all the way, I could see a court stringing out the company. They were just as negligent in their assumptions than the OP's wife was in theirs.

But its the lossof the NCB that has pushed up the premium. You may have a point if the op's wife had a crash and they are refusing to pay out on a claim because of the non-disclosure.

You can only get damages if there is a loss and on the facts of this case there hasn't been.

MugMugs

joeguevara wrote: »

But its the lossof the NCB that has pushed up the premium. You may have a point if the op's wife had a crash and they are refusing to pay out on a claim because of the non-disclosure.

You can only get damages if there is a loss and on the facts of this case there hasn't been.

jtmturner wrote: »

Now we're trying to get quotes from other brokers, but as soon as they hear that we have a non disclosure on our file with someone else they won't even talk to us and end the conversation.

I'm not referring to the increase in premium. I've been discussing the so called Non Disclosure.

I wholly appreciate that claims attract increased premiums. I'm not sure where you've drawn the "get damages" bit from?

Have I insinuated that the OP should seek damages?

joeguevara

MugMugs wrote: »

I'm not referring to the increase in premium. I've been discussing the so called Non Disclosure.

I wholly appreciate that claims attract increased premiums. I'm not sure where you've drawn the "get damages" bit from?

Have I insinuated that the OP should seek damages?

No, but you are suggesting that the OP bring them to court. I was asking what for? What could the court find against the insurance company?

The only situation that a person would bring the insurance company to court if they were refusing to pay out on a claim due to non-disclosure.

MugMugs

joeguevara wrote: »

No, but you are suggesting that the OP bring them to court. I was asking what for? What could the court find against the insurance company?

The only situation that a person would bring the insurance company to court if they were refusing to pay out on a claim due to non-disclosure.

MugMugs wrote: »

Send your insurance company a letter outlining a minor error on your part. Point out the gaping error on their part and request a final response.

Refer this on to the Ombudsman who will nail this crowd to the wall for their incompetence. Have any trace of Non Disclosure removed and shop elsewhere.

By the way, there's no "file" for all Insurers to see Non Disclosure. That falls under Utmost good faith. Other insurers can only see your claims record if they bother checking.

MugMugs wrote: »

With respects, I haven't disputed anything in the first paragraph.

With respects to your second paragraph...... you'd think so, wouldn't you?

IF this was pushed all the way, I could see a court stringing out the company. They were just as negligent in their assumptions than the OP's wife was in theirs.

I actually suggested that the OP bring this matter to the ombudsman.

I theorised that if it was brought to court, the company would lose.

joeguevara

MugMugs wrote: »

I actually suggested that the OP bring this matter to the ombudsman.

I theorised that if it was brought to court, the company would lose.

I doubt the ombudsman would 'nail this crowd to the wall'. The OP's wife failed to disclose a claim. They were asked about claims and left it blank and signed. An insurance company are not obliged to remind their customers about claims.

If it was brought to court, the op's wife signed a form and omitted the claim. It is a cut and dried case. She would lose.

MugMugs

joeguevara wrote: »

I doubt the ombudsman would 'nail this crowd to the wall'. The OP's wife failed to disclose a claim. They were asked about claims and left it blank and signed. An insurance company are not obliged to remind their customers about claims.

If it was brought to court, the op's wife signed a form and omitted the claim. It is a cut and dried case. She would lose.

If you'd bothered to read the thread you'd see that I clearly disagree and that your argument has already been put forward by other members. The appropriate response to your post is contained in my previous posts on this thread

joeguevara

MugMugs wrote: »

If you'd bothered to read the thread you'd see that I clearly disagree and that your argument has already been put forward by other members. The appropriate response to your post is contained in my previous posts on this thread

I did read the thread (why would you think I didn't) and completely agree that you are entitled to your opinion. I have also read all of your responses and my response is contained in my posts. I am as entitled to my opinion as you are to yours. No need to get snippy. Just think you are giving bad advice.

derry

Insurance companies have so many get out clauses it not funny .

However the reality is if the policy went through and they didn't spot it and the wife had accident effecting third party they would still have to fork out some probably ~50% as only the 50% the policy was paid for due to communication break down.
The comprehensive part they can probably totally declare void but no the third party section.
The result is the injured party would have to seek the other 50% from the insurance fund .

The insurance companies have it all worked out no matter what small detail you forget they will use that to hike the premiums and they can basically get away with murder when you got comprehensive that part they can null and void with a misplaced coma if they want .The third party part is more difficult to wriggle out of in ROI compared to UK where vast amounts of third party claims the Insurance find ways to wriggle out from it .

Me i went with FBD after my claim for a stolen car with comprehensive went south with another crowd due to some bull crap they invented . I rang them to see if the policy was worth it for claiming on old runner just give me some idea like if they said €100 forget it .The assessor said he would call around to see if it was worth it .I didn't grasp that once he issued a number the claim was in and it wasn't a some form filler calling around and so i was walked into a trap as i wasn't that concerned to claim for old runner .Then Because the assessor came to house to discuss my stolen car never found there was now a claim in the system but they didn't want to pay up until i supplied the copy of log book the NCT all in the car and the most they would pay was ~€500 probably less for 1998 1000cc runner so i didn't bother to continue the claim left it at that i wasn't going to try to get copies from NCT as they basically told me to feck off on the phone it was two years ago lost in system yada yada .
At end the year the premium went up because they said I had made claim for which i didn't get paid and to add insult to injury it was selling point they wouldn't hit you with extra premiums for first claim and yet they did.

I shopped around and off course now I was not full no claims i lost 30% or something for claim that never got finished .

So after that it was simple I would never bother to get anything except 3rd party ever again and I wouldn't even get fire and theft

FBD does third party only the only legally required insurance so Went with them . If the car is stolen my problem
If the car catches fire and the fire brigade trys to send me some €5000 euro bill i will say no contract i didn't call you to put out the fire get lost with your legal notice here my legal notice take a hike

Best advise is only get third party in ROI its the only insurance they cant wriggle out off and its the highest risk millions are at risk in big accidents and the insurance companies lay off the risk with the big boys in Lyodds of London so they are only in for first €50,000 euros damages .

Then later after you got third party you can shop around on the net for other insurance stuff as the Insurance companies will want to do business for that low risk stuff .
With comprehensive the risks are low maxim the value of the like the car and few other tweaks like windscreen and replacement car so they are hungry to get that but with the ROI insurance have CARTEL gentleman agreement totally illegal under EU laws
They make it so you cant split up the Insurance so they say .
So when they refuse to quote you just for comprehensive you sue all their collective asses for anti competition CARTEL operations and get them fined to hell and back in the EU courts and force the Insurance companies in Rip OFF Republic to give you separate Comprehensive quotes.

Once comprehensive is split off from third party then there is a serous incentive to have competition and the prices for comprehensive will tumble rapidly .

BEWARE generally these so called independent Quango agencies that claim to work for you are paid for by the companies that make the industry so it often like going down to the local Mafia head to complain the actions of the local MAFIA hood who is trying to steal from you .How far will the local MAFIA head go out of the way to help you when they get their pay check from the local MAFIA hoods protection rackets .

So for me ringing the Insurance ombudsman and expecting him to not to try to plant you in the doo doo is asking a lot unless its a big issue like CARTEL and EU regulations being broken and then he has to follow that EU mafia rules . His main interests are to keep the industry CARTEL happy but pretend he is on your side

So for me skin the BASTARDS alive those car Insurance companies are paid extortion MAFIA outfits and come from the cess pit the Banksters who extort Ireland money come from Eire


If they figure out your doing that they will offer you free insurance with all trimming for life as they could lose billions if you stir the CARTEL system up and they have to break up the lucrative CARTEL in ROI

The reason I know this is I lived in countries which did supply the ability to have third party with one insurance system and the Comprehensive in other packages with another company
It was fun to ring around and bargain and haggle those SOB,s prices down over the phone as they wanted the easy money for comprehensive insurance and the competition was hot man real hot. You made them work harder for the hard earned money you had .Often you could knock 50% off the first asking price for a few phone calls

Also this system they have of non declaration is strong evidence of the INSURANCE EXTORTION CARTEL they run in ROI.

Ring the Ombusman and he will probably as good MAFIA chief say well they have the right to do it but neglect to mention they pay his wages to say that .

Car Insurance in ROI is one of the most profitable in all the EU I wonder why

Derry