Why do Insurance companies ask if you ever had a judgement or a judgement pending?

omnithanos

Is this question relevant to the insurance quote or is it asked for the purposes of ascertaining whether the individual would be a risk to default on payment?

How do you know if you have had a judgement against you or a judgement pending? If you had a Solicitor representing you in a case would they have been obliged to let you know directly? If your Solicitor did not advise you of this but you suspect you may have had a judgement against you or a judgement pending how would you find this out if your solicitor had ceased communication?

Is it appropriate to tell the Insurance company that you do not know this information or do you need to find this out before you can get your quote?

Can you rely on the fact that you weren't told by your Solicitor that you have had a judgement against you or a judgement pending and simply answer no?

Fred Swanson

This post has been deleted.

coylemj

omnithanos wrote: »

Can you rely on the fact that you weren't told by your Solicitor that you have had a judgement against you or a judgement pending and simply answer no?

If you're going to rely on moral acrobatics to make a false declaration to obtain insurance, I just wouldn't bother. If there is a claim and they find out that you did have a judgement against you, they will repudiate the policy and refuse to pay.

So if you want to be covered, make a full declaration and stop trying to invent excuses for witholding material information.

NUTLEY BOY

coylemj wrote: »

If you're going to rely on moral acrobatics to make a false declaration to obtain insurance, I just wouldn't bother. If there is a claim and they find out that you did have a judgement against you, they will repudiate the policy and refuse to pay.

So if you want to be covered, make a full declaration and stop trying to invent excuses for witholding material information.

Exactly right. It is called uberrima fides or acting in utmost good faith.

omnithanos

NUTLEY BOY wrote: »

Exactly right. It is called uberrima fides or acting in utmost good faith.

Is there no obligation on a Solicitor who acted on your behalf and was fully paid for their services or lack thereof to inform you of such matters?

coylemj

omnithanos wrote: »

Is there no obligation on a Solicitor who acted on your behalf and was fully paid for their services or lack thereof to inform you of such matters?

How can the solicitor act on your behalf unless you instructed him to do so - in which case how could you not have been aware of the case in the first place?

You get sued for a debt, you instruct a solicitor, then you go home and metaphorically stick your head under a pillow so you can act as if nobody told you the outcome of the case - that's what you're proposing here.

So next thing that happens is that your house burns down and the insurance company refuses to pay out because you made a false declaration but your brilliant excuse is that your incompetent solicitor never told you the outcome of the case - the case about which you were not aware of in the first place.

Good luck with that.

hullaballoo

What sort of insurance are you talking about?

No one can answer your question without knowing what type of insurance the question relates to.

Miaireland

What kind of Insurance is it? I could see how the question would be relevant in certain types of insurance but not in others.

coylemj

It's clearly a material fact as far as the insurance company is concerned so why does it matter what type of insurance is involved?

Unless someone is suggesting that it's ok to make a false declaration for motor insurance but it's not ok for property insurance?

hullaballoo

The question is as to the reason why an insurance company asks the question, not just the question dodging.

The insurance companies' reasons will be different depending on the type of insurance.

For whatever reason, the OP has added some thinly veiled circumstances that suggest he might be attempting to wriggle out of answering accurately but there's nothing you or I can do about that. Firstly, it's ancillary to the real question - the insurance companies' reasons for asking. Secondly, if the OP wants to render his own insurance policy void by lying, it's on his/her head.

coylemj

hullaballoo wrote: »

The insurance companies' reasons will be different depending on the type of insurance.

I wouldn't have thought so. Asking someone if they have had a judgement against them is clearly designed to identify people with present or past financial problems, the reasoning being that they are more likely to submit false or exaggerated claims under any category of insurance.

omnithanos

coylemj wrote: »

How can the solicitor act on your behalf unless you instructed him to do so - in which case how could you not have been aware of the case in the first place?

You get sued for a debt, you instruct a solicitor, then you go home and metaphorically stick your head under a pillow so you can act as if nobody told you the outcome of the case - that's what you're proposing here.

So next thing that happens is that your house burns down and the insurance company refuses to pay out because you made a false declaration but your brilliant excuse is that your incompetent solicitor never told you the outcome of the case - the case about which you were not aware of in the first place.

Good luck with that.

If a Solicitor had been previously instructed to act on my behalf and was paid in full for their services are they not expected to report back on the outcome as part of that service?

If both the Solicitor and the other party have both ceased communication with me how should I know the outcome?

omnithanos

coylemj wrote: »

I wouldn't have thought so. Asking someone if they have had a judgement against them is clearly designed to identify people with present or past financial problems, the reasoning being that they are more likely to submit false or exaggerated claims under any category of insurance.

How is evidence of prior financial trouble a indicator of dishonesty?

The question is asked when inquiring about a house insurance quote, I'm not sure if the they also ask it for car insurance but I assume so.

Triangla

omnithanos wrote: »

If a Solicitor had been previously instructed to act on my behalf and was paid in full for their services are they not expected to report back on the outcome as part of that service?

If both the Solicitor and the other party have both ceased communication with me how should I know the outcome?

You phone them up and ask them.

omnithanos

Triangla wrote: »

You phone them up and ask them.

They both ignore my correspondence.

They were possibly in cahoots as the other side repossessed my property and sold it. The land registry adjudicated that the sale of my property did not follow proper procedure and they issued me with a copy of the Instrument of Sale showing the property was sold on to a nominee. My Solicitor demanded that I send him on the Instrument of sale and has since ceased communication and has refused to return said Instrument.

FreudianSlippers

Please read the charter before posting again - this is not a place for legal advice. You've also been told previously not to start further threads on this topic.

There will be no further warnings given.