Boxymo loaded insurance for an uncontested claim settled with 3rd party insurer

Delboy33

My son is insured with boxymo. He had an uncontested claim against a 3rd party and went through their insurance. It was fully settled without any involvement from my sons insurer. For his renewal he was asked if he had any claims whether he was at fault or not to which he answered yes. As a result his insurance went from 650 to 950 (addtional 300 euro). Surely this is not correct. He rang his insurance company and they said it was.

ELM327

Yes thats correct, any claims made is the question. If you've been in an accident where a claim was made - at fault or not - you are statistically more likely to result in another claim being made in future. This is why the loading is made.

Sono

You should not be loaded for an accident you were not at fault for.

Eggs For Dinner

Your son did not have a claim. He had an accident (which must be declared if asked). In this instance the 3rd party 'claimed' under his policy contract with his insurer for funds to compensate your son. The industry is now populated by people who are no longer trained and educated in the basic principles of insurance. There should be no affect on your premium, as your insurer had no outlay. Either go up the food chain with your insurer and argue your case or try other insurers.

Playing devil's advocate for your insurer, can I ask if the incident was reported to your insurer at the time? Although liability was not disputed, you have this obligation and they may have taken exception to this an applied a loading. The thinking behind this is that it may happen again, leading to difficulties in handling the claim, therefore it's a higher risk

Delboy33

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121383324#Comment_121383324

Yes, incident was reported to my insurer as i know that is an obligation.

NUTLEY BOY

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121382911#Comment_121382911

What is your interpretation of the claims made question ?

Are you suggesting that because OP's son made a claim against the third party that constitutes a basis for an affirmative answer to the claims made question ?

What wording of the claims made question are you using to ground your proposition ?

beachhead

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121442689#Comment_121442689

ELM327 is correct in post 2.That's how the insurance industry exists.The only variation is how long each insurance company allows before the claim(notification,damage,costs,whatever)is disregarded.Some go for 3 years or it can be 6 years.The innocent driver gets loaded for the period.

ELM327

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121442689#Comment_121442689

Have you made any claims.. I think it's pretty clear. Most companies even specify it includes not at fault claims.

Eggs For Dinner

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121443375#Comment_121443375

Unless you claim for funds under your policy, you have not made a "claim". The reason they ask about non fault claims is because you might have claimed for incidents such as theft, malicious damage, fire etc., which are not the fault of the policyholder

mickdw

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121443436#Comment_121443436

Yes or also non fault claims where they may have ended up claiming on own policy for whatever reason.

The correct answer to that question should be, yes non fault accident as declared on xx date. Fully settled by other party.

No claim made on policy.

UrbanFox

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121382911#Comment_121382911

Say that in a 6 month period you are twice hit from behind whilst stationary at a red traffic light.

Is some algorithm saying that these facts now make you an adverse risk ?

ELM327

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121443502#Comment_121443502

If you are asked has the driver made any claims, that question is specific and not policy related. You would have to declare claims made in the time period, adding the note that it was not on your policy.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121445215#Comment_121445215

Yes. Well, it's not some algorithm, it's most likely a set of rules and calculations made by the risk management teams to analyse past claims and group them. I've worked in risk management (although not in insurance) for years so call it a semi educated guess.

Eggs For Dinner

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121445464#Comment_121445464

If a 3rd party is responsible for an accident and has caused you a loss, you are seeking compensation. You are not 'claiming' despite the common usage of the word in this context. Only a policyholder can ever claim under an insurance policy. The 3rd party claims the amount of damage he has caused and gives it to you

ELM327

I'd advise to read any questions you are asked carefully, lest your insurance find a reason to decline your cover. Of course, you won't ever be affected by this until you do in fact need to make a claim on your own policy

Eggs For Dinner

Let's imagine you own an engineering business with full property, public and employers liability insurance. One day you are getting petrol in a filling station and, when you go into pay, you slip on a banana skin in the shop. You 'claim' against the filling station owner for your injury. The filling station owner will rely on his insurance to compensate you. Do you think you need to declare to the insurers of your engineering business that you have made a claim??

NUTLEY BOY

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121445464#Comment_121445464

Thanks for that insight.

This makes me wonder exactly what criteria risk management teams use to make such determinations.

This sounds like a quantitative exercise where the facts of two no fault accidents can be potentially converted in to an adverse assessment of the risk. Common sense, also once known as underwriting, seems to be excluded from the overall rating of risk.

Have insurance underwriters now decided to let these rules do their thinking for them ?

mickdw

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121445464#Comment_121445464

Can you see anything in my suggested wording that could be in any way deemed to be untruthful or in bad faith?

It is the most accurate response to the question. It is then for the insurer to consider whether they deem that scenario as clearly outlined worthy of loading or not.

ELM327

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121446554#Comment_121446554

Well done. Now lets stop engaing in reducto ad absurdum and try to make points related to the issue at hand. Motor insurance is what is in question here.

ELM327

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121471621#Comment_121471621

Your answer in its entirety would be perfectly fine IMHO

ELM327

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121471581#Comment_121471581

Underwriters, no. But underwriting teams are typically subject to finance budgets, loss budgets etc. If the loss gets too high then rules need to be adapted to load groups that have shown, when grouped together, that they are leading indicators of future loss.

Eggs For Dinner

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121471855#Comment_121471855

The principles and practices of insurance are in question here and I've being giving my experienced opinion

galwaytt

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121384818#Comment_121384818

You should ask your son's insurer if this incident which you reported is still showing as 'open' on the file. This would definitely impact your son's renewal (pending resolution & closing of the case).

If it's open, close it and get them to recalculate based on 'no' claim (sic) being made.