Last year I got knocked off my bike at a crossroads by a lady who jumped the lights. This morning I got a letter from my new car insurer saying that my policy is going up due to a non-disclosed claim.
I couldn’t think what it was because I haven’t claimed on my car insurance for anything and haven’t had any accidents. It finally clicked that the claim date was the day I got knocked off my bike. I have since spoken to both my new insurer who said I needed to speak to Tesco (the ladies insurer). Tesco told me all their info is correct and that I’m on the claim as a cyclist but it will still flag up on the insurance database as a non-fault claim. I rang my current insurer and they said its normal and nothing they can do. It hardly seems fair but I when is car insurance ever fair.

Edit: Its not gone up by much so its not the money more the principal that has annoyed me.

I really can’t see how this is legal.

Does your motor insurance cover you on the bike all of a sudden?

I know when someone crashed into the back of my car my insurance went up on renewal as as I was involved in an accident then I was statistically more likely to be involved in another one! I would have though it would statistically be less likely but there you go. So some idiot doesn’t look where they’re are going and the innocent party gets penalised.

Can’t really understand why this would apply to a cyclist.

If you get free legal stuff with your insurance I’d think about using that.

Why would you think that? Pretty much all the stats suggest that for events which happen where your own behaviour has an effect on the likelihood, those who have had one occurrence are more likely to have another.

An incident whilst cycling would appear to be completely irrelevant to motor insurance though, if your motor insurance doesn’t cover you for cycling.

Not come across it being applied to cyclists but strictly speaking, it’s a road traffic collision so the info goes onto the claims underwriting exchange.

I’d complain to Tesco as it’s intended for ‘motor’ claims and your bike falls some way short of that or http://www.insurancedatabases.co.uk/

I know when someone crashed into the back of my car my insurance went up on renewal as as I was involved in an accident then I was statistically more likely to be involved in another one! I would have though it would statistically be less likely but there you go. So some idiot doesn’t look where they’re are going and the innocent party gets penalised.

You’re insured based on the risk to the insurer of having to pay out, not on your ability to drive, which is why it costs more to insure a Ferrari than a Mondeo with the same driver.

But they have no real indication of the type of routes you drive apart from a postcode and a tickbox to say you use the car for commuting. But once you’ve claimed then that’s showing you do something that puts you in a position where cars can hit you (even if it’s entirely not your fault), it could be a horrible junction, or a normal one but just bad luck, you’re still in a statistical group that’s more likely to be in another accident. Or it coul just be that your commute is on B roads an mine is on motorways, if we both do 12,000 a year, your 12,000 is far more risky.

On the other hand you could have a no fault claim for cutting someone up and braking, or belligerently not giving way until you crashed.

All in all, if you’ve been involved in an accident, you’re statistically far more likely to be involved in another.

So, if I got ran over as a pedestrian would this affect my premiums too?

for events which happen where your own behaviour has an effect on the likelihood, those who have had one occurrence are more likely to have another.

But my behavior didn’t have an effect on the likelihood. I was sitting in a queue at traffic lights, someone wasn’t watching the road ran into the back of me. How could I have influenced that?

It’s not about your individual claim, it’s about all other the “no fault claimers” that you’ll be lumped in with when determining your premium, and statistically, having one no fault claim makes you more likely to make another claim.

Lots of possible reasons for that, such as driving on the kind of roads at the kind of time where people are more likely to drive into the back of each other because they’re dopily looking at their phones in stop/start traffic, through to things like being inattentive yourself and braking hard and late when encountering queuing traffic on a motorway, making it more likely that the next person will drive into the back of you.

You have to disclose everything that the insurance company needs to use as a reason to charge you more. It’s a great business model. Don’t for one second imagine they’re there for your benefit.

Just after I reinsured my motorbike I got a letter saying I owed £4-odd for an ‘additional premium’
I called and spoke to a very helpful lady and after a bit of digging it turns out that (wait for it) it was because I was a named driver on my wife’s policy when the car was hit by a stolen car whilst peaked outside the house.
Now, we’d successfully claimed on the stolen car owners insurance (that’s another long story too!) and it hadn’t cost us a penny.
So, not my insurance, car stationary, locked and empty, not our fault, no claim of our insurance and I still get rogered for more money.
Robbing bar stewards!

Robbing bar stewards!

Not really, you park on a street where you’re more likely to be hit by stolen cars, so your premium goes up…..

Were you the last known driver PeterPoddy? That should be the only reason your details will have/should have been tied to that claim.

I think the point is that insurance only seems to work against the customer, well its very much one sided. I just hate the (motor) insurance companies. For years I had 3 seperate policies, one for each motorbike and 1 for a car. If I had 10 years NCB on one, it couldnt be transferred to the other (am I not seen as a safer driver), however, if my wife would be hit as a named driver in my car, all 3 of my insurances would be impacted. They now seem to be using non motor vehicles to further stretch their greedy hands.

TBH a lot of this probably comes down to over the top+false claims from all parties involved. Lawyers, medical costs, repairs etc. I mean 1 car crash claim may cost £500,000 in medical + court costs – that’ll take a fair few customers+ fair few years of payments to recover.

Someone went into the back of me when I was in a rental car. Increased my premiums and caused a load of hassle trying to get quotes as if you declare an accident they want to know costs.

i just ran this by our head of underwriting at my work. his reply- rubbish. you should ask your insurer to confirm where there is a requirement for you to disclose the incident (and resultant PI claim). you WILL be on a database, but only for a PI claim and not in any way related to your own motor insurance. especially if it’s non-fault.

If your renewal goes up you’ll almost certainly be able to get it cheaper by changing insurers. After a no fault claim my renewal went up by £300 but I got insurance from another company for less than my previous years premium.

I didn’t disclose anything to my new insurer hence the letter charging me extra for a non disclosed claim. I have only had the policy a few weeks so its not worth changing it yet for the small amount its going up.
I’m not sure complaining would get me anywhere. Both insurance companies seem to be correct in what they are saying. That doesn’t mean its right or i’m happy about it.

It’s a great business model

Doesn’t the car insurance industry consistently lose money? It’s propped up by home insurance and fancy finance stuff.

Doesn’t the car insurance industry consistently lose money?

There seems to be a lot of insurance companies vying for your trade for a business with no money in it.

A friend who works in car insurance once told us: “If you are ever involved in a small fender-bender, pay to fix it and don’t tell your insurance company because they will put you down as an accident magnet, whether you claim or not. I didn’t tell you that.”

Seems you’ve acquired that magnetism.

It’s not that there’s no money in it, but they make no underwriting profit. Their money comes from investment income.

bails, true:

http://www.insuranceage.co.uk/insurance-age/news/2461776/motor-insurance-market-reports-loss-for-2015

Competition for market share is the reason it’s been unprofitable for most of the last 20, 30 years. Free market, innit.

Also, it’s the same reason why the reaction is so disproportionate if you have an accident. Claim free – you’re in demand and all the discounts available thrown at you. Any hint of an idea of a suggestion that you might cost them money – all that disappears.

Does seem bonkers to get pinged for a non-fault incident on a bicycle though!

Insurance is mad the wife’s went up after a van drove into the back of her at a set of red lights, then mine went up at renewal as she was named on my policy so I removed her and it went up anyway as I then lost my spouse discount I as I didn’t have her named on my policy I was more likely to drive like a twunt. Madness

xherbivorex – Member
i just ran this by our head of underwriting at my work. his reply- rubbish. you should ask your insurer to confirm where there is a requirement for you to disclose the incident (and resultant PI claim). you WILL be on a database, but only for a PI claim and not in any way related to your own motor insurance. especially if it’s non-fault.

I would fight it, would you get buggered over a pedestrian claim too (as someone else said)? If you leave it and it becomes common practice, it’s yet another metric they can legitimise using.

What if you once spilled tea over your computer? Should you have to declare that? Other non-motor accidents perhaps? Any visits to the hospital? Falling off the mountain bike? Will they come round and ask you to explain every scratch and dent on your other property if you claim not to have had an accident?

this don’t seem right to me. maybe there was a mixup somewhere and it was presumed you were in a car

Name and shame the companies please.

You could have been sitting at home having a beer instead of in a queue at the traffic lights.

So, if I got ran over as a pedestrian would this affect my premiums too?

If, as a pedestrian, you allow yourself to be run over, I can’t imagine the havoc you’d cause from behind the wheel.

There’s always an ombudsman. I’d dispute that it’s a “non disclosed claim” on the principle that it’s not a claim which your motor insurance would have had to pay out on if the 3rd party hadn’t – what they are doing seems basically incorrect. It depends how much hassle you want, but I suspect if you took it to http://www.financial-ombudsman.org.uk/ you’d probably get it changed.

I would fight it, would you get buggered over a pedestrian claim too (as someone else said)? If you leave it and it becomes common practice, it’s yet another metric they can legitimise using.

What if you once spilled tea over your computer? Should you have to declare that? Other non-motor accidents perhaps? Any visits to the hospital? Falling off the mountain bike? Will they come round and ask you to explain every scratch and dent on your other property if you claim not to have had an accident?

no, what i’m saying is that although the OP would be listed in a PI database after this, that has absolutely no bearing on his own driving/car insurance hence, when applying for a policy, he would not be expected or indeed asked to dislose anything about any claims not involving him as a driver/in a motor vehicle. i’d be fighting it too by asking them to divulge where their regs state that this PI claim should have been disclosed. it certainly wouldn’t come into play during my company’s quoting process, same as if you were injured as a pedestrian or whatever.

I basically agree with you xherbivorex (clearly you have better expert knowledge – though we’ve all had enough of experts 😉 ), though I’m also suggesting there is a route to go over the head of the insurance company – it appears that the financial ombudsman has legal powers and that something like this is well within their remit.

If, as a pedestrian, you allow yourself to be run over, I can’t imagine the havoc you’d cause from behind the wheel.

Weird thing to write.

After the first X number of complaints I believe the ombudsman charge the insurance company something like £650 per complaint.
It might be worth mentioning your intention to complain to them.

@aracer, your post appeared at about the same time as my last one so tbh i agree, the insurance ombudsman is a good route to go down.

(btw, i don’t profess to be an expert, i work in IT for an insurance company but i asked our underwriters about this and they ARE experts in pricing here!)

It’s not about your individual claim, it’s about all other the “no fault claimers” that you’ll be lumped in with when determining your premium, and statistically, having one no fault claim makes you more likely to make another claim.

What they need to demonstrate is that having a prior no-fault claim increases your chances of having a future “fault” claim. Are there any figures for that, I wonder ?

Put a claim into her insurer for your losses (premium increase).

challenge this for all our sakes.