Help - Search - Members - Calendar
Full Version: Insurance question
FightBack Forums > Discussion > The Flame Pit
K3bab
Stopped for alleged 90 in 70 on motorway 3 weeks ago by undercover cops. Given verbal NIP. Heard nothing since. Insurance renewal has come up. Question: do I declare to the insurance company that I’ve been stopped given I don’t yet know what the outcome of that will be? I can’t provide a factually correct statement of whether I will end up with 3 points, court summons, or speed awareness course until I officially receive that information from the police? My insurer is Admiral.
southpaw82
Have you considered asking Admiral?
K3bab
I have. On the other hand I’ve read plenty of articles about the pitfall of over-informing insurance companies resulting in higher premiums. Is it a question of what I am required to communicate by law, or is it down to each insurers T&Cs.
baggins1234
QUOTE (K3bab @ Sat, 1 Jun 2019 - 14:31) *
I have. On the other hand I’ve read plenty of articles about the pitfall of over-informing insurance companies resulting in higher premiums. Is it a question of what I am required to communicate by law, or is it down to each insurers T&Cs.


So read the policy and do what they ask you to do?
DancingDad
At the moment it isn't even a pending conviction, just a stop by police and a possibility (fairly high?) that something may come of it.
Check your T&Cs on what you must declare.
It varies with insurer, only common ground is if you don't declare what you must, you risk all sorts of pain.
Convictions almost certainly and deffo when renewing.
Pending convictions.... ie you've had the S172 or a summons, possibly required but I cannot remember ever seeing it.
Some are asking for courses to be declared now.
K3bab
QUOTE (baggins1234 @ Sat, 1 Jun 2019 - 14:37) *
QUOTE (K3bab @ Sat, 1 Jun 2019 - 14:31) *
I have. On the other hand I’ve read plenty of articles about the pitfall of over-informing insurance companies resulting in higher premiums. Is it a question of what I am required to communicate by law, or is it down to each insurers T&Cs.


So read the policy and do what they ask you to do?


The only thing I can find is this (attached)

To me it’s not really clear if I should be declaring or not
The Rookie
No, the list of ‘involved in’s are all final action, none of those are ‘received a warning you may be prosecuted’.
666
QUOTE (K3bab @ Sat, 1 Jun 2019 - 16:58) *
QUOTE (baggins1234 @ Sat, 1 Jun 2019 - 14:37) *
QUOTE (K3bab @ Sat, 1 Jun 2019 - 14:31) *
I have. On the other hand I’ve read plenty of articles about the pitfall of over-informing insurance companies resulting in higher premiums. Is it a question of what I am required to communicate by law, or is it down to each insurers T&Cs.


So read the policy and do what they ask you to do?


The only thing I can find is this (attached)

To me it’s not really clear if I should be declaring or not


The phrase "been involved in" seems all-embracing, and definitely means you should declare. WHether you do it now or when renewing will depend on the policy wording.

When you're shopping around for better quotes, you need to consider the exact questions carefully.
K3bab
QUOTE (The Rookie @ Sat, 1 Jun 2019 - 17:09) *
No, the list of ‘involved in’s are all final action, none of those are ‘received a warning you may be prosecuted’.


Would the term “pending prosecution” not cover the situation I am in?
Redivi
You will note that Admiral wants to know about Speed Awareness courses, removing the entire purpose of doing one

They say that they regard drivers that have done a course as higher risk
Tells you all you need to know about the courses' contribution to road safety
DancingDad
QUOTE (K3bab @ Sat, 1 Jun 2019 - 17:29) *
QUOTE (The Rookie @ Sat, 1 Jun 2019 - 17:09) *
No, the list of ‘involved in’s are all final action, none of those are ‘received a warning you may be prosecuted’.


Would the term “pending prosecution” not cover the situation I am in?


To me, no it wouldn't.

The cops told you that you are possibly/likely/will be prosecuted.
That's a bit like my mum telling me to wait till my father got home.
Could mean that I would get a smack round the earhole or a talking to or nothing.

End of the day, cops need to progress it a little further (IMO) before it becomes pending.
It may disappear, could end up on a speed awareness course, could be a Fixed Penalty and three points, could be into court.

To me, until you have a piece of paper from the Old Bill saying we intend to prosecute, a conditional offer or a summons, it is simply a chat with some cops and a potentially poor outcome.

K3bab
I’m basically worried that interpreting their terms and conditions may give them an easy way to deny a claim later on if they disagree with my interpretation. I can’t believe that this isn’t a common situation and that there isn’t some general guidance on what one has to do in terms of declaring to insurance co
southpaw82
So ask Admiral...
DancingDad
QUOTE (southpaw82 @ Sat, 1 Jun 2019 - 20:51) *
So ask Admiral...


They will be the only people to give you a definitive answer.
You may not like it but they will give an answer.

I assume that you are shopping around and not just relying on Admiral ?
What they say (or their interpretation) could be totally academic.
Churchmouse
Ultimately, the "correct" interpretation of the requirement would only be determined at a later date by a court or by the Financial Ombudsman, should you choose not to disclose it upon renewal and "something bad" happens later.

Arguably, the words "involved in any motoring offences" is very broad, and would include your current situation. No doubt that is how Admiral would see it, if you were to ask them. However, prior to any conviction, a more accurate description of your situation might be that the driver had been involved in an accusation relating to an alleged motoring offence--one which had not yet been legally established as a "motoring offence".

This interpretation is supported by their inclusion of the words, "or have any pending prosecution", the inclusion of which obviously would have been superfluous if the "involved in any motoring offences" language already included any "pending prosecution", and it is hard to see why it logically would not. After all, in order to have a "pending prosecution" for one, the driver must already have had some "involvement" in a motoring offence.

--Churchmouse
K3bab
QUOTE (Churchmouse @ Mon, 3 Jun 2019 - 15:53) *
Ultimately, the "correct" interpretation of the requirement would only be determined at a later date by a court or by the Financial Ombudsman, should you choose not to disclose it upon renewal and "something bad" happens later.

Arguably, the words "involved in any motoring offences" is very broad, and would include your current situation. No doubt that is how Admiral would see it, if you were to ask them. However, prior to any conviction, a more accurate description of your situation might be that the driver had been involved in an accusation relating to an alleged motoring offence--one which had not yet been legally established as a "motoring offence".

This interpretation is supported by their inclusion of the words, "or have any pending prosecution", the inclusion of which obviously would have been superfluous if the "involved in any motoring offences" language already included any "pending prosecution", and it is hard to see why it logically would not. After all, in order to have a "pending prosecution" for one, the driver must already have had some "involvement" in a motoring offence.

--Churchmouse



It is all down to the technicalities. I may or may not have pending prosecution as the outcome may be a fixed penalty or a driving awareness course.

Anyway as per the recommendation on this thread I clarified with Admiral and they advised that since a verbal NIP is not a definitive pending prosecution, I do not need to worry about it at this stage and only declare it once I hear again from the police.
666
QUOTE (K3bab @ Mon, 3 Jun 2019 - 16:22) *
QUOTE (Churchmouse @ Mon, 3 Jun 2019 - 15:53) *
Ultimately, the "correct" interpretation of the requirement would only be determined at a later date by a court or by the Financial Ombudsman, should you choose not to disclose it upon renewal and "something bad" happens later.

Arguably, the words "involved in any motoring offences" is very broad, and would include your current situation. No doubt that is how Admiral would see it, if you were to ask them. However, prior to any conviction, a more accurate description of your situation might be that the driver had been involved in an accusation relating to an alleged motoring offence--one which had not yet been legally established as a "motoring offence".

This interpretation is supported by their inclusion of the words, "or have any pending prosecution", the inclusion of which obviously would have been superfluous if the "involved in any motoring offences" language already included any "pending prosecution", and it is hard to see why it logically would not. After all, in order to have a "pending prosecution" for one, the driver must already have had some "involvement" in a motoring offence.

--Churchmouse



It is all down to the technicalities. I may or may not have pending prosecution as the outcome may be a fixed penalty or a driving awareness course.

Anyway as per the recommendation on this thread I clarified with Admiral and they advised that since a verbal NIP is not a definitive pending prosecution, I do not need to worry about it at this stage and only declare it once I hear again from the police.

Surely a "verbal" (oral) NIP is no more or less definitive than a written one?
DancingDad
QUOTE (666 @ Mon, 3 Jun 2019 - 17:27) *
............Surely a "verbal" (oral) NIP is no more or less definitive than a written one?



I believe there is a difference.
To me, a cop on the roadside who says "I am reporting this for further action" is not cementing anything into the system. Only warning the driver that they may receive a notice of further action.
While a written notice is saying, we are taking action.
I would not even take an S172 request as a notice of pending prosecution, it is a precursor at the worst.
southpaw82
I’m with 666.
cp8759
QUOTE (DancingDad @ Mon, 3 Jun 2019 - 20:51) *
QUOTE (666 @ Mon, 3 Jun 2019 - 17:27) *
............Surely a "verbal" (oral) NIP is no more or less definitive than a written one?



I believe there is a difference.
To me, a cop on the roadside who says "I am reporting this for further action" is not cementing anything into the system. Only warning the driver that they may receive a notice of further action.
While a written notice is saying, we are taking action.
I would not even take an S172 request as a notice of pending prosecution, it is a precursor at the worst.

So you're saying that if someone is stopped for, say, doing 99 mph on the motorway, old bill says "I'm reporting you for the offence" and a few months later he gets a summons / SJPN, the driver can claim a defence that he didn't receive a NIP within 14 days? Sorry DancindDad but that's clearly absurd, see section 1(a) here https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1988/53/section/1
DancingDad
QUOTE (cp8759 @ Tue, 4 Jun 2019 - 10:57) *
QUOTE (DancingDad @ Mon, 3 Jun 2019 - 20:51) *
QUOTE (666 @ Mon, 3 Jun 2019 - 17:27) *
............Surely a "verbal" (oral) NIP is no more or less definitive than a written one?



I believe there is a difference.
To me, a cop on the roadside who says "I am reporting this for further action" is not cementing anything into the system. Only warning the driver that they may receive a notice of further action.
While a written notice is saying, we are taking action.
I would not even take an S172 request as a notice of pending prosecution, it is a precursor at the worst.

So you're saying that if someone is stopped for, say, doing 99 mph on the motorway, old bill says "I'm reporting you for the offence" and a few months later he gets a summons / SJPN, the driver can claim a defence that he didn't receive a NIP within 14 days? Sorry DancindDad but that's clearly absurd, see section 1(a) here https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1988/53/section/1



In terms of further legal action, indeed a verbal warning at the roadside is all that is needed.

My point is that the cop may well say that they are reporting you for further action but there is no guarantee this is going to happen.
They may have a change of heart, lose the paperwork, be struck by lightening.
Seems a bit silly to be reporting it to the insurance as pending when nothing further may happen.
cp8759
QUOTE (DancingDad @ Tue, 4 Jun 2019 - 16:26) *
In terms of further legal action, indeed a verbal warning at the roadside is all that is needed.

My point is that the cop may well say that they are reporting you for further action but there is no guarantee this is going to happen.
They may have a change of heart, lose the paperwork, be struck by lightening.
Seems a bit silly to be reporting it to the insurance as pending when nothing further may happen.

Depends on what the insurance company asks. If the insurance company were to ask whether a verbal NIP has been given, it would be a lie to say "no".
666
QUOTE (DancingDad @ Tue, 4 Jun 2019 - 16:26) *
QUOTE (cp8759 @ Tue, 4 Jun 2019 - 10:57) *
QUOTE (DancingDad @ Mon, 3 Jun 2019 - 20:51) *
QUOTE (666 @ Mon, 3 Jun 2019 - 17:27) *
............Surely a "verbal" (oral) NIP is no more or less definitive than a written one?



I believe there is a difference.
To me, a cop on the roadside who says "I am reporting this for further action" is not cementing anything into the system. Only warning the driver that they may receive a notice of further action.
While a written notice is saying, we are taking action.
I would not even take an S172 request as a notice of pending prosecution, it is a precursor at the worst.

So you're saying that if someone is stopped for, say, doing 99 mph on the motorway, old bill says "I'm reporting you for the offence" and a few months later he gets a summons / SJPN, the driver can claim a defence that he didn't receive a NIP within 14 days? Sorry DancindDad but that's clearly absurd, see section 1(a) here https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1988/53/section/1



In terms of further legal action, indeed a verbal warning at the roadside is all that is needed.

My point is that the cop may well say that they are reporting you for further action but there is no guarantee this is going to happen.
They may have a change of heart, lose the paperwork, be struck by lightening.
Seems a bit silly to be reporting it to the insurance as pending when nothing further may happen.

But a written NIP must simply warn that "the question of prosecuting ... would be taken into consideration". So no guarantee there either.
DancingDad
QUOTE (666 @ Tue, 4 Jun 2019 - 20:23) *
........But a written NIP must simply warn that "the question of prosecuting ... would be taken into consideration". So no guarantee there either.


Which to me takes it into possible prosecution but not pending.


I fully accept that once a cop stops you or a NIP that says there is a possibility of prosecution that there is a very high chance that it will happen.
But to me it is where the line is drawn between pending and possible?
I also fully accept that I may be out of step with the thoughts of others.

I tend to look at the extremes when making this sort of judgement.
At one end, based on the rather loose wording of Admiral's T&Cs is the question of whether someone has been involved in a relevant offence.
If that is the yardstick then I have to say yes and phone them up each and everytime I realise that I have let my speed creep above the speed limit.
Which is plainly ridiculous.
At the other end is that I have a summons requesting my attendance in court for a speeding offence.
That has obviously gone into the realms of pending, someway into it.
I simply believe that the line falls between "We are thinking of prosecution" and "We are going to prosecute"
southpaw82
QUOTE (DancingDad @ Wed, 5 Jun 2019 - 12:35) *
But to me it is where the line is drawn between pending and possible?

Wherever it is drawn I doubt the distinction between a verbal and a written NIP is relevant.
This is a "lo-fi" version of our main content. To view the full version with more information, formatting and images, please click here.
Invision Power Board © 2001-2019 Invision Power Services, Inc.