Motor Insurance - Beware cancellation charges

Messages
274
Name
Rob
Edit My Images
Yes
Just a word to the wise... I have just sold my motorbike, 11 months into a 12 month policy so there's no refund for the unused cover which is fair enough. However the cancellation charge from One-Call insurance is £55.99 ... which I find excessive given that the cost of the policy was only £93.00 for the year (yes, I'm old... with 15 years no claims...) Given the fact that to cancel a policy is just one keystroke on a computer this sticks in my craw.
 
Often the cheapest providers will have charges that the likes of AA or Direct Line dont have, which is why they can be cheaper on comparison sites.
 
Just a word to the wise... I have just sold my motorbike, 11 months into a 12 month policy so there's no refund for the unused cover which is fair enough. However the cancellation charge from One-Call insurance is £55.99 ... which I find excessive given that the cost of the policy was only £93.00 for the year (yes, I'm old... with 15 years no claims...) Given the fact that to cancel a policy is just one keystroke on a computer this sticks in my craw.
Not saying it is right but plenty of policies have these clauses in them. I would challenge it on principle, but I wouldn't hold out much hope.
 
When I have sold vehicles and not intended to get another one straight away, I have tended to let them run its course, as cancelling a policy you lose the no claims that would have been earned for that year.
 
Just a word to the wise... I have just sold my motorbike, 11 months into a 12 month policy so there's no refund for the unused cover which is fair enough. However the cancellation charge from One-Call insurance is £55.99 ... which I find excessive given that the cost of the policy was only £93.00 for the year (yes, I'm old... with 15 years no claims...) Given the fact that to cancel a policy is just one keystroke on a computer this sticks in my craw.

Could you not have waited for it to expire? Or was it set for auto renewal? Though surely the policy document says what any cancellation fee is present?
 
You have to cancel.
A while back someone sold a motorbike and didn't cancel the insurance. Then the bloke who bought it, crashed into a vehicle with it, but wasn't insured.

The car drivers insurance then went after the original blokes insurance and won costing the bloke his no claims and hiked premiums Despite not having anything to do with it.
It's unlikely but not worth the risk.
 
i recently cancelled mine as i sold my z750 last week.
i rang up and they said they would not bother with the cancel charge i wouldn't have paid it anyway
that was bennets
 
You were a month away from the contract end date with no refund due. Why did you cancel it.

I’d also be asking the insurance company why they have charged you a cancellation fee when they are not out of pocket
 
You were a month away from the contract end date with no refund due. Why did you cancel it.

I’d also be asking the insurance company why they have charged you a cancellation fee when they are not out of pocket

In regard to first part which I also queried Tom @TCR4x4 in post #6 makes a point I was unaware of..................though it seems unfair :(
 
Can 2 people insure the same bike? I wouldn't have thought so so I'm guessing the OP had to cancel so that the new owner could take out insurance.
 
Can 2 people insure the same bike? I wouldn't have thought so so I'm guessing the OP had to cancel so that the new owner could take out insurance.

Of course you can. I can insure myself on my wife’s car if I wanted to, even though it’s insured for her too. I don’t, I a named driver, but I could.
 
Take the vehicle off the insurance policy with the intention of going to buy a new car/bike (even if you don't) - then leave the policy live, so you have a live policy but no vehicle. (I've been advised several times this can be done).
 
Of course you can. I can insure myself on my wife’s car if I wanted to, even though it’s insured for her too. I don’t, I a named driver, but I could.
Yes I know you can insure yourself in that way but if there are 2 separate owners?
 
Take the vehicle off the insurance policy with the intention of going to buy a new car/bike (even if you don't) - then leave the policy live, so you have a live policy but no vehicle. (I've been advised several times this can be done).

Is that what used to be called taking a sold vehicle "off risk" in readiness to add an as yet unowned one. If that practice still exists is it not down to the insurers to inform the customer as appropriate?
 
Is that what used to be called taking a sold vehicle "off risk" in readiness to add an as yet unowned one. If that practice still exists is it not down to the insurers to inform the customer as appropriate?
Yes I believe so from what I've previously been quoted - but not sure many of these new cut-price insurers would mention it if you called up and said you'd sold your vehicle and want to cancel - they'd just mention the cancellation fee and hope that you'll bite.
 
Yes I believe so from what I've previously been quoted - but not sure many of these new cut-price insurers would mention it if you called up and said you'd sold your vehicle and want to cancel - they'd just mention the cancellation fee and hope that you'll bite.

IMO it is remiss on the part of the broker/insurer to not engage fully with a client and rather take the route that costs the most :(
 
You have to cancel.
A while back someone sold a motorbike and didn't cancel the insurance. Then the bloke who bought it, crashed into a vehicle with it, but wasn't insured.

The car drivers insurance then went after the original blokes insurance and won costing the bloke his no claims and hiked premiums Despite not having anything to do with it.
It's unlikely but not worth the risk.

Did you know the person effected personally or is it heresay ?
If the new buyer didn't have permission from the the policyholder then perhaps he should be challenging the payout
 
Yes I know you can insure yourself in that way but if there are 2 separate owners?

Technically......you can't insure anything that you don't have an "insurable interest" in. Which is why I can't insure the lives of random people on the street as a safer bet than playing the lottery :)

But if the vehicle happens to have a valid policy in place then it can get messy and in the event of uninsured drivers it gets messier. The story of the motorbike sounds plausible to me. I know of one incident far more ridiculous that that where a company had to pay out
 
I've had this in the past and I've just refused to pay it. In two cases I just let the policy expire, but in the third I had to accept it as there was a couple of hundred quid due in refund. I just told the insurance company that I would never use them again and that I would make it my mission in life to put people off using them. It didn't make the slightest difference of course, but it made me feel better.
 
I've had this in the past and I've just refused to pay it. In two cases I just let the policy expire, but in the third I had to accept it as there was a couple of hundred quid due in refund. I just told the insurance company that I would never use them again and that I would make it my mission in life to put people off using them. It didn't make the slightest difference of course, but it made me feel better.

Cancellation fees are annoying but if the company is out of pocket and you were aware of the cancellation fee from the start then I guess you can't really complain about it.

The OP on the other hand has paid them for 12 months cover, not due any refund and only receiving 11 months cover. I'd definitely not be paying them any cancellation fee.
 
Cancellation fees are annoying but if the company is out of pocket and you were aware of the cancellation fee from the start then I guess you can't really complain about it.

Two assumptions in one sentence huh? Firstly, the companies wouldn't have been out of pocket - they'd already had my money and now wanted extra. The third was a vehicle change with the same company just a few weeks after taking out the policy. Secondly, in all cases it was all in the policy small print that only a solicitor would read - not the usual terms and conditions which everyone should read.
 
Two assumptions in one sentence huh? Firstly, the companies wouldn't have been out of pocket - they'd already had my money and now wanted extra. The third was a vehicle change with the same company just a few weeks after taking out the policy. Secondly, in all cases it was all in the policy small print that only a solicitor would read - not the usual terms and conditions which everyone should read.

Wind your neck in. Not my fault you didn't read the small print.
 
My neck's fine thanks - just pointing out your assumptions.

I wouldn't want them to make an ASS of U and ME.
 
But if the vehicle happens to have a valid policy in place then it can get messy and in the event of uninsured drivers it gets messier. The story of the motorbike sounds plausible to me. I know of one incident far more ridiculous that that where a company had to pay out

Can someone clarify then, if your car/motorbike is stolen and involved in an accident, does that mean your insurance policy is still valid you you are liable for any damage ?
 
Can someone clarify then, if your car/motorbike is stolen and involved in an accident, does that mean your insurance policy is still valid you you are liable for any damage ?

Surely not, if/provided you have reported it stolen!

In the cases mentioned above it/they were, where sold but the insurance not cancelled (or taken off risk ~ if that is still a process one can use?) i.e. the vehicle were still under your insurance.
 
Last edited:
Did you know the person effected personally or is it heresay ?
If the new buyer didn't have permission from the the policyholder then perhaps he should be challenging the payout

Was all over the news a while back. Quite common now.

 
Can someone clarify then, if your car/motorbike is stolen and involved in an accident, does that mean your insurance policy is still valid you you are liable for any damage ?

So, insurance doesn't work like most people think (source: worked briefly in claims - it doesn't work like most people who called me think....).

Imagine the scene. You have fully comp and are stationary at lights with handbrake on. I drive into the back of you. Most people seem to think you can claim on my insurance - you can't. What you can do is repair your car and then seek to recover damages from me. So you ring up *your* insurers - get them to fix the car (and they may or may not "waive" the excess in this case) and they essentially buy the debt from you. They have the right to pursue *me* for the damages. And since I'm a law abiding citizen I will have 3rd party cover so they will get all their money back including the excess (which is the only reason they waived it).

Now of course, because they are going to win, your insurers "spend" as much money as they need to on your car. Since you're an innocent party you have the right to be put into the situation you would have been if the accident had never occurred. This includes hiring a replacement car for you (and they will be happy to do this because the agreement they have with most other insurers says they can charge the hire at a flat rate even if they negotiate better rate with the hire company - that's just good business right?). So it's in *my* insurer's interests to call you first and offer to fix your car, hire you a new one and maybe throw in a bottle of sparkling wine for your trouble. Because frankly your insurers are going to charge way more than some cheap fizz for their trouble. Also, don't be surprised if a bunch of people contact you and offer to "manage" the repair for you - they also get the chance to make money.

But....what if I'm not insured? Check your policy - practically all insurers have "uninsured driver" cover which is actually backed by an industry body. Your insurers repair your vehicle and then claim at least a big chunk of the cost from the Motor Insurance Bureau fund instead of my insurers. Now any thief would automatically be uninsured because every policy I've ever seen says other driver cover is *only* extended if they have the insured's permission to drive (or it's a bona fide emergency). But if you sell your bike....? Well, they are driving with your permission. And you're insuring the bike so yeah, if they aren't more specifically insured it might cascade back to your policy.

TL;DR: don't insure stuff you no longer own. But don't worry too much about thieves. It's unlikely they will be covered on your policy.

Bonus fun fact: in the case above (where you did nothing wrong and it was all my fault and my insurers pay everything and your insurers actually make money).......your insurers will almost certainly still put your premium up. Welcome to capitalism.
 
Often the cheapest providers will have charges that the likes of AA or Direct Line dont have, which is why they can be cheaper on comparison sites.

I'm with Direct Line and have just renewed and noticed the £48.16 cancellation charge in the T&Cs.

From the company:

If you cancel after 14 days, we will return any premium paid less a charge for the number of days for which cover has been given and an administration fee of £48.16 for Car Insurance and £11.20 for Breakdown cover. All figures quoted include Insurance Premium Tax where applicable.
 
Back
Top