car insurance

[Bunnybabe13]

I never realised that my insurance company had put no for me having ccj's on my policy, they never asked me the question when i did my insurance over the phone so i never had said no to that, my car was stolen and now they are saying that because i do have ccj's and it states on my policy that i dont they wont pay, is there anything i can do ? I dont see how that information even affects me being covererd

[Ethel]

You are going to find it very hard to prove you weren't asked about the CCJs - did you check the paperwork when you received it?
Is there anything on the original paperwork about CCJs?

[bednobs]

this is why they send you the paperwork and ask you to read it and call them with any corrections i guess!

[gouldc]

That's a very odd reason to refuse a claim - whilst you should have been asked about the CCJ's, that in itself is not sufficient to refuse a claim (from my understanding at least).

Obviously any CCJ's can be a factor for the investigation of theft claims, but I don't think that the Financial Ombudsman will accept that as the sole reason to refuse a claim.

I would suggest ringing the ombudsman.

[alifbae]

This site holds all the details about the car insurance. Check out this site for sure to clear all your doubts about the car insurance.
http://insurance-plan-guide.blogspot.com

[pink-kittens]

Very odd indeed
Yr CCJ might be for a mortgage you had - how the heck that affects the insurance of a car I dont know
I also suggest the ombudsman

[Buenchico]

Here's the link you need:
http://www.financial-ombudsman.org.uk/

Chris

[wishy123]

Insurers believe that people with CCJs are a poor risk (financially insecure, more likely to default on premiums or make dodgy claims) so the Financial Ombudsman would accept that this question affected their decision on whether or not to insure you, and how much to charge for the cover. However gouldc is right - if the non-disclosure was really that important to the insurer, the correct course of action for them to take would be to avoid the policy, which means that they cancel it altogether (usually also refunding some or all of the premium) and it is as if the policy never existed. they can't just turn down the claim. If they have just turned down this one claim and have kept the policy in force then that is actually a mistake on their part and they may now be legally obliged to deal with the claim because of that. The Financial Ombudsman would probably support you.