Direct Line Insurance – Cautionary Note regarding Modifications

[st13phil]

I’ve insured my cars with Direct Line in the past but moved away from them in 2014 when I bought my first E63, for reasons that will become clear.

As a benchmarking exercise against my renewal invitation from Aviva this year, I ran a proposal with Direct Line. As part of the online declaration you have no option but to confirm that your car is unmodified, so that’s what I did to get an indicative premium. Now, my current E63 is modified – it has a Quaife diff – so I knew that should I wish to proceed then I would have to phone Direct Line to determine what, if any, impact that would have on their offer. I also downloaded a copy of the Policy Document so that I could compare it with what Aviva were offering.

The interesting bit in the policy regarding modifications is their definition:

Modifications – any changes to your car’s standard specification, including optional extras.

Note that “optional extras” are classed as Modifications.

So, I phone them up, tell them about my online quote so they have all the relevant details and say that I need to declare a modification to the car. I also questioned them regarding whether or not factory-fitted options needed to be declared. They confirmed that all deviations from the car’s standard specification, regardless of whether or not those deviations were factory-fitted options, were classed as modifications and had to be declared.

OK, so we start with the Driving Assistance Package. Yes, they have that on their list.

Then the Dynamic Multi-Contour Seats. “Are they sports seats?” No, they’re Dynamic Multi-Contour Seats. “Ahh, we don’t have those on our list so I need to make a note of them. How much did they cost?”.

OK, so we move on to the Comfort Ventilated Seats. “Err… No, we don’t have those on our list either so I need to make a note of them and their cost too”.

Then I mention Speed Limit Assist. “Speed Camera Alert?”, I’m asked. Nope, nothing to do with speed cameras. It uses a camera system to read the road signs and displays the speed limit in the instrument cluster. “Err… I can’t find that on our list. I need to add it to the notes”.

At this point I stop proceedings as this was exactly why I left Direct Line in 2014 when I had my first E63 that had just about every available option on it. The process of trying to register all the options was so difficult I terminated my current policy and went to Aviva.

The requirement to provide information about factory fitted options is sort of understandable at first thought, but Aviva manage with just a registration number and are unconcerned about factory fitted options. This suggests that either they get the information from manufacturer-supplied data source or, more likely, they don’t consider it relevant to their underwriting risk. Either way, life’s too short to spend trying to register every factory fit option with Direct Line.

So, the point of all this?

Direct Line’s Policy Document is very clear, and my attempts to insure with them have confirmed that they really are insistent on all factory-fitted options being declared – even if they make it so darned difficult to do so that people like me take their business elsewhere. This is not common practice in my experience, so I suspect that a large proportion of all motor policies written with Direct Line could potentially be at least partially voided on the basis of failure to disclose material information. Whilst Direct Line can put any conditions they like on their motor policies, I would suggest that most people filling in the online proposal form wouldn’t dream of answering “yes” to the question of “is your car modified” just on the basis that it has factory-fitted options. If you’re a Mercedes-Benz owner it’s highly unlikely that your car has no factory-fitted options, so if you insure with Direct Line you may wish to review whether or not any options have been declared. And good luck with trying to declare them.

Be aware also that Direct Line is a brand of UK Insurance who underwrite motor policies for many other well-known brands and partner brands, including:

Churchill, Privilege, Green Flag, NIG, RBS, Natwest, Ulster Bank, Coutts, Yorkshire Bank, Clydesdale Bank, Royal London, Prudential, Nationwide, Sainsbury’s, HSBC and Zurich​

There are bound to be differences in the cover provided under different brands, but there are similarities in the policies too, so the same issue may arise with any policy underwritten by UKI: my advice would be to check your policy to be sure.

 

[MercedesDriver]

Thanks for info. I was just checking the insurance prices and Direct Line was 1st on my shortlist. Now I’ll have to reconsider if I’ll proceed with them at all.

 

[JRH30]

I am having to move from Direct Line as I have modifications on my SL55 and they say due to new policy they no longer insure modified cars!!

 

[KennyN]

If buying a used vehicle how can the new owner possibly have any idea what was added as options at the time of the initial purchase , not everyone is as thorough as an "enthusiast" when buying a used vehicle.

When i told More Than that i had fitted 19" alloys to the CLS they replied that if alloys that size were a factory option then where would be no extra charge or requirements for additional paperwork.

I also told Admiral on Tuesday that my son has a different head unit in his car but they were not interested , just mods for top speed and acceleration is all they need to know about.

Kenny

 

[sturgeon]

I have the data card for my car but how do you find out what the standard spec was?

I'm going through the motions of pulling in quotes and have found that some companies give a valuation from the Reg.No. that are WAY higher than others. Is this because they have a way to get a value from the data card?

 

[Deleted member 6183]

It would be interesting to know the number of claims declined due to non-disclosure.

 

[st13phil]

It would be interesting to know the number of claims declined due to non-disclosure.

Indeed it would. Fancy being the guinea pig?

I agree with KennyN's point regarding non-enthusiasts being unaware of what was / wasn't an optional extra on their recently purchased used car. The DL policy makes specific point of demanding that modifications carried out by a previous owner are also declared, and I'm sure most buyers would struggle with identifying that, too.

On balance, I'm unconvinced that an insurer whose underwriting criteria are so specific is going to give a claimant the benefit of the doubt.

 

[Deleted member 6183]

I've had a look, 99% of claims are paid.

 

[st13phil]

I've had a look, 99% of claims are paid.

In full?

My gut feel is that any failure to disclose (unless it's a performance related modification) would be used to limit liability rather than void a claim completely. Otherwise, why be so specific?

 

[flowrider]

This is why i don't go with Direct Line, the conditions are way over the top and have been this way for a number of years.

 

[Deleted member 6183]

In full?

My gut feel is that any failure to disclose (unless it's a performance related modification) would be used to limit liability rather than void a claim completely. Otherwise, why be so specific?

To put off those punters that they deem to be high risk.

 

[PobodY]

I also told Admiral on Tuesday that my son has a different head unit in his car but they were not interested , just mods for top speed and acceleration is all they need to know about.

That's how it should be really. - I had Adrian Flux ask "how much more power have you added to it?"
"Maybe 70bhp"
"What about safety or anything like that?"
"Braided brake lines? More aggressive pads?"
"Ok, we've made a note of that. Here's your revised quotation."

 

[whitenemesis]

In full?

My gut feel is that any failure to disclose (unless it's a performance related modification) would be used to limit liability rather than void a claim completely. Otherwise, why be so specific?

Exactly this. I declared all my retrofits on the S203, DL noted them on my policy. Had I not informed them they said the would, in the event of a claim, only cover the originally fitted parts, i.e. only pay out for the halogen headlamps, instead of the retrofitted xenons.

 

[m80]

Whilst I wouldn't want to pay the litigation costs against a bigger and more capable adversary like and insurance company,
I would view that anything listed on the manufacturers list gained from the VIN wouldn't be an extra or modification. Options at purchase vary wildly and inclusions within 'options' are often standard if not chosen anyway. For us to know what was included as standard isn't realistic. For insurance to restrict payment because we didn't tell them something we can't be expected to know would surely be an unfair term.

 

[ringway]

I don't get it.
Insurance companies know everything.

The size and wherewithal of these giants would enable them to database the spec of every car by datacard.
Then when reg number is known, calculate the risk/cost instantly.
I'm certain it wouldn't be a manual input process, either. The data could be captured once the software was there.
An automatic thing for them to use once the ball was rolling and the cost would be peanuts if used by the whole insurance industry and other industries.
I can't help thinking that (although as said earlier 99% of claims are paid) that non-declaration of factory fitted items, available to check by datacard, is a way of not paying up if they get a whopping claim.

Performance and handling related modifications should be declared, yes, but faffing about with optional OEM extras that can be identified by datacard IF THEY WANTED TO is ridiculous.

Insurance companies would know if you failed or forgot to declare, say a speeding conviction of a minor bump 4 years, 9 months and 25 days ago and might not pay out because of this, but they wouldn't ask you "are you sure" at the time of insuring, because they've gotcha, if it comes to a claim, which would perhaps constitute some kind of fraud on their part - They knew you were lying or had forgotten to declare, but still took your money, knowing that they possibly wouldn't have to pay out if a claim was required.

 

[Quackers]

I was thinking of buying my brother's '04 Range Rover as a runabout for the winter.
I approached the usual confused.com et al and then I remembered that DL were not on such sites so went through their quotation system.
I received a quote of circa £900 (£350 more than most other quotes) and it was on the strict understanding that a Tracker would be fitted!
For an '04 Range Rover HSE!
They're having a laugh. I won't be back to their site in a hurry.

 

[st13phil]

Exactly this. I declared all my retrofits on the S203, DL noted them on my policy. Had I not informed them they said the would, in the event of a claim, only cover the originally fitted parts, i.e. only pay out for the halogen headlamps, instead of the retrofitted xenons.

I completely understand - and support - the requirement to disclose modifications made post-manufacture. It's the requirement to disclose all factory-fitted optional extras that I find both burdensome and absurd.

I don't get it.
Insurance companies know everything.

Performance and handling related modifications should be declared, yes, but faffing about with optional OEM extras that can be identified by datacard IF THEY WANTED TO is ridiculous.

Precisely. And it's an unusual requirement that most customers would not expect and, perhaps, couldn't reasonably comply with due to lack of specialist knowledge.

 

[PobodY]

Precisely. And it's an unusual requirement that most customers would not expect and, perhaps, couldn't reasonably comply with due to lack of specialist knowledge.

I did once say to an insurance company that it was a second-hand car, how could I know if these were the same wheels it was supplied with or if it had any internal changes.

I was hedging my bets at the time because I'd been told the engine had been rebuilt and had HKS cams, but without taking the rocker cover off how could I be sure? - I later discovered that it didn't, so I was right no not declare them.

 

[whitenemesis]

From a well known comparison website..

"The law changed in 2013 to reflect the way in which the FOS had been viewing this area and puts the emphasis on the consumer being honest and careful, rather than 100% accurate.

The Consumer Insurance (Disclosure and Representations) Act 2012 says that the consumer's duty is to "take reasonable care not to make a misrepresentation", replacing the previous duty to disclose all necessary information."

 

[markjay]

On both occasions that I retrofitted COMAND, I declared it to Aviva, it did not affect the premium but interestingly they confirmed that the retrofitted COMAND unit it will be covered (but only up to £500).

Just to be safe, I declared a whole lot of other retrofits which also had no effect on the premium, e.g. heated seats, speakers upgrade, puddle lights, etc......