Can an insurance company revoke an already issued policy?

[turtle]

I assure you there was no such question. If there was, I would have typed in the registration information. I did not engage in misrepresentation. I didn't even know ownership was an issue. It never came up in the online forms.

So my question again is isn't this their problem? They should have asked those questions before issuing me a policy and letting me believe I was covered. Not wait until they have an accident on their hands.

And if they actually do try to cancel the policy, what do I do then?

PS yes, I spoke to a lawyer, as well as people who have dealt with insurance, but none claimed to be specialists. That is why I asked if any of you were?

 

[tammy8]

WHY wasn't your partner listed on the policy?

 

[turtle]

He has his own car. My car was on his policy, but in order to save some money, he asked me to get my own policy. So I did.

The question still remains, what will happen if they decide to revoke the policy? How do they go about it? is is a legal process or not? do I have any rights whatsoever? and so on?

 

[tammy8]

Why are you saying it was cheaper for you to split the policy? What kind of activity does your partner have on their record?????

In all likeliness, SIU will investigate and see that your partner either had tickets or accidents that you both were trying to avoid paying for. This will likely void your orginal app (and I would almost bet my life that the registered owner question was there somewhere on the policy) and therefore allow the insurance company to deny the claim.

You may get lucky and the insurance company may add your partner and his surcharges to the policy and then charge you the difference.

 

[Zigner]

(and I would almost bet my life that the registered owner question was there somewhere on the policy)

I'm more inclined to think it's listed in the "terms" of the policy - not as an actual question. It doesn't need to be asked, since the applicant is affirming that they have an insurable interest in the vehicle.

THAT'S why I said that I bet the OP didn't read the fine print...

 

[turtle]

Neither of us were trying to avoid anything. That is rather a leap don't you think? I am asking in good faith because I don't understand legal and financial matters. I'm one of those head in the clouds intellectual types who is not so good with practical matters. So is he. But we are not dishonest people or stupid.

The insurance sign up forms did not include registration information obviously or I wouldn't be in this predicament. Again isn't this their oversight? If they fail to gather the necessary information, then their procedures for signing up are faulty.

And again I wonder what will happen? Is it a legal process where I can get representation in the matter? It seems to me that even if I made some sort of mistake I am the one getting screwed not them.

 

[turtle]

Your responses made me think. To the initial question, I think I got a clear answer, though without subtleties mixed in. To my subsequent questions about what may happen, I don't believe I did hear anything that helped me. Perhaps it is out of the experience of those here.

It was not surprising but somewhat discouraging to read post that just presumed that I had done things wrong, including illegal things. I am used to internet antics, but still it affected me as sad since I am in a vulnerable state of just having nearly lost my life to a serious accident. Strange how we tend to shoot off blame so quickly and accuse each other without a sense of respect. I have learned something here. I will never treat another human being with suspicion ever again.

 

[Zigner]

Your responses made me think. To the initial question, I think I got a clear answer, though without subtleties mixed in. To my subsequent questions about what may happen, I don't believe I did hear anything that helped me. Perhaps it is out of the experience of those here.

It was not surprising but somewhat discouraging to read post that just presumed that I had done things wrong, including illegal things. I am used to internet antics, but still it affected me as sad since I am in a vulnerable state of just having nearly lost my life to a serious accident. Strange how we tend to shoot off blame so quickly and accuse each other without a sense of respect. I have learned something here. I will never treat another human being with suspicion ever again.

You are not being treated with suspicion..in fact, I CLEARLY stated that I was giving you the benefit of the doubt and ASSuming that you made an honest mistake.
You can step down off your pity-pot now...

 

[turtle]

I was not necessarily writing with you in mind so you can please remove the my ego hat. It is charming but unsuitable since you were respectful enough to say I may have made a mistake and to speculate that there may not have been a question that was just asserted was there.

Do you really think adding "pity pot" was necessary? Just seems to aggravate things, not help in any way. It was just a reflective moment where it seemed to me that people just assume a whole lot without due cause, most of it negative, rather than giving each other basic respect. For me, as a Buddhist, people I know make lots of effort to live according to standards and principles that involve treating each being with unconditional generosity and kind regard. It is discouraging to be reminded that many people think that everyone is guilty automatically, on the take, a weasle, without any evidence to this effect. Suggests what kind of world is out there that I don't want to be part of. And yes, it is a vulnerable time for me, but that's just a truth statement and nothing else. Gave the context. Have you ever come close to losing your life? You go into a reflective mode, and your values come to the fore.

 

[turtle]

I read about rescission in insurance cases, and it seems to place the burden of proof on the insurer due to the seriousness of the action. That is to say, the insurer cannot just rescind on a whim, but it must have evidence that proves misrepresentation and/or concealment. Since there was no misrepresentation or concealment, I don't see how they can rescind. They may want to cancel since it is within the 60 days, which they are free to do without stating a cause, but they cannot take the contract back to the initial point. So they have to settle the claim or they fall under bad faith.

I went through the documents, and nowhere did I find a request for the registered owner of the vehicle. The requests were for my driving record and so on. They did have the VIN number and the bank name so they could have checked this out on their own. And should have if indeed it is a requirement for holding a policy. Accident forms from this company have separate lines for policy holders and owners implying that they do not have to be the same person.

I am not sure then why people here are so convinced that the insurance company can do as it wants to. I wish I heard an explanation. So far there were insinuations that I misrepresented or made a mistake or willfully was hiding something. None is the case.

 

[Zigner]

What site did you use to buy your insurance?

 

[turtle]

The notorious Geico. I have also read about horrible practices by this company. There is an entire web site on complaints about Geico. The mistake I made was believing that they were going to be decent and responsible.

I really wish I had stayed with my partner's policy now. The hassle is making it difficult for me to get over the accident and move on.

 

[Zigner]

1) You were required to list all drivers in your household - you did not.

2) The site is quite clear that you will be subject to the terms, conditions and exclusions on the policy when it is issued. If you have questions as to those exclusions, it is YOUR responsibility to have those questions answered BEFORE buying the policy.

 

[turtle]

Thanks for checking this out for me. I appreciate your effort and attention. I don't recall the question about other drivers. My partner never drove this vehicle so is it material though? I guess they could try to make a case that I concealed something though I certainly didn't intend to. Household? I really don't recall that part and why would it be relevant if a household member doesn't drive the vehicle? His record is perfect so they can't really claim I was hiding him to intentionally defraud. That would be untrue.

Still the question they are raising seems to be about whose name is on the registration. I still don't see anything that specifies that I had to be the registered owner. Perhaps it is buried somewhere in some document online? If that is the case, I guess it is my responsibility, but it sure seems sleazy. I mean it is not upfront and specified. I wonder if I can at the very least complain to the Department of Insurance.

Oh boy, looks like bad news and more bad news, but I still thank you for trying to help me.

 

[turtle]

Actually I just went through the sign up process to double check. There is one question about other drivers, but it doesn't say in the household. In context it is pretty clear that it refers to the car in question. In other words, does the vehicle have other drivers? So I did answer correctly when I said no.

If they use this to rescind, it is based on a quibble and misleading wording so pretty flimsy.

I am still looking for other policy documents that concern the registration.