Curious when car insurance PDF letter differs significantly from fine print.

Forums › Transport (cars, bikes and boats) › Curious when car insurance PDF letter differs significantly from fine print.

surfisup1000

5288 posts

Uber Geek

#273268 13-Aug-2020 17:45

I just added my oldest child to our car insurance. AMI emailed a PDF of the policy cover letter, part of which reads....

For any drivers not named in the Policy Schedule:

Driver aged 25 years and over $400
Driver aged 21-24 years $650
Driver aged 16-20 years $900

But, in the fully worded policy document....

While you are under 25, there is no cover for any loss or damage if your vehicle is being driven by or
is in the charge of any other person who is under the age of 25, unless that person is:

ii named in the Policy Schedule

The cover letter says unnamed 16-20yr old drivers are covered, the full policy document wording says they are not .

Phoned AMI and the rep said the cover letter was 'confusing' and the fine detail applies. I objected to the word 'confusing' and said that the cover letter is wrong, not confusing. The rep did agree with that view (said they would refer this for correction, but will they?).

Which then got me thinking. Would the cover letter or the full policy wording take precedence in the event of a claim? I'm not going to test that one out haha.

Goosey

2829 posts

Uber Geek

Subscriber

#2540529 13-Aug-2020 20:31

hmmm

I thought you can opt to cover un-named for a fee and obviously get cover for named.

Reminds me, I have no cover at all for anyone other than my wife or myself for one of our vehicles because apparently a medioka Ford SUV from 2011 that happens to have a factory turbo is just too much for anyone under 25 to drive. heck... i think its slow to be fair...

SomeoneSomewhere

1802 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#2540532 13-Aug-2020 20:38

While you are under 25, there is no cover for any loss or damage if your vehicle is being driven by or
is in the charge of any other person who is under the age of 25, unless that person is:

ii named in the Policy Schedule

I think this may be referring to the case of the policy holder being under-25, and allowing another under-25 to drive the vehicle.

BlueShift

1692 posts

Uber Geek

#2540654 14-Aug-2020 08:34

surfisup1000:

I just added my oldest child to our car insurance. AMI emailed a PDF of the policy cover letter, part of which reads....

For any drivers not named in the Policy Schedule:

Driver aged 25 years and over $400
Driver aged 21-24 years $650
Driver aged 16-20 years $900

But, in the fully worded policy document....

While you are under 25, there is no cover for any loss or damage if your vehicle is being driven by or
is in the charge of any other person who is under the age of 25, unless that person is:

ii named in the Policy Schedule

The cover letter says unnamed 16-20yr old drivers are covered, the full policy document wording says they are not .

Phoned AMI and the rep said the cover letter was 'confusing' and the fine detail applies. I objected to the word 'confusing' and said that the cover letter is wrong, not confusing. The rep did agree with that view (said they would refer this for correction, but will they?).

Which then got me thinking. Would the cover letter or the full policy wording take precedence in the event of a claim? I'm not going to test that one out haha.

I'd imagine, in the event that you had a claim denied, the Insurance Ombudsman would be pretty firmly on your side.

There's a well established rule that the fine print can't revoke what's in the big writing on the front page. I suspect this would fit that bill.

wellygary

8312 posts

Uber Geek

#2540682 14-Aug-2020 08:55

surfisup1000:

But, in the fully worded policy document....

While you are under 25, there is no cover for any loss or damage if your vehicle is being driven by or
is in the charge of any other person who is under the age of 25, unless that person is:

ii named in the Policy Schedule

The cover letter says unnamed 16-20yr old drivers are covered, the full policy document wording says they are not .

Phoned AMI and the rep said the cover letter was 'confusing' and the fine detail applies. I objected to the word 'confusing' and said that the cover letter is wrong, not confusing. The rep did agree with that view (said they would refer this for correction, but will they?).

Which then got me thinking. Would the cover letter or the full policy wording take precedence in the event of a claim? I'm not going to test that one out haha.

The Two sections you compared are not referring to the same situation, the fine print has the rider "While you are under 25" so its the situation of the policy holder being under 25.... then anyone else under 25 driving must be named to be covered..

I'm guessing you are over 25, so it does not apply....

surfisup1000

5288 posts

Uber Geek

#2540694 14-Aug-2020 09:08

wellygary:

The Two sections you compared are not referring to the same situation, the fine print has the rider "While you are under 25" so its the situation of the policy holder being under 25.... then anyone else under 25 driving must be named to be covered..

I'm guessing you are over 25, so it does not apply....

Yes, I was wondering about that.

AMI said it is free to add additional under-25's to our policy, but, if their name is not on the policy they are not covered at all.

Interestingly, just about all the young drivers we know breach their restricted license driving conditions by giving their friends rides to school . I wonder if that is reason for denying a claim.

I am the 'mean' parent because I told my son he is not allowed to drive friends to school. A bit tough after one of his friends has been driving him to school for the past year? But, I don't want to pay out a large sum of money in case of an accident.

clevedon

1059 posts

Uber Geek

#2540775 14-Aug-2020 10:26

We just got two cheap cars to teach my boys to drive in, didn't matter when they got a small scratch or minor dent as the cars aren't worth much anyway. They got their licences and that's what they are still happy driving, when they can afford something better they can pay for it themselves.

They sure aren't driving my car.

scuwp

3885 posts

Uber Geek

#2540804 14-Aug-2020 10:51

Have been with AMI for a while. I note a recent (ish) change from having to specifically name the under 25 year old driver, to just purchasing a generic under 25 year old cover add-on option, much the same as you buy the optional add-on for glass, rental car etc. I suspect someone forgot to update the policy or they haven't quite got the documents aligned.

Lazy is such an ugly word, I prefer to call it selective participation

Equinox IT

Cloud spending continues to surge globally, but most organisations haven’t made the changes necessary to maximise the value and cost-efficiency benefits of their cloud investments. Download the whitepaper From Overspend to Advantage now.

Jvipers2

214 posts

Master Geek

#2540900 14-Aug-2020 11:34

The way I look at it is that generally, there is no cover if the driver or in charge person is below 25...

But by paying $900/$650/$400, cover can then be extended in events of a claim...

I believe we need the whole paragraph or section of the quoted above to fully understand the meaning...