by Harvey Williams
Some time ago it was feasible to for an insurance company to pay a motor claim that would have otherwise been declined, simply because the claimant had been a long term and loyal client to the company. Even today it is not inconceivable that an insurance company will make a decision to pay a claim on commercial grounds, for example where the claimant is a very major and highly profitable client. However the days of paying out a claim in order to treat a long-term client decently, are long gone and many clients risk having claims declined.
Contract hire companies nowadays see many cases where insurers have refused to pay out on claims following accidents. Naturally the larger a claim the more closely an insurance company will scrutinise it; if one of your company vehicles has a minor accident it does not make financial sense for the insurer to spend too much time on the claim. If however it is a major accident there are very sound commercial reasons why the insurance company will closely examine all aspects of the claim and the circumstances surrounding it. An Insurance company’s obligation is to its shareholders, which doesn’t include paying out on claims, if they can find good reason to invalidate it.
A motor insurance company’s terms and conditions will normally state that a vehicle should comply with the manufacturer’s specifications; if the vehicle is modified by the driver it is essential to inform the insurance company, otherwise it can invalidate the insurance. For this reason it is always advisable to fit the manufacturer’s recommended tyres. It is important to advise employees that they must not make any changes to their company vehicle. It has been known for employees to do what is called “chip” the engine of their company vehicle. This increases the power of the engine and could, if they had not been notified, give an insurer a very valid reason for refusing pay out on a claim. It is worth bearing in mind that this can also invalidate the manufacturer’s warranty and potentially cause a problem with the contract hire company; a vehicle without a manufacturers warranty does not have the same value as one that does.
The vehicle must also be roadworthy to comply with the insurance company’s terms and conditions. Contract hire vehicles, as most company car are nowadays, are generally relatively new and regularly serviced. If however a company runs its own vehicles and keeps them for perhaps four or five years, then the condition of the cars needs to be monitored more closely, particularly if they are doing high mileage.
Of course it is not only the lack of maintenance that can cause a vehicle un roadworthy; depending on the circumstances of an accident, having the wrong tyre pressure, where the tyres are unevenly, over or under inflated could cause the insurance company to deem the vehicle to be in an un roadworthy condition. Incorrect tyre pressure can affect road holding, steering, braking and the overall handling of a vehicle and in an accident can often be a contributory factor, particularly in wet conditions. If a vehicle is involved in an accident, it is not unusual for the insurance company to check that the car is roadworthy; it is in their interests to do so. Of course if the circumstances of the accident were such that it is clear that the accident has been caused by another vehicle, this would not be a factor.
If an accident happens under different circumstances, for example where an employee’s car crashes on a bend or skids out of control and causes the accident, then it is quite reasonable that the insurance company will want to ensure that the vehicle was in a roadworthy condition. Incorrect tyre pressure is one of the most common causes of newer cars being un- roadworthy. Employers should advise their employees that tyre pressures need to be checked regularly. This is best done in the morning whilst the tyres are still cold. Another good reason for ensuring that tyre pressures are correct is that it can significantly reduce the company’s fuel bill.
Company cars should have their tyres checked on a regular basis to ensure that wear is within the legal limit. In the past servicing was carried out on average every 12,000 miles, now manufacturers have extended the intervals and it can even be 20,000 miles. Clearly with intervals this long the company cannot rely on the serving department advising them when tyres have insufficient or uneven wear. Driving the vehicle with the wrong tyre pressure can cause uneven wear.
Many company bosses seem unaware or unconcerned, of the risks posed by of a company car being uninsured due to employees driving whilst in excess of the legal alcohol limit, Insurance companies are able to refuse to pay out on a claim, if the driver is under the influence of alcohol. In spite of all the evidence as to how alcohol affects psychomotor skills, there are a hard core of offenders who believe that this does not apply to them and that their years of drinking and driving has allowed them to master driving whilst drunk. There is some evidence to suggest that this not so much the younger driver but often men in their 50’s. 19% of car accidents that result in a death are believed to involve alcohol. Sadly the death is often not the drunk driver but an innocent pedestrian, another motorist or sometimes children. Employers that make it very clear to their employees that they can be instantly dismissed if they drink and drive are not only helping to avoid the company car being involved in an accident without insurance cover but possibly also saving a life.
The same will apply if the employee is under the influence of drugs. The company should also take into account that an employee may be taking a prescription drug that could affect their ability to drive safely. It would perhaps not be unreasonable for a company to check with an employee if they feel this could be the case. With the new legislation that comes into force in April 2008, the company is responsible for ensuring that its employees are safe when driving on company business.
Employees should also be told that they must not, however cold the weather is, go out and start the car and leave the engine running to warm the car up. However comfortable this may make the drive into work, it is highly risky; if someone got into the car and drove off, as has happened many times, the insurance company will not pay out for a vehicle stolen under these circumstances. The same applies if an employee leaves the keys in the car at a petrol station whilst they go to the cash desk.
If the company vehicles are to be insured whilst on the road, the driver must have a valid driving licence. There are many employers that believe that taking a photocopy of an employee’s driving licence is all that is necessary. Some have never seen the original and accept a photocopy provided by the employee, only to discover following an accident, that the employee had been previously disqualified.
If a company uses a contract hire broker to source their vehicles they could arrange for the broker to regularly check the employee’s driving licences; a licence checking service is offered by the more established contract hire and leasing brokers. This is the only way that a company can be sure an employee not been convicted of offences that they are unaware of and cause their insurance to be invalidated. This will also help them to avoid being prosecuted under new legislation introduced in April 2008.
If an insurer refuses to pay out on a claim, one should not be necessarily assume that they are correct in doing so. There is the Financial Ombudsman that will deal with any complaints or disputes in this respect. In a case we are aware of, one of our clients had his vehicle carjacked, the insurance company refused to pay out the claim of 60,000, because they said that they had written to him on a number of occasions telling him that he must fit Tracker to the vehicle, which he had not done. They argued that had tracker been fitted, the vehicle might have been recovered. However when an expert was called in on behalf of the client, things changed. Our understanding is that the expert stated that whilst the insurer had indeed written to the client with regard to Tracker, they had not at any time told him he would be uninsured without it. The claim was settled.
The following may help to prevent a claim from being declined by an insurer; company cars should be maintained regularly and tyre pressures need to be measured frequently to ensure pressures are correct and wear is even. It should be made clear to employees that they must not modify their car in any way and that they should not ignore any warning lights that show up. It can help to reduce drink driving amongst employees if they understand that they are likely to loose their job as well as their driving licence, if caught. They should also be advised of the risks of driving if taking any form of drugs, including some prescription drugs. Make employees aware that if they leave the car with the engine running there is a very real risk of it being stolen. Also using a contract hire and leasing broker to check employees driving licences, will avoid the risk of employees driving with undeclared convictions, or whilst disqualified.
Very often when motor insurance claims are declined, the insurer claims that the driver has been negligent. Some employers, perhaps with justification, worry that company car drivers are more prone to be negligent with the company car than they would perhaps with their own vehicle. It seems that negligence is a factor in accident claims not being paid, throughout the world; following an accident in America the insurer refused to pay a claim for accident that happened when the owner of a new motorhome thought the vehicle would drive itself after he had switched to cruise control. This did not stop him taking legal action against the manufacturer of the motorhome claiming that they should have told him that cruise control didn’t encompass steering, braking and knowing where to go etc. Common sense does not appear to be a factor in the American legal system; he won his case.