| They laid the blame squarely on householder Ian Wylie and warned others seeking insurance they must disclose previous claims at the time of seeking cover.
A Direct Line spokesman said failure to do so would make the policy “null and void”.
He claimed the company was entitled to seek recovery of an £11,000 payment they made to Mr Wylie last year and £3000 paid out for alternative accom-modation under Mr Wylie’s latest claim.
Mr Wylie tried to claim against his policy after his Kingennie Court flat was substantially damaged when a boiler blew up in June. The fire service blamed a switch fault.
Mr Wylie, wife Julie and two children Shannon (11) and Ian (5) were put up in a Monifieth hotel then a rented flat while repairs began. However, Mr Wylie was outraged when the insurance company told them they would have to get out of the rented flat and the claim would not be paid due to failure to disclose previous claims.
Mr Wylie said that was a “simple mistake” and he had got dates mixed up. He believed the company had access to information on past claims anyway and could have checked when he was taking out the policy.
But a spokesman for Direct Line said the onus was on the person seeking cover to give the information when asked about previous claims.
“He has put himself in a very tricky position,” said the spokesman, adding Mr Wylie had four “relevant” previous claims he did not disclose in 2004.
“Had he disclosed those claims we would not have offered him cover,” said the spokesman.
He admitted insurers did have access to a database where they could check a person’s claims history, but the company only researched that database if it felt there was a need.
“When he took out cover there was no need for us to do that,” said the spokesman. “The only reason we did so this year was because Mr Wylie made a very similar claim last year.”
The Direct Line spokesman said they paid out £11,000 last year after a fire. It was only after the current claim for three times that amount that investigations were made that revealed the initial failure to disclose.
The spokesman said his company had already paid out £3000 for accom-modation relating to the current claim, paid before the discovery the policy was void.
“We won’t be seeking to recover these costs, nor the £11,000 paid out last year, although legally we are entitled to do so,” said the spokesman. “We will not be continuing to provide cover.”
The Evening Telegraph was unable to contact Mr Wylie today. |
