Spent DUI conviction - do I have to declare when applying for insurance

muttley-dps

Hi.

I have a DUI from 2002 for which a ban was served and carried the endorsements for 5 years after which I've a clean license.

When applying for insurance I always only ever go with a company which asks specifically if I've any convictions in the previous 5 years. I have read though that Ireland is the same as in England/Wales, whereby a spent conviction does not have to be volunteered even if asked for.

I'm not sure if this is right or not. Can anyone shed some light on this?

NUTLEY BOY

"DUI" implies a conviction in another jurisdiction ? Where was it sustained ? If outside the country there may a technical legal argument about whether it would fall within the scope of any rehabilitation of offences legislation within Ireland.

I am not aware that, in Ireland, a drink driving conviction can be rehabilitated or spent where the original conviction was sustained in 2002 - others might know differently. I would place no reliance on that notion when completing a proposal for motor insurance.

I would proceed on the basis that you already outlined namely that of making a factually correct disclosure within the terms of the proposal question. However, be very careful to read the full proposal wording to see if there is any other generalised / catch-all question which might embrace the 2002 conviction within it's scope.

The latter point might be problematical under the generalised principle of non-disclosure of a material fact. Insurers can repudiate a contract subsequent to it's formation if there has been such non-disclosure.

Generally, a material fact is one which might be capable of influencing a prudent insurance underwriter (they still exist ) in deciding whether or not to accept a particular risk offered for insurance and, if so, upon what terms and conditions.

The conventional wisdom is that if there is doubt a material fact should always be disclosed. It is never the right of the proposer for insurance to judge if the fact in question is material - that is the sole province of the underwriter.

I would have lingering doubts and unease about not declaring that 2002 conviction as failure to do so could be construed as a lack of good faith which is also a relevant principle in this type of contract. Insurance contracts are classified as being made uberrima fides [utmost good faith].

If the 2002 conviction and associated penalty is declared there is no doubt thereafter about issues of non-disclosure or breach of the concept of uberrima fides.

Just a view...........

AudreyHepburn

As some-one who works in the industry I can tell you straight up that you have to declare any and every conviction you have ever had.

Not doing so is deliberate non-disclosure of a material fact and, as the above poster correctly said, goes against the principle of Utmost Good Faith - you will inevitably end up being caught out if you go to make a claim and your policy would more than likely be cancelled. And because you would need to declare this as well as the conviction you would find it difficult if not impossible to get in future.

Liam McPoyle

AudreyHepburn wrote: »

As some-one who works in the industry I can tell you straight up that you have to declare any and every conviction you have ever had.

Not doing so is deliberate non-disclosure of a material fact and, as the above poster correctly said, goes against the principle of Utmost Good Faith - you will inevitably end up being caught out if you go to make a claim and your policy would more than likely be cancelled. And because you would need to declare this as well as the conviction you would find it difficult if not impossible to get in future.

Not strictly true.

It depends on how the individual company words their questions.

Some may ask have you ever had any convictions to which he will have to answer yes.

Some may ask have you had any convictions in the last 5/10 years, if outside of that time frame then the proposer is not obliged to advise of it.

boardsuser1

Were you convicted in Ireland?

If so it would have come under this act (As amended)

http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/eli/1961/act/24/section/49/enacted/en/html


If the above is correct then the below link should answer your question(s)

http://www.garda.ie/Documents/User/Garda%20Vetting%20Procedures%20-Aministration%20Filter%20revised.pdf

muttley-dps

It was an Irish conviction.

I have always used insurers who stipulate a timeframe as I would not knowingly lie on a form.
Last year I had a tip but it required a claim. On the accident report form from the company it did ask did I ever have a conviction even though on the quote they stipulate 5 years. I made a full disclosure of my conviction because it asked. There was no hassle with the claim and no mention made of the fact it wasn't on the original quotation (why would it be when it was outside timeframe they asked for).

L1011

AudreyHepburn wrote: »

As some-one who works in the industry I can tell you straight up that you have to declare any and every conviction you have ever had.

Not doing so is deliberate non-disclosure of a material fact and, as the above poster correctly said, goes against the principle of Utmost Good Faith - you will inevitably end up being caught out if you go to make a claim and your policy would more than likely be cancelled. And because you would need to declare this as well as the conviction you would find it difficult if not impossible to get in future.

If a conviction is actually spent - this has a very specific meaning in law - an insurance company has no right or reason to know about it and has no ability to cancel policies for non disclosure, etc. This is only a recent-ish innovation but I'd really, really hope people actually working in insurance would understand it.

muttley-dps

Thanks so far for the replies.

Looking at this law that was passed this year then (http://www.iprt.ie/contents/2886).

Because my conviction was in the district court and is long since spent (outside 7 years) then I no longer have to declare even where an insurance company asks 'Have you ever' as opposed to stipulating a time-frame is my understanding of it. It's the only scrape I've ever had with the law so there would be no reason for it not to become spent.

What would the insurance industries take be on this then? Has this law been accounted for?