Unreasonable demand for a yearly medical

mondeoman72

So my car is up for renewal next month. Got an Affinity deal with FBD but looking at the proposal, they are demanding a yearly medical as I have a declared medical condition. Doc will look for about 60 quid.

Thing is, I am medically cleared to drive. The medical certificate has been properly sent to the RSA, accepted, and it is marked on my licence as fit and medically cleared to drive (101)

How can FBD make this demand when nobody else has?

Thanks

Eggs For Dinner

They obviously have concerns that your condition has the possibility of an increased risk of accident. Whether they are right or wrong is irrelevant, it's one of their conditions. Move to one of the other insurers who don't have that requirement

Addmagnet

Their insurance, their rules. Take your business elsewhere if you don't like it.

elperello

You could try sending them a copy of your driving licence and outline your case as above.

There might be an error in the proposal.

If that doesn't work maybe try an independent broker for an alternative quote.

NUTLEY BOY

The nature of OP's medical condition could be one that is capable of deterioration. If so, FBD's request may be reasonable as part of their assessment of the risk even though OP is certified as fit to drive by their GP and the RSA has accepted that.

As we don't know the nature of the condition - and are not prying - it is hard to be more definitive on current information.

How often is OP required to submit a medical to the RSA ? If yearly, a copy of the medical certificate should be reasonably good enough for FBD.

I would consider complaining formally to FBD about this. They might change their minds if challenged.

BTW if OP goes elsewhere for motor insurance do they have to declare the FBD transaction ? i.e. seeking to impose a term on the OP.

mondeoman72

The condition is diabetes. I currently have insurance running with aig, Zurich and allianz. They are happy as long as it is declared and it's on my licence. I'm not going to argue any more. Chill.ie is cheaper for my Zurich policy - than Zurich is. Stupid stuff

I am refusing the fbd demand and going elsewhere.

NUTLEY BOY

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120587436#Comment_120587436

On the latest information the FBD attitude seems hard to understand. Obviously, every case of diabetes must be assessed on the individual's personal clinical situation. If RSA / NDLS are happy with the OP'S medical evidence FBD's position hard to justify.

If OP's position happens to be one where his licence renewal is for a short duration only and he has to submit a medical report form with licence renewal a copy of the driving licence medical report [D.501 ?] should be good enough for FBD.

I see that some diabetes conditions do not even need to be advised to the RSA/NDLS if they are under active medical management and control. For motor insurance purposes OP is entirely correct to notify the condition.

However, I am concerned for OP on the point I raised previously at 5# above. FBD's action in requiring OP to submit a yearly medical report could be construed as the imposition of underwriting terms by them on OP. That, in turn, could be regarded as a material fact which must be declared to any insurer whom OP approaches subsequent to FBD's action.

I would please urge OP strongly to disclose the FBD action to any future insurers to keep in the right and to avoid any possible accusation of non-disclosure of a material fact. It is a pain but it is worth it to avoid trouble.......

coylemj

I would please urge OP strongly to disclose the FBD action to any future insurers to keep in the right and to avoid any possible accusation of non-disclosure of a material fact. It is a pain but it is worth it to avoid trouble.......

I would urge the OP not to do so, you are seriously overthinking this. OP has already notified his other insurers of his condition, there is nothing else they need to know. The fact that FBD are getting their knickers in a twist is not a 'material fact' that other insurers need to know about.

In the worst case, a prospective insurer could interpret his difficulties with FBD as a refusal. Whch it is not, he is simply taking his business elsewhere because of FBD's red tape.

Under the new regulations (see below), you are not obliged to volunteer information, only to give truthful answers to the questions a prospective insurer puts on the proposal form. It does not oblige the OP to tell every prospective insurer that FBD were going OTT on an already disclosed medical condition and he decided to walk.

8. (1) The duties in this section replace, at the pre-contractual stage of a contract of insurance, the principle of utmost good faith (uberrima fides) and any duty of disclosure of a consumer (including any duty on the consumer to volunteer information) that applied prior to the commencement of this section (whether that principle or duty arose at common law or under an enactment).

(2) The pre-contractual duty of disclosure of a consumer is confined to providing responses to questions asked by the insurer, and the consumer shall not be under any duty to volunteer any information over and above that required by such questions.

http://www.irishstatutebook.ie/eli/2019/act/53/section/8/enacted/en/html#sec8