Quarter of polled United kingdom policyholders ready to commit application fraud for less costly car insurance

Figures launched Wednesday by LexisNexis Risk Solutions indicate a single in 4 surveyed insured motorists in the United Kingdom say it really is acceptable to mislead insurers to minimize their car insurance premiums.

Forty % of respondents – identified as insured drivers and policy decision-makers – think the cost of their policy is as well high, and numerous are taking fraudulent measures to minimize the value, notes a statement from LexisNexis Chance Answers, a supplier of information to assist predict, assess and handle threat.

The poll carried out on behalf of LexisNexis by Client Intelligence concerned 951 adults residing in the U.K. Fieldwork was done June 21-26, 2013.

In all, 25% of those polled report that they believe some omission or adjustment of information is acceptable in purchase to reduce premiums when applying for motor insurance coverage, LexisNexis reviews.

Slightly far more than that, 29%, admit to “fronting” their policy by naming someone other than the individual who will drive the automobile the most. This determination is influenced by a number of elements, which includes who has the principal revenue, mentioned by 25% of respondents a better driving record, cited by 12% or who has historically had a reduce cost policy, reported by eleven%.

“Whilst a quarter of people feel it is acceptable to omit or modify information when applying for car insurance, the bulk acknowledge that this is unacceptable behaviour,” Bill McCarthy, managing director, U.K., Insurance for LexisNexis, notes in the statement.

“One resolution for insurers to help address shoppers who are prepared to mislead is to verify that the data that consumers are telling them is appropriate via wise use of information verification and analytics,” thereby helping insurers to underwrite threat a lot more accurately, McCarthy suggests.

Some buyers could not even realize that adjusting or omitting data can constitute fraud. “This is a chance for the 2 parties – customers could find themselves without having cover in the event of an accident and insurers can uncover themselves exposed to unforeseen chance,” McCarthy cautions.

Other survey findings include the following:

  • 13% report it is acceptable to use someone else’s tackle when applying for motor insurance
  • 15% say it is acceptable to try to modify their number of “no claims discount” years to accomplish a better discount and
  • 8% note it is acceptable to exaggerate the severity of a individual injury, this kind of as whiplash, to improve the funds paid out.

On the optimistic side, LexisNexis reviews that 64% of respondents are comfy with a telematics-kind of solution that would share details about the events foremost to a traffic accident to aid determine which driver was at fault.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *