Discrimination Against Armed Forces

[Hoots]

I recently purchase a new car from a Renault Dealership in Elgin. They offer free 7 day insurance cover which eases the transition from one car to another, mainly for road tax purposes. The insurance used by Renault is from the Advantage Insurance Company via Equity Insurance Brokers. However, I was refused insurance because I am a member of the Armed Forces. I complained to Equity and received the following reply today.

They stated: -

“Equity Insurance Brokers administer insurance on behalf of Renault UK. The policy is underwritten by Advantage Insurance Company.” “I can confirm that on 9 February 08 you contacted our office by telephone and during the call you subsequently advised our agent that you wished to obtain a free 7 day quotation. Regrettably we were unable to offer you a quotation due to your profession.” “Having referred your question regarding members of the Armed Forces to the Underwriters they have advised me that they will normally only insure Commissioned Officers who are based in the UK, there is greater risk with Non-Commissioned Officers as they may be stationed abroad and if on a base are able to take their cars with them, this leads to a lot of driving abroad, also a higher risk of vandalism and many other factors. If however they do not take their vehicles then have the risk of the vehicle being left unattended for prolonged periods of time.” “Insurers have only recently agreed to cover office based Forces staff (including MOD staff) and prior to this all forces personnel were automatically declined.


Needless to say this angered me somewhat, apparently I am not the only serviceman this has happed to with my local dealership and is sure to be the case elsewhere. I have now complained to Renault UK and to the Financial Ombudsman.

This treatment of the Armed Forces is just so typical of so many these days, fortunately I have this Anti-Armed Forces policy in writing. I would appreciate anyone with an ARRSE & Rum Ration accounts to pass this on. If I had have known this policy then I would have walked away from Renault. Maybe we should all boycott Renault, Equity and Advantage!!!

[Feneris]

You'd have thought their insurer would be extremly happy for you car to be kept in a base with barbed wire and guards with guns! Mine is!

[Tigs2]

Hoots

Try them out on the discrimination factor, the insurers and Renault

[snowball1]

Reminds me of the wife kicking off in that dealership, with the keycards you get with the laguna. In the space of a few months 2 of them refused to work for her so she demanded replacements (which she got), still haven't told her i washed them with my clothes after i had been out on the pop!

[Question_Answer]

barking! ......and to think that they could mitigate their concern about the "risk" by putting a simple clause in to make it clear that perhaps the insurance would only cover the vehicle if it remained in the UK.

[FantomZorbin]

Hoots.

Sorry to say that this is not new. On returning from an overseas tour in 1977 I needed to hire a car but was refused on similar grounds because the insurance company, Zurich, wouldn't cover me (before you ask the licence was clean)

Hell's Teeth that was 31 years ago - won't these ever get their feeble minds around this.

From that point on I always stated that I worked for the MOD ... problem solved.

[johnny99]

I know its too late now but if you had pulled out of the purchase and informed the dealer you were taking your business to a more enlightened company I bet they wouldn't be slow at getting the message across to their agent. This sort of nonsense should be flagged up the AF Forces minister via the AF Pay Review Board or whatever they are called now. You may want to flag it to your MP - just a thought.

[Kitbag]

This has been an ongoing situation for many years, however to a certain extent it is our own fault. Insurers use past experience in terms of risk- their business model is risk and probability. We are a bad risk. I recall seeing some stats from DASA that puts us near the top of the tree for alcoholism as a starter. Why should we get special treatment from an organisation dedicated to making profit? If we were a 'good' risk there would be no problem.

Perhaps that could also be factored into the next pay review?

[serf]

So do they think Officer = office based staff?

[minigundiplomat]

Bit of a no brainer. Noone touches Renault or the insurance company in future!

We may be a small firm these days, but 180,000 plus spouses, kids and relatives would make a big dent in their sales. There is enough journo's trawling these pages looking for a story, be interesting to see if they pick up on this. Probably not... for once Nu Labour isn't responsible for our woes.

[Fire 'n' Forget]

I would NEVER buy a Renault anyway

Especially a Dci variant, Type Renault Dci engine problems into google

The EGR valve and blowing Turbo's EEK ££££

[Always a Sapper]

Well I'm due to renew tommorow, funny enough last years was with Advantage.... Not any more

Anyway Hoots, whats with buying a 'surrender monkey' car....... you should hang your head in shame.....



Take yourself out back and have a chat with yerself.... Oh and come back bruised.....

[RubiC Cube]

Probably not worth getting your knockers ina twist over this as lots of different insurance companies have different exclusions depending on your proffession. My son, an accounant with aclean licence, was turned down on the grounds of his proffession, by one company offering a cheap quote.

[Al R]

There is absolutely no case for this company to answer, however unpalatable that sounds. It can decide who it wants to insure, and that'll depend on the relationship it has with its underwriters and agents (think.. Sheila's Wheels). And why anyone would buy a modern Renault is beyond me anyway.

Under the terms of the Road Traffic Act, there is no automatic legal requirement to own an insurance policy.

[C130 Techie]

“Having referred your question regarding members of the Armed Forces to the Underwriters they have advised me that they will normally only insure Commissioned Officers who are based in the UK, there is greater risk with Non-Commissioned Officers as they may be stationed abroad and if on a base are able to take their cars with them, this leads to a lot of driving abroad, also a higher risk of vandalism and many other factors. If however they do not take their vehicles then have the risk of the vehicle being left unattended for prolonged periods of time.”

I have read some utter Bo$$ocks in my time but that takes the biscuit.

[Whenurhappy]

Google the Chief Executive, write to him/her at their home address (Companies House gives this) and point out - rationally - the illogicality of this proposal (based, it seems, on an 18 year olf squaddie posted to Germany for the first time!). A few years ago I had the similar rubbish with a 'free' life assurance scheme offered by a High Street Bank, that would not (unnaturally) insure for military risk. This included injury in a service vehicle - say, Corsa on the M4 - or office based injury - say, electrocuting oneself on a photocopier. I pointed out that these are not specifically military risks, and they, in turn, pointed out that Serviceman were generally a higher risk (alcohol, adrenaline etc). I promised to go public with my complaint and they relented.

[Bladdered]

My 16 year old could put together a more coherent response than that drivel - it makes no sense whatsoever. Renault..................paah

[minigundiplomat]

Slightly off topic, but the Australian system where you insure the car, not the driver has a lot of merits.

[Vage Rot]

My insurance up for renewal soon - just for a laugh I'm going to apply to 'Sheila's Wheels'!! I don't mind if they load my premium quoted but if they refuse to quote just becuse I'm male then I'll have the bds

[Al R]

Sheila's Wheels does take blokes, and it does refuse women - tts all about the marketing. Its also crap, so it would appear.

http://www.reviewcentre.com/reviews-all-96183.html