GAP Insurance

[babycakes2k]

I purchased a car about 2 years ago on finance and with it I had to purchase GAP insurance. Primarily, my husband drove it but because it was working out too expensive for him to use it for work, we parked in our garage and it has been there ever since. Only 6 months ago when I sold my car, did I insure the other car and start to drive it. Last week I had an accident and the insurance company are telling me they will probably write it off. The accident wasn't my fault. I've taken out the GAP insurance paperwork so that I can submit a claim to them when my insurance company decide how much they will give me and I've noticed a condition on the policy which states that the vehicle must have been insured on a fully comprehensive policy for the term of the GAP insurance! So now I'm panicking as the car was only insured for a short time when we first bought it and now for 6 months. Does this mean the GAP insurance is not valid? Please advise.

[Hymie]

Assuming that your current insurance is comprehensive, there is no reason that the GAP insurance should dig deeper to see that the car has been continuously insured during your ownership � they will only be interested in the fact that you have current insurance cover.

My understanding of GAP insurance is that it covers the gap between the outstanding finance amount and the value of the car. It may be that no GAP insurance is payable, because there is no difference between what you owe on finance and what your insurance company offers you. In any event, it should not be a massive amount.

[babycakes2k]

Thank you for your response. Sorry I think I've mistaken my policy for a GAP policy. It is actually a vehicle replacement policy! The benefits of it as in the policy wording are 'If after the start date and before the end date, the insured vehicle is the subject of a total loss within the territorial limits, we will pay: the amount by which the purchase price exceeds the insured value to you, plus any excess up to �250. Does this help any further?

[Hymie]

The same would still hold true in relation to holding current insurance, as in the first paragraph of my above reply.

If the insurance company tries to wriggle out of payment based on not having had the vehicle insured continuously, I would claim that I could not find the previous insurance details, having thrown them away once they had expired.

[DesperateEth]

Don't lie like that - the registration number will be on a database which will show the insurance history.

Just be truthful - if you lie about one thing they will be justified in not believing anything you tell them

[Hymie]

Should the insurance company find out that you have not maintained fully comp. insurance throughout the period of VRI, I would not expect them to refuse payment on the policy. Had you not had fully comp insurance at the time of the accident (regardless of who was at fault), I would not expect them to payout.

Otherwise the wording they used (must have been insured fully comp. for the term of the VRI policy), would read something like �must be insured fully comp. at the time of the accident� which might lead someone to believe that they could somehow get away with not insuring the car.