07.08.2013 Views

Misrepresentation, Non-Disclosure and Breach ... - Law Commission

Misrepresentation, Non-Disclosure and Breach ... - Law Commission

Misrepresentation, Non-Disclosure and Breach ... - Law Commission

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

Create successful ePaper yourself

Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.

• Any warranty should be set out in writing. Additionally, in consumer cases,<br />

any warranty must be brought properly to the consumer’s attention (paras 8.8<br />

– 8.20).<br />

• A breach of warranty would not automatically discharge the insurer from<br />

liability. Instead, the insurer should pay a claim where the insured can prove<br />

on the balance of probabilities that the event constituting the breach did not<br />

contribute to the loss (paras 8.21 – 8.48).<br />

• For consumer insurance, these rules would be m<strong>and</strong>atory (paras 8.49 –<br />

8.50).<br />

• In business insurance the parties could agree other consequences for breach<br />

of warranty. There would be special controls where the business contracts on<br />

the insurer’s st<strong>and</strong>ard terms. The insurer would not be permitted to rely on a<br />

warranty, exception or definition of the risk in a st<strong>and</strong>ard term contract if it<br />

would render the cover substantially different from what the insured<br />

reasonably expected (paras 8.51 – 8.80).<br />

PRE-CONTRACT INFORMATION AND INTERMEDIARIES<br />

1.17 Insurance is often bought through brokers <strong>and</strong> other intermediaries who give<br />

guidance on application forms <strong>and</strong> pass information to insurers. It is not always<br />

clear for whom the intermediary is acting, <strong>and</strong> a policyholder often bears the<br />

consequences of any mistakes or wrongdoing by the intermediary.<br />

1.18 We propose to clarify that “tied agents” who sell the products of a limited range of<br />

insurers should be treated as acting for the insurer. Where intermediaries are<br />

clearly independent, they should be considered to be acting for the policyholder.<br />

We ask whether the test of an intermediary’s independence should be whether<br />

the intermediary has made a “fair analysis” of the market, as defined by the<br />

Insurance Mediation Directive (paras 10.02 – 10.74).<br />

CONCLUSION<br />

1.19 It is not possible in an outline of this length to introduce all of our proposals.<br />

Consultees are therefore encouraged to read both the fuller summary available<br />

on our websites <strong>and</strong> the relevant sections of this paper. We look forward to<br />

receiving views by 16 November 2007, sent to the address at the front of this<br />

report.<br />

xiii

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!