Prejudical Policy Terms

<p>Upon purchasing my vehicle, I obtained short term vehicle insurance with BMW Insurance which at the time was underwritten by Alexander Forbes. Initially, my insurance contract was on a named driver basis and I subsequently changed this to an open driver policy.</p> <p>BMW changed its underwrites to Guard risk, and as policy holders we were instructed that there will be no change to our policy terms.</p> <p> </p> <p>I recently contacted the underwriters to update my address and employment detail. An updated policy was sent to me which to my surprise reflected me as the only insured person under the named drivers option (which is incorrect).</p> <p> </p> <p>Upon enquiry I was instructed that the system correctly reflected me as being on open driver policy, but the policy details could not be updated for this. This appears to be inconsistent to me, and as a policy holder does not provide me with the necessary assurance.</p> <p> </p> <p>My concern stems from the fact that my right of recourse is in terms of the policy terms (and wording). In the present case, nowhere does it state that the policy is an open driver. Therefore, in the event of a dispute and should this policy document be presented as evidence, no where does this state that extent of all my terms (which includes the open driver policy). This therefore leaves me open to risk as a policy holder.</p> <p> </p> <p>Previously the policy document stated that the cover included open driver cover. Surely this was stated for the avoidance of any doubt. I understand that the insurance underwriters have changed, but my policy terms have not changed. I should not be prejudiced as a policy holder and should be provided with a policy contract that legal reflects all the agreed terms (not just some).</p> <p> </p> <p>I have no line of sight of the system, and have been provided with no further assurance. This is unacceptable, and borders on unfair insurance practice.</p> <p> </p> <p> </p>