Nationwide, compulsary helmet wearing for insurance cover

This sub-forum all discussions about this "lively" subject. All topics that are substantially about helmets will be moved here, if not placed here correctly in the first place.
User avatar
The utility cyclist
Posts: 1692
Joined: 22 Aug 2016, 12:28pm

Nationwide, compulsary helmet wearing for insurance cover

Postby The utility cyclist » 21 Jul 2017, 11:29am

Seems the natiowide are now insisting on helmet compulsion for all types of cycling to be covered by the flexplus insurance policy. :evil: That the underwriters currently offer a policy via Natwest that doesn't make it compulsary and they (Nationwide) don't make it compulsary to wear a helmet for
nationwie.jpg

http://www.bikebiz.com/news/read/nation ... 0#after-ad

User avatar
al_yrpal
Posts: 6807
Joined: 25 Jul 2007, 9:47pm
Location: South Potholeshire also known as the Chilterns

Re: Nationwide, compulsary helmet wearing for insurance cover

Postby al_yrpal » 21 Jul 2017, 11:57am

I would guess the underwriters (UK Insurance) have suffered some recent expensive claims from helmetless punters. Doesnt worry me I always wear one.

Al
Touring on a bicycle is a great way to explore and appreciate the countryside and towns you pass through. CTC gone but not forgotten!

User avatar
[XAP]Bob
Posts: 16595
Joined: 26 Sep 2008, 4:12pm

Re: Nationwide, compulsary helmet wearing for insurance cover

Postby [XAP]Bob » 21 Jul 2017, 12:27pm

Don't think it's underwriter driven
A shortcut has to be a challenge, otherwise it would just be the way. No situation is so dire that panic cannot make it worse.
There are two kinds of people in this world: those can extrapolate from incomplete data.

Vorpal
Moderator
Posts: 15668
Joined: 19 Jan 2009, 3:34pm
Location: Not there ;)

Re: Nationwide, compulsary helmet wearing for insurance cover

Postby Vorpal » 21 Jul 2017, 12:36pm

It's only for travel insurance under flexplus accounts (travel insurance is free with them), and it's not driven by underwriters.

http://www.bikebiz.com/index.php/news/r ... nce/021590

http://road.cc/content/news/226380-cycl ... -helmet-or
“In some ways, it is easier to be a dissident, for then one is without responsibility.”
― Nelson Mandela, Long Walk to Freedom

hufty
Posts: 484
Joined: 28 Jan 2011, 7:24pm

Re: Nationwide, compulsary helmet wearing for insurance cover

Postby hufty » 21 Jul 2017, 12:52pm

Don't forget that the notorious Cycling UK branded travel insurance doesn't provide cover if you're not wearing a helmet. That's Cycling UK, an officially pro-choice cycling organisation that should be fully conversant with the statistics. What hope for a building society?
Please do not use this post in Cycle magazine

User avatar
al_yrpal
Posts: 6807
Joined: 25 Jul 2007, 9:47pm
Location: South Potholeshire also known as the Chilterns

Re: Nationwide, compulsary helmet wearing for insurance cover

Postby al_yrpal » 21 Jul 2017, 1:31pm

I have a Nationwide Flexplus account and the travel insurance is provided for them by UK Insurance, it's subbed out, and, it's them that make the rules. It's pretty good because it provides worldwide cover including the US.

Al
Touring on a bicycle is a great way to explore and appreciate the countryside and towns you pass through. CTC gone but not forgotten!

Vorpal
Moderator
Posts: 15668
Joined: 19 Jan 2009, 3:34pm
Location: Not there ;)

Re: Nationwide, compulsary helmet wearing for insurance cover

Postby Vorpal » 21 Jul 2017, 1:54pm

al_yrpal wrote:I have a Nationwide Flexplus account and the travel insurance is provided for them by UK Insurance, it's subbed out, and, it's them that make the rules.

Then why don't they have the same rules for other insurance they underwrite?

Churchill is also underwritten by UK Insurance Limited, and they have a longish list of things that require helmets (kayaking, jet skiing, quadbiking, motorcycling, gokarting, rafting, etc.), but cycling does not require a helmet (to make a claim), even though it is an insured activity.

https://www.churchill.com/lib/pdf/ch-tr ... cument.pdf

Direct Line, also underwritten by UK Insurance Limited, adds downhill skiing to that list, but otherwise their list looks almost identical to the Churchill list (even to fonts and layout) https://www.directline.com/lib/pdf/dl-t ... cument.pdf Cycling still doens't require a helmet to amke a claim.
“In some ways, it is easier to be a dissident, for then one is without responsibility.”
― Nelson Mandela, Long Walk to Freedom

User avatar
al_yrpal
Posts: 6807
Joined: 25 Jul 2007, 9:47pm
Location: South Potholeshire also known as the Chilterns

Re: Nationwide, compulsary helmet wearing for insurance cover

Postby al_yrpal » 21 Jul 2017, 2:51pm

Nationwide can't be paying a huge premium because the Flex Direct account only costs £13 a month (just increased from £10 a month,) and includes car breakdown and recovery, mobile insurance and 2nd year warranty on electrical items purchased. So, a belt tightening exercise has been in process.

Al
Touring on a bicycle is a great way to explore and appreciate the countryside and towns you pass through. CTC gone but not forgotten!

User avatar
Mick F
Spambuster
Posts: 42987
Joined: 7 Jan 2007, 11:24am
Location: Tamar Valley, Cornwall

Re: Nationwide, compulsary helmet wearing for insurance cover

Postby Mick F » 21 Jul 2017, 3:12pm

The utility cyclist wrote:Seems the natiowide are now insisting on helmet compulsion for all types of cycling ......
No they're not.

Not by what the attachment says.
Helmets must be worn: Normal, everyday cycling.

I don't do "normal everyday cycling" and I'm sure lots of us don't either.
Mick F. Cornwall

hufty
Posts: 484
Joined: 28 Jan 2011, 7:24pm

Re: Nationwide, compulsary helmet wearing for insurance cover

Postby hufty » 21 Jul 2017, 6:40pm

Mick F wrote:
The utility cyclist wrote:Seems the natiowide are now insisting on helmet compulsion for all types of cycling ......
No they're not.

Not by what the attachment says.
Helmets must be worn: Normal, everyday cycling.

I don't do "normal everyday cycling" and I'm sure lots of us don't either.

In the event of a claim, it won't really matter how you try to characterise your cycling, only how the insurance company views it.
Please do not use this post in Cycle magazine

User avatar
The utility cyclist
Posts: 1692
Joined: 22 Aug 2016, 12:28pm

Re: Nationwide, compulsary helmet wearing for insurance cover

Postby The utility cyclist » 21 Jul 2017, 6:54pm

Mick F wrote:
The utility cyclist wrote:Seems the natiowide are now insisting on helmet compulsion for all types of cycling ......
No they're not.

Not by what the attachment says.
Helmets must be worn: Normal, everyday cycling.

I don't do "normal everyday cycling" and I'm sure lots of us don't either.

every day cycling is what most do, if you don't and are a competition cyclist (everything else is 'everyday') good for you, this isn't relevant to you :roll:

slowster
Posts: 293
Joined: 7 Jul 2017, 10:37am

Re: Nationwide, compulsary helmet wearing for insurance cover

Postby slowster » 21 Jul 2017, 8:03pm

I emailed Nationwide Building Society today to ask why this exclusion had been introduced, and received the following reply:

Whilst we accept an individual’s choice to wear a helmet or not, we feel the requirement to wear a helmet whilst cycling is a responsible approach to encourage safe cycling for our members. This change is purely for the safety of our members.

Although, if a customer was not wearing a helmet, but the injury suffered is unrelated to not wearing a helmet we would consider the claim and we will always apply a fair and reasonable approach.


So, this was not a commercial decision imposed by the Underwriters or taken to reduce the price Nationwide pay for the cover, but a paternalistic attempt to influence/restrict people's behaviour.

I have replied pointing out the very limited scientific/statistical evidence in favour of compulsory helmet wearing, referring them the information published by Cycling UK at http://www.cyclinguk.org/campaigning/vi ... le-helmets, and have asked them to quote the evidence for their decision.

It looks like Nationwide's action stems from the cultural values associated with its being a mutual society which was established and exists solely to act in the interests of its members. Unfortunately in this case the desire to 'look after' its members has led it to overreach its responsibility.

As Nationwide has noted, the exclusion also applies even if the injury is totally unrelated to whether or not a helmet is worn. They say that in those circumstances they would apply a fair and reasonable approach (although such a decision may rest with the Underwriters rather than Nationwide), but the point of insurance is 'peace of mind', which means knowing that you are covered (rather than uncertainty regarding whether the insurer would waive the exclusion).

Given that there is evidently no commercial reason for this exclusion, I think it is a very bad decision on their part. It is very easy to imagine scenarios in which the application of this exclusion is clearly going to be wholly unnecesarily detrimental to members, to an extent that far outweighs the inadequately proven benefits of compulsory helmet wearing.

NB I've posted this on both Singletrackworld and the Cycling UK forum, since there are threads about this running on both forums, and I think it's important that people are aware of the grounds for this decision by Nationwide.

User avatar
al_yrpal
Posts: 6807
Joined: 25 Jul 2007, 9:47pm
Location: South Potholeshire also known as the Chilterns

Re: Nationwide, compulsary helmet wearing for insurance cover

Postby al_yrpal » 21 Jul 2017, 9:57pm

I don't believe what they are saying. It's an astounding coincidence that this change is precisely coincidental with the monthly account charge going up. I bet it was imposed by UK Insurance as part of the renegotiation of what it charges Nationwide. Nationwide don't get involved with claims, it's UK Insurance you actually deal with.

Al
Touring on a bicycle is a great way to explore and appreciate the countryside and towns you pass through. CTC gone but not forgotten!

david7591
Posts: 197
Joined: 29 Dec 2015, 11:02pm

The old chestnut

Postby david7591 » 22 Jul 2017, 7:37am


slowster
Posts: 293
Joined: 7 Jul 2017, 10:37am

Re: Nationwide, compulsary helmet wearing for insurance cover

Postby slowster » 22 Jul 2017, 8:10am

I don't believe what they are saying. It's an astounding coincidence that this change is precisely coincidental with the monthly account charge going up. I bet it was imposed by UK Insurance as part of the renegotiation of what it charges Nationwide.


I see no reason to disbelieve what I was told by Nationwide.

As I understand it, the underwriter used by Nationwide has no such exclusion in the policies it underwrites for NatWest, Lloyds and TSB.

Changes to the terms of the policy will have been discussed and negotiated between Nationwide and the underwriter as part of the overall deal and the price Nationwide pays them for the cover. I very much doubt that this exclusion would have reduced the price, because although a cycling accident has the potential to result in a large medical expenses and repatriation claim, such claims are so infrequent that the wearing or not wearing of a helmet would be unlikely to make it worth it to the underwriter to offer Nationwide any significant reduction in the price for this exclusion.

Nationwide don't get involved with claims, it's UK Insurance you actually deal with.


In the scenario described by Nationwide where the injury was unrelated to lack of wearing a helmet, I suspect that there is already either an agreement or understanding between Nationwide and the insurer that the exclusion would not be enforced, or Nationwide would apply pressure on the underwriter to pay. However, it is bad insurance and commercial practice to issue insurance policies with an exclusion and say at the same time that the exclusion might not be enforced, since it just creates uncertainty.
Last edited by slowster on 22 Jul 2017, 11:04am, edited 1 time in total.