Consumer Rights
The duty to take reasonable care and what happens if you slip up
Getting an answer wrong on an insurance application does not automatically void your cover. The Consumer Insurance (Disclosure and Representations) Act 2012 sets out a graded system based on whether the mistake was honest, careless or deliberate.
TL;DR
The Consumer Insurance (Disclosure and Representations) Act 2012 (CIDRA) replaced the old duty to volunteer information with a duty to take reasonable care not to make a misrepresentation. An insurer's remedy depends on whether a careless or deliberate or reckless misrepresentation was made, ranging from a proportionate adjustment to voiding the policy and keeping the premium.
Last reviewed: 22 June 2026
|
Key Facts
|
The old law and why CIDRA replaced it
Before 2013, consumer insurance was governed by an old duty of "utmost good faith" that required a policyholder to volunteer any fact a prudent insurer would consider material, even if never asked about it. That placed an unfair burden on ordinary consumers, who could not realistically know what an underwriter would consider relevant, and harsh outcomes followed when claims were refused over undisclosed details.
The Consumer Insurance (Disclosure and Representations) Act 2012, which applies to consumer insurance contracts entered into or varied from 6 April 2013, swept that away. It abolished the duty to volunteer information and replaced it with a single, fairer duty: to take reasonable care not to make a misrepresentation to the insurer.
The practical shift is significant. The onus is now on insurers to ask clear and specific questions. If they do not ask, you generally do not have to tell, and you cannot be penalised for failing to disclose something you were never asked about.
What taking reasonable care means
The standard of care is that of a reasonable consumer. Whether you took reasonable care is judged in light of all relevant circumstances, including the type of policy, how clearly the questions were worked, and any clarity the insurer gave about what it wanted to know.
Importantly, a consumer is not held to the standard of an expert. If a question is ambiguous and you answer it honestly on a reasonable interpretation, you have not failed in your duty. The way the insurer framed the question matters: vague or confusing questions count against the insurer, not you.
Common areas where misrepresentation issues arise include undeclared modifications on a car, previous claims or convictions, medical history on travel or life cover, and the number of bedrooms or rebuild value on home insurance. Answering these accurately and keeping a record of what you said protects you.
The three categories of misrepresentation
CIDRA grades misrepresentations and matches each to a remedy. The first category is an honest and reasonable misrepresentation. If you took reasonable care, there is no qualifying misrepresentation at all, and the insurer must pay the claim as though nothing went wrong.
The second category is careless misrepresentation. Here the remedy is proportionate. If the insurer would have charged a higher premium, it can reduce the claim proportionately. If it would have applied different terms, the claim is treated as if those terms applied. If it would not have offered cover at all, it can void the policy but must return the premium.
The third category is deliberate or reckless misrepresentation. This is the most serious. The insurer can void the policy, refuse all claims, and in many cases keep the premium. To rely on this, the insurer must show the misrepresentation was deliberate or reckless, not merely careless, and the burden of proving the category sits with the insurer.
How proportionate remedies work in practice
Proportionate remedies for careless errors aim to put the insurer in the position it would have been in had the truth been known, rather than punishing the consumer. Suppose you carelessly understated something that would have increased your premium by a quarter. The insurer can reduce your claim payment by the same proportion.
If the insurer would have imposed an exclusion had it known the true position, it can treat the policy as containing that exclusion when assessing the claim. If it would have refused cover entirely, the policy can be avoided, but your premium is refunded because you should not pay for cover you were never going to be granted on those facts.
This graded approach is far gentler than the old all-or-nothing rule. A genuine slip rarely wipes out your cover; it more often results in a reduced or adjusted settlement, which is why honest, careful answers and good record-keeping matter so much.
What to do if your insurer alleges misrepresentation
If an insurer declines or reduces a claim citing misrepresentation, ask it to specify exactly which answer it says was wrong, which CIDRA category it is relying on, and the evidence for that. The insurer must justify treating the error as careless or deliberate rather than honest.
Gather your own evidence: the application questions as they were worded, your answers, and any context showing you answered honestly and reasonably. If a question was ambiguous, point that out. If you disclosed something and the insurer recorded it incorrectly, that is the insurer's error, not yours.
Where you cannot resolve the dispute, complain formally and, after the insurer's final response or eight weeks, refer the matter to the Financial Ombudsman Service. The Ombudsman frequently considers CIDRA cases and will assess whether the insurer applied the correct category and remedy fairly.
Disclaimer: This article gives general information about CIDRA 2012 and consumer insurance disclosure, not legal advice. How the Act applies depends on the exact questions asked, your answers and the facts. Verify your position with your insurer and seek tailored advice for a disputed claim.
Frequently asked questions
Do I still have to volunteer information to my insurer?
No. CIDRA abolished the old duty to volunteer material facts for consumer policies. Your duty is to take reasonable care not to misrepresent the answers to the questions the insurer actually asks, so it is on the insurer to ask clearly.
Will an honest mistake void my policy?
Usually not. If you took reasonable care and answered honestly, there is no qualifying misrepresentation and the insurer must pay the claim. Only careless, deliberate or reckless misrepresentations attract remedies.
What is the difference between careless and deliberate misrepresentation?
A careless misrepresentation is an inadvertent failure to take reasonable care and attracts a proportionate remedy. A deliberate or reckless one means you knew the answer was untrue or did not care whether it was, and it can allow the insurer to void cover and keep the premium.
Can the insurer keep my premium if it voids the policy?
It depends on the category. For a careless misrepresentation that would have led to no cover, the policy can be voided but the premium is refunded. For a deliberate or reckless misrepresentation, the insurer can usually retain the premium.
Who decides which category my mistake falls into?
The insurer must justify the category and bears the burden of proving a misrepresentation was deliberate or reckless. If you disagree, you can complain and ultimately refer the matter to the Financial Ombudsman Service.
Sources:
- Consumer Insurance (Disclosure and Representations) Act 2012: https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2012/6/contents
- FCA Handbook, ICOBS Insurance: Conduct of Business sourcebook: https://www.handbook.fca.org.uk/handbook/ICOBS
- Financial Ombudsman Service, non-disclosure and misrepresentation: https://www.financial-ombudsman.org.uk/businesses/complaints-deal/insurance
- ABI, consumer information on buying insurance: https://www.abi.org.uk/products-and-issues/choosing-the-right-insurance/
