Report comment

The defendants here did not adduce the greatest case, apparent if you read the judgment, here for those interested: http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Costs/2017/B18.html
The policy was an Allianz block rated policy issued under delegated authority. D argument was that a £10,000 premium to cover a £2,000 risk was disproportionate - the premium is to cover the cost of additional medical evidence where such cost is not recoverable from D. The judge did not accept that C knew that was the only potential additional cost when issuing the policy. D produced redacted policies from 3 other insurers - one is Lamp, but which showed substantially lower premiums, but the policy terms and conditions were not available, and D did not support the argument with any evidence, such as a statement at the very least dealing with that issue. It should be possible to attack these block rated premiums, but it is going to need a lot more cogent evidence than was produced here.
Also, if you are going to try this line of argument, make sure you have complied with protocols - here the response letter was badly delayed.