FORUMS FORUMS






RLFANS.COM
Celebrating
25 years service to
the Rugby League
Community!

   WWW.RLFANS.COM • View topic - Car insurance
::Off-topic discussion.
User avatar
RankPostsTeam
International Chairman28357
JoinedServiceReputation
Feb 17 200223 yearsN/A
OnlineLast PostLast Page
2nd May 24 20:2424th Oct 19 15:32LINK
Milestone Posts
25000
30000
Milestone Years
0510 1520 2530
Location
MACS0647-JD
Signature
Last edited by Ferocious Aardvark on stardate Jun 26, 3013 11:27 am, edited 48,562,867,458,300,023 times in total

Re: Car insurance : Wed Jan 09, 2013 9:53 am  
Insurers have a multitude of shared data on various anti-theft and anti-fraud registers, and in many cases, they already know the answer to the question. For example, "have you had any previous accidents". At a click of a mouse they get a list of every claim/accident related thing ever relating to your name, similar names, your address, your post code, similar addresses, your car reg no., and ditto details of anyone sharing your address, etc. etc.

Oddly, they can (seemingly) refrain from ever clicking that button for many years, and take your money, if you never have a claim. But the minute anything happens the information will miraculousy become known.

Of course they would say they never check in advance as they should be able to trust you, and if you misdeclared that's your fault. Sounds like utter bollox to me.

Cod'ead is confusing declaring something, as opposed to giving a false answer to a direct question. There is a difference between not volunteering information and lying. FWIW I wouldn't declare it either, but in this case the insurmountable problem is the previous refusal which as has been pointed out, all insurers already know about. Funny, that.
User avatar
RankPostsTeam
Moderator12488No
Team
Selected
JoinedServiceReputation
May 07 200718 yearsth
OnlineLast PostLast Page
13th Oct 23 16:277th Mar 23 15:21LINK
Milestone Posts
10000
15000
Milestone Years
0510 1520 2530
Location
Durham
Signature
Huddersfield Giants 2013 over achievers

Huddersfield Giants 2014 under achievers ??????????
Moderator

Re: Car insurance : Wed Jan 09, 2013 10:46 am  
JerryChicken wrote:
Have you actually rung any insurers or are you just going on what the comparison web sites tell you ?

I found that speaking to an actual alive and still warm sales person and explaining your situation politely and calmly (you can be calm sometimes can't you ?) often gets results - I picked up some unrequested extra discount on a two car policy with Direct Line last year and then this year when they tried to increase it spoke to someone at Aviva and got a superb deal, rang Direct Line back and gave them the opportunity to match it but they couldn't, nevertheless the salesperson did try which is something that a computer program wouldn't have done.


I have done both. two comparisons sites, 3 direct online applications to different companies and 4 calls to companies. Out of that only one would insure me.
User avatar
RankPostsTeam
In The Arms of 13 Angels26578
JoinedServiceReputation
Mar 08 200223 yearsN/A
OnlineLast PostLast Page
6th Jul 17 23:1930th Apr 17 15:32LINK
Milestone Posts
25000
30000
Milestone Years
0510 1520 2530
Location
On the set of NEDS...
Signature
Image


ebay's Rugby League Bargains ¦ Boost Your eBay Sales ¦ Recommended Amazon Stuff ¦ Get a Free Ink Cart!!! ¦ Quins RL T-Shirts, BRAND NEW DESIGNS

Re: Car insurance : Wed Jan 09, 2013 11:59 am  
Did you speak to a real live person at Swiftcover?
I've been with them for years and always found them easy to deal with.
User avatar
RankPostsTeam
Moderator12488No
Team
Selected
JoinedServiceReputation
May 07 200718 yearsth
OnlineLast PostLast Page
13th Oct 23 16:277th Mar 23 15:21LINK
Milestone Posts
10000
15000
Milestone Years
0510 1520 2530
Location
Durham
Signature
Huddersfield Giants 2013 over achievers

Huddersfield Giants 2014 under achievers ??????????
Moderator

Re: Car insurance : Wed Jan 09, 2013 12:10 pm  
Big Graeme wrote:
Did you speak to a real live person at Swiftcover?
I've been with them for years and always found them easy to deal with.


Yes i did and they told me that they could not renew because they had new underwriters and had changed their policies.
Cronus 
User avatar
RankPostsTeam
Club Coach7152
JoinedServiceReputation
Jan 30 200520 yearsN/A
OnlineLast PostLast Page
4th Dec 20 18:2622nd Jun 20 21:45LINK
Milestone Posts
5000
10000
Milestone Years
0510 1520 2530
Location
one day closer to death

Re: Car insurance : Wed Jan 09, 2013 3:10 pm  
Durham Giant wrote:
Unfortunatly you cannot deny things now.

Apparently when Swiftcover denied me insurance they enter that on the national insurance database that means there is now a record given to all other insurers that i have been denied insurance without any explanation.

Now that is big brother for you BUT it is all done on the basis of protection from fraud.

I wish i had never disclosed it but it seems that now i cannot get away from it.

You can't deny it, but you can dispute that it should be on the database at all.

According to the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act 1974:

(2) Subject to the provisions of any order made under subsection (4) below, where a question seeking information with respect to a person’s previous convictions, offences, conduct or circumstances is put to him or to any other person otherwise than in proceedings before a judicial authority—

(a) the question shall be treated as not relating to spent convictions or to any circumstances ancillary to spent convictions, and the answer thereto may be framed accordingly; and

(b) the person questioned shall not be subjected to any liability or otherwise prejudiced in law by reason of any failure to acknowledge or disclose a spent conviction or any circumstances ancillary to a spent conviction in his answer to the question.


Have a look through the Unlock site, specifically the detailed guide. As they put it:
Under the ROA, once the ‘rehabilitation period’ is completed the conviction is ‘spent’ and no longer needs to be disclosed when applying for insurance.  For the purposes of insurance, “the broad effect of the Act ….is to relieve any proposer for insurance of the obligation to disclose a conviction or even the fact that he had committed the crime.”

The ROA allows the individual to interpret the question of convictions in their own favour, but with the backing of government legislation.

I'd challenge Swiftcover and request that any record of your spent conviction and consequently the denial of cover be removed from the national database and if they refuse, threaten legal action and quote the ROA. I think they'd struggle in a court to back up their case.
Durham Giant wrote:
Unfortunatly you cannot deny things now.

Apparently when Swiftcover denied me insurance they enter that on the national insurance database that means there is now a record given to all other insurers that i have been denied insurance without any explanation.

Now that is big brother for you BUT it is all done on the basis of protection from fraud.

I wish i had never disclosed it but it seems that now i cannot get away from it.

You can't deny it, but you can dispute that it should be on the database at all.

According to the Rehabilitation of Offenders Act 1974:

(2) Subject to the provisions of any order made under subsection (4) below, where a question seeking information with respect to a person’s previous convictions, offences, conduct or circumstances is put to him or to any other person otherwise than in proceedings before a judicial authority—

(a) the question shall be treated as not relating to spent convictions or to any circumstances ancillary to spent convictions, and the answer thereto may be framed accordingly; and

(b) the person questioned shall not be subjected to any liability or otherwise prejudiced in law by reason of any failure to acknowledge or disclose a spent conviction or any circumstances ancillary to a spent conviction in his answer to the question.


Have a look through the Unlock site, specifically the detailed guide. As they put it:
Under the ROA, once the ‘rehabilitation period’ is completed the conviction is ‘spent’ and no longer needs to be disclosed when applying for insurance.  For the purposes of insurance, “the broad effect of the Act ….is to relieve any proposer for insurance of the obligation to disclose a conviction or even the fact that he had committed the crime.”

The ROA allows the individual to interpret the question of convictions in their own favour, but with the backing of government legislation.

I'd challenge Swiftcover and request that any record of your spent conviction and consequently the denial of cover be removed from the national database and if they refuse, threaten legal action and quote the ROA. I think they'd struggle in a court to back up their case.
User avatar
RankPostsTeam
International Chairman28357
JoinedServiceReputation
Feb 17 200223 yearsN/A
OnlineLast PostLast Page
2nd May 24 20:2424th Oct 19 15:32LINK
Milestone Posts
25000
30000
Milestone Years
0510 1520 2530
Location
MACS0647-JD
Signature
Last edited by Ferocious Aardvark on stardate Jun 26, 3013 11:27 am, edited 48,562,867,458,300,023 times in total

Re: Car insurance : Wed Jan 09, 2013 5:26 pm  
Cronus wrote:
...
I'd challenge Swiftcover and request that any record of your spent conviction and consequently the denial of cover be removed from the national database and if they refuse, threaten legal action and quote the ROA. I think they'd struggle in a court to back up their case.


That's not very practical. Swiftcover don't run the national databases for one thing. More to the point, any such challenge would either fall at the first hurdle or, for obvious reasons, be appealed all the way by the insurance industry. Unless you are a millionaire how would you fund the sort of costs involved and how much would you be prepared to risk taking them on?

Also politically, the motor insurers pretty much have the government in their pocket just now. Trying to achieve anything that might be seen as anti-insurer / pro-convicted motorist would not go down well. There would be zero appetite for anything that insurers could spin as being in any way helpful to fraud or dishonesty.

Finally, the obvious objection to such a court case would be that it is not in any way illegal for insurers to hold such data which is simply factual. What they cannot do, in the case of a spent conviction, is take it into consideration.
Cronus 
User avatar
RankPostsTeam
Club Coach7152
JoinedServiceReputation
Jan 30 200520 yearsN/A
OnlineLast PostLast Page
4th Dec 20 18:2622nd Jun 20 21:45LINK
Milestone Posts
5000
10000
Milestone Years
0510 1520 2530
Location
one day closer to death

Re: Car insurance : Wed Jan 09, 2013 7:07 pm  
Ferocious Aardvark wrote:
That's not very practical. Swiftcover don't run the national databases for one thing. More to the point, any such challenge would either fall at the first hurdle or, for obvious reasons, be appealed all the way by the insurance industry. Unless you are a millionaire how would you fund the sort of costs involved and how much would you be prepared to risk taking them on?

Also politically, the motor insurers pretty much have the government in their pocket just now. Trying to achieve anything that might be seen as anti-insurer / pro-convicted motorist would not go down well. There would be zero appetite for anything that insurers could spin as being in any way helpful to fraud or dishonesty.

Finally, the obvious objection to such a court case would be that it is not in any way illegal for insurers to hold such data which is simply factual. What they cannot do, in the case of a spent conviction, is take it into consideration.

They don't run it, but they clearly have access to amend people's details. It would take them very little to remove a tick from a box or send an email to resolve something that is proving detrimental to DG's noble quest for fair insurance. He might even have a case for data protection.

He could always ask the Motor Insurance Database directly. Impractical or not, it's worth a try if it saves him several hundred quid a year and problems in the future. If the MID say no, he needs to ensure the spent conviction isn't used against him as per the ROA legislation. That might be impossible as we all know they will almost certainly use that information, which is why it should be escalated and challenged if at all possible.

You're mad anyway, there's no talking to you.
Ferocious Aardvark wrote:
That's not very practical. Swiftcover don't run the national databases for one thing. More to the point, any such challenge would either fall at the first hurdle or, for obvious reasons, be appealed all the way by the insurance industry. Unless you are a millionaire how would you fund the sort of costs involved and how much would you be prepared to risk taking them on?

Also politically, the motor insurers pretty much have the government in their pocket just now. Trying to achieve anything that might be seen as anti-insurer / pro-convicted motorist would not go down well. There would be zero appetite for anything that insurers could spin as being in any way helpful to fraud or dishonesty.

Finally, the obvious objection to such a court case would be that it is not in any way illegal for insurers to hold such data which is simply factual. What they cannot do, in the case of a spent conviction, is take it into consideration.

They don't run it, but they clearly have access to amend people's details. It would take them very little to remove a tick from a box or send an email to resolve something that is proving detrimental to DG's noble quest for fair insurance. He might even have a case for data protection.

He could always ask the Motor Insurance Database directly. Impractical or not, it's worth a try if it saves him several hundred quid a year and problems in the future. If the MID say no, he needs to ensure the spent conviction isn't used against him as per the ROA legislation. That might be impossible as we all know they will almost certainly use that information, which is why it should be escalated and challenged if at all possible.

You're mad anyway, there's no talking to you.
User avatar
RankPostsTeam
International Chairman28357
JoinedServiceReputation
Feb 17 200223 yearsN/A
OnlineLast PostLast Page
2nd May 24 20:2424th Oct 19 15:32LINK
Milestone Posts
25000
30000
Milestone Years
0510 1520 2530
Location
MACS0647-JD
Signature
Last edited by Ferocious Aardvark on stardate Jun 26, 3013 11:27 am, edited 48,562,867,458,300,023 times in total

Re: Car insurance : Wed Jan 09, 2013 11:54 pm  
Cronus wrote:
They don't run it, but they clearly have access to amend people's details. It would take them very little to remove a tick from a box or send an email to resolve something that is proving detrimental to DG's noble quest for fair insurance. He might even have a case for data protection.

But even if they did have access, they aren't going to amend anything just by request, are they? Would completely defeat the object. Data protection is a non-starter IMHO as the data is (they would argue) held for a permissible reason.

Cronus wrote:
He could always ask the Motor Insurance Database directly.

No, that is just a search engine to find out if a car was insured on a given date. It is nothing to do with the databases that record anti-fraud etc info.

Cronus wrote:
Impractical or not, it's worth a try if it saves him several hundred quid a year and problems in the future.

Well, at the risk of losing my house, I wouldn't say it was worth a try, but yes, he might.

Cronus wrote:
he needs to ensure the spent conviction isn't used against him as per the ROA legislation. That might be impossible as we all know they will almost certainly use that information, which is why it should be escalated and challenged if at all possible.

But I already outlined the cheap and cheerful way he could do that, if it happened that he had reason to believe information had been used contrary to ROA. No need to break the bank.

Cronus wrote:
You're mad anyway, there's no talking to you.

One tries :P
Cronus wrote:
They don't run it, but they clearly have access to amend people's details. It would take them very little to remove a tick from a box or send an email to resolve something that is proving detrimental to DG's noble quest for fair insurance. He might even have a case for data protection.

But even if they did have access, they aren't going to amend anything just by request, are they? Would completely defeat the object. Data protection is a non-starter IMHO as the data is (they would argue) held for a permissible reason.

Cronus wrote:
He could always ask the Motor Insurance Database directly.

No, that is just a search engine to find out if a car was insured on a given date. It is nothing to do with the databases that record anti-fraud etc info.

Cronus wrote:
Impractical or not, it's worth a try if it saves him several hundred quid a year and problems in the future.

Well, at the risk of losing my house, I wouldn't say it was worth a try, but yes, he might.

Cronus wrote:
he needs to ensure the spent conviction isn't used against him as per the ROA legislation. That might be impossible as we all know they will almost certainly use that information, which is why it should be escalated and challenged if at all possible.

But I already outlined the cheap and cheerful way he could do that, if it happened that he had reason to believe information had been used contrary to ROA. No need to break the bank.

Cronus wrote:
You're mad anyway, there's no talking to you.

One tries :P
User avatar
RankPostsTeam
Club Owner2874No
Team
Selected
JoinedServiceReputation
Feb 25 200421 yearsN/A
OnlineLast PostLast Page
1st Aug 24 21:351st Aug 24 20:39LINK
Milestone Posts
2500
5000
Milestone Years
0510 1520 2530
Location
Sometimes Workington, Sometimes Warrington, Often on the M6

Re: Car insurance : Thu Jan 10, 2013 9:34 am  
Car insurance is a total rip off. A few weeks ago my daughter had an accident, for which the other party's insurance have admitted full and complete liability.

My daughter's car has been declared a write off. So far so good.

Her car was 7 weeks old with 1,200 miles on the clock and has a list price of £8,500 and came with other add-ons like 5 year warranty, 3 years free servicing and roadside recovery etc

So I was expecting a "new for new" offer from the other party's insurers. They phoned yesterday to offer £5,100 ! Of course I told them to stick it where the sun don't shine and asked them if they could tell me where I could buy a 7 week old car with all of the additional benefits for that price as I'd buy 2 ! I also reminded them of their legal obligation to offer a value which would enable an equivalent age and condition vehicle to be purchased as a replacement. The chap went very quiet then blustered a bit before finally saying he'd need to refer the matter to an assessor. "No problem" I said "take as long as you like. You're already paying for a hire car costing you £300 a week plus storage costs of the written off car so it's entirely your own money you're wasting. You'll continue to incur those costs until you make me a sensible offer and the claim can be closed so quite frankly I don't care if you take 6 months". He mumbled something about Glass's Guide prices to which I simply said that Glass's prices were trade 'buy in' prices and not 'sell out' prices.

Half an hour later they phoned back and offered a no quibble offer of full list price. So their offer went from £5100 to £8500 in 30 minutes. I wonder how many people they rip off like that who aren't able or prepared to stand up for themselves ?
Robbo 
RankPostsTeam
Club Owner7195No
Team
Selected
JoinedServiceReputation
Oct 05 200321 yearsN/A
OnlineLast PostLast Page
8th Jan 18 22:2031st Dec 17 00:32LINK
Milestone Posts
5000
10000
Milestone Years
0510 1520 2530
Location
Wigan
Signature
https://twitter.com/#!/Robbo_Wigan

Re: Car insurance : Thu Jan 10, 2013 10:03 am  
Derwent wrote:

Half an hour later they phoned back and offered a no quibble offer of full list price. So their offer went from £5100 to £8500 in 30 minutes. I wonder how many people they rip off like that who aren't able or prepared to stand up for themselves ?



I'd imagine they do it every time in the hope that people won't have the balls to questions it. A lot of people unfortunately will just accept what they say and take the offer.

They did the same with my mate, but he works for Aviva so was wise to it. He then printed off I don't know how many different car adverts of similar make/model and age to show that the offer was ridiculous and he received the right amount.
PreviousNext

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 224 guests

REPLY

Subject: 
Message:
   
Please note using apple style emoji's can result in posting failures.
Use the FULL EDITOR to better format content or upload images, be notified of replies etc...

Return to The Sin Bin


RLFANS Recent Posts
FORUM
LAST
POST
TOPIC
POSTER
POSTS
26m
Out of contract 2025
Abe Froman
69
Recent
Shirt reveal coming soon
18th Man
60
Recent
Captains Challenge for Televised Games in 2025
Huddersfield
2
Recent
DoR - New Coach - Investor & Adam - New signings
Huddersfield
4068
Recent
Jerome Luai
Zig
21
Recent
Wigan warriors 2022 away shirt
Wigg'n
3
Recent
Accounts
Tony Fax
144
Recent
Captains Challenge to be introduced in 2025
Wigg'n
6
Recent
BORED The Band Name Game
bobm
63329
Recent
Assistant Coach - Langley
excruciating
31
FORUM
LAST
VIEW
TOPIC
POSTER
POSTS
1m
Captains Challenge for Televised Games in 2025
RLFANS News
1
1m
Rumours and signings v9
Big Steve
28923
1m
Planning for next season
Binosh
201
1m
IMG Score
Bull Mania
88
2m
Film game
karetaker
6010
2m
2025 Kits
Dave K.
32
2m
Salford placed in special measures
supercat
126
2m
Captains Challenge for Televised Games in 2025
Huddersfield
2
3m
Assistant Coach - Langley
excruciating
31
3m
Rule Changes
Rugby Raider
5
FORUM
NEW
TOPICS
TOPIC
POSTER
POSTS
TODAY
Wigan warriors 2022 away shirt
Wigg'n
3
TODAY
Captains Challenge for Televised Games in 2025
Huddersfield
2
TODAY
Captains Challenge to be introduced in 2025
Wigg'n
6
TODAY
Rule Changes
Rugby Raider
5
TODAY
Player Contracts
Trojan Horse
4
TODAY
Fans Forum 12 Dec 11th
Dunkirk Spir
3
TODAY
Laurie Daley returns as NSW origin coach
Huddersfield
1
TODAY
2025 Challenge Cup
Wanderer
1
TODAY
Challenge Cup
BigTime
6
TODAY
Friendlies
Deadcowboys1
3
TODAY
Sam Luckley likely to miss the beginning of new season
Huddersfield
1
TODAY
Frankie Halton sign new deal
ColD
2
TODAY
Transfer chatter for 2025 - New Dec 1st tamper date
HU8HFC
29
TODAY
Trinity shop Sunday opening
phe13
1
TODAY
Tyler Craig
Wanderer
1
TODAY
Matty Ashurst testimonial dinner
Big lads mat
1
NEWS ITEMS
VIEWS
RLFANS Match Centre
Matches on TV
Thu 13th Feb
SL
20:00
Wigan-Leigh
Fri 14th Feb
SL
20:00
Hull KR-Castleford
SL
20:00
Catalans-Hull FC
Sat 15th Feb
SL
15:00
Leeds - Wakefield
SL
17:30
St.Helens-Salford
Sun 16th Feb
SL
15:00
Huddersfield-Warrington
Thu 20th Feb
SL
20:00
Wakefield - Hull KR
Fri 21st Feb
SL
20:00
Warrington-Catalans
SL
20:00
Hull FC-Wigan
Sat 22nd Feb
SL
15:00
Salford-Leeds
SL
20:00
Castleford-St.Helens
Sun 23rd Feb
SL
14:30
Leigh-Huddersfield
Fri 28th Feb
SL
20:00
Huddersfield-Hull FC
SL
20:00
Hull KR-Salford
SL
20:00
Leigh-Catalans
Sat 1st Mar
SL
14:30
Wakefield - St.Helens
SL
21:30
Wigan-Warrington
Sun 2nd Mar
SL
15:00
Leeds-Castleford
Thu 6th Mar
SL
20:00
Hull FC-Leigh
Fri 7th Mar
SL
20:00
Castleford-Salford
This is an inplay table and live positions can change.
Mens Betfred Super League XXVIII ROUND : 1
 PLDFADIFFPTS
Wigan 29 768 338 430 48
Hull KR 29 731 344 387 44
Warrington 29 769 351 418 42
Leigh 29 580 442 138 33
Salford 28 556 561 -5 32
St.Helens 28 618 411 207 30
 
Catalans 27 475 427 48 30
Leeds 27 530 488 42 28
Huddersfield 27 468 658 -190 20
Castleford 27 425 735 -310 15
Hull FC 27 328 894 -566 6
LondonB 27 317 916 -599 6
This is an inplay table and live positions can change.
Betfred Championship 2024 ROUND : 1
 PLDFADIFFPTS
Wakefield 9 328 100 228 18
Widnes 9 238 153 85 13
Sheffield 8 234 126 108 12
Featherstone 9 250 169 81 12
Bradford 9 193 160 33 10
Doncaster 9 190 202 -12 8
 
Whitehaven 8 161 217 -56 7
Toulouse 7 158 130 28 6
Swinton 8 162 200 -38 6
Halifax 9 146 247 -101 6
Barrow 7 102 207 -105 6
York 9 153 207 -54 4
Batley 8 109 180 -71 4
Dewsbury 9 131 211 -80 2
Hunslet 0 0 0 0 0
RLFANS Recent Posts
FORUM
LAST
POST
TOPIC
POSTER
POSTS
26m
Out of contract 2025
Abe Froman
69
Recent
Shirt reveal coming soon
18th Man
60
Recent
Captains Challenge for Televised Games in 2025
Huddersfield
2
Recent
DoR - New Coach - Investor & Adam - New signings
Huddersfield
4068
Recent
Jerome Luai
Zig
21
Recent
Wigan warriors 2022 away shirt
Wigg'n
3
Recent
Accounts
Tony Fax
144
Recent
Captains Challenge to be introduced in 2025
Wigg'n
6
Recent
BORED The Band Name Game
bobm
63329
Recent
Assistant Coach - Langley
excruciating
31
FORUM
LAST
VIEW
TOPIC
POSTER
POSTS
1m
Captains Challenge for Televised Games in 2025
RLFANS News
1
1m
Rumours and signings v9
Big Steve
28923
1m
Planning for next season
Binosh
201
1m
IMG Score
Bull Mania
88
2m
Film game
karetaker
6010
2m
2025 Kits
Dave K.
32
2m
Salford placed in special measures
supercat
126
2m
Captains Challenge for Televised Games in 2025
Huddersfield
2
3m
Assistant Coach - Langley
excruciating
31
3m
Rule Changes
Rugby Raider
5
FORUM
NEW
TOPICS
TOPIC
POSTER
POSTS
TODAY
Wigan warriors 2022 away shirt
Wigg'n
3
TODAY
Captains Challenge for Televised Games in 2025
Huddersfield
2
TODAY
Captains Challenge to be introduced in 2025
Wigg'n
6
TODAY
Rule Changes
Rugby Raider
5
TODAY
Player Contracts
Trojan Horse
4
TODAY
Fans Forum 12 Dec 11th
Dunkirk Spir
3
TODAY
Laurie Daley returns as NSW origin coach
Huddersfield
1
TODAY
2025 Challenge Cup
Wanderer
1
TODAY
Challenge Cup
BigTime
6
TODAY
Friendlies
Deadcowboys1
3
TODAY
Sam Luckley likely to miss the beginning of new season
Huddersfield
1
TODAY
Frankie Halton sign new deal
ColD
2
TODAY
Transfer chatter for 2025 - New Dec 1st tamper date
HU8HFC
29
TODAY
Trinity shop Sunday opening
phe13
1
TODAY
Tyler Craig
Wanderer
1
TODAY
Matty Ashurst testimonial dinner
Big lads mat
1
NEWS ITEMS
VIEWS


Visit the RLFANS.COM SHOP
for more merchandise!