My ex has called for advice. Today whilst shopping, upon opening her car door the wind took it and it smacked against another car door. There sounds to be a line of paint transferred from ex's car to the other car door approx 15" long - although from what it sounds like no sign of a dent.
She waited around for the owner to return to explain what happened and at first she was of the "these things happen" mind and said she would discuss with her husband.
Later tonight she has come back and said she has spoke to her insurance and it needs a new door + repainted in metallic and side moldings, at a cost of £300!
It seems like that have gone from sympathetic to hard ball, which might be expected but can they obtain an inspection and quote on what seems relatively minor accidental damage in sucha short space of time.
The car isn't anything special - 2005 Corsa.
Not having any big ideas on what to say, I have told her to remain polite, cooperate and ask for a copy of said quote, an image of the damage (she didn't take a photo) and ask if we can look at an alternative maybe a chips away type outfit to inspect and quote?
If ex claims on her insurance to sort, how does it work with excess and future premiums?
Please ask further question if I may have missed anything.
Last edited by: nice but dim on Mon 1 Feb 16 at 21:54
|
|
Tell her to claim it from her insurance.
Last edited by: Old Navy on Mon 1 Feb 16 at 22:09
|
I accidentally clipped a car once when reversing. Just badly scratched his car, left a note.
He was very sympathetic ask him to get a quote, which he did 6 weeks later, £200 damage, however my wing was slightly dented and mine would have cost £350 so I claimed on the insurance.
Hasn't really seemed to affect my premiums but depending on her driving history, sometimes it is easy just to go via the insurance, should limit any come back etc.
|
My first thought is that its not very easy to get a proper quote from a body repairer "this evening" let alone talk to the insurance company and get a proper quote "this evening"
Its also a silly amount, a new door, painted in metallic will cost considerably more than 300 quid.
Sooo the only advice i can give is what I would do if it were me.
Work out how much an insurance claim would cost me, with respect to my excess, future premiums, and loss of NCB* - If that is more then 300 quid, I would pay them. It wont be much more than 300 quid I would guess.
So If i though they were pulling a fast one, I might be prepared to gamble a few quid and face them down. and Reply
"Ok I shall inform my insurance company, you had better inform yours. Let them deal with it. "
I betting your 300 quid claim by them might suddenly come down.
* edit I would guess 10% for loss of NCB, 10% for premium increase, and 100 quid for excess.
say 250 quid max over three years.
Last edited by: Zero on Mon 1 Feb 16 at 22:11
|
Yep Zero, agree a door alone must be at least £500, then there is all the labour of transferring the trim, wiring up the windows, mirrors, central locking etc. To paint a door alone costs more than £300 these days I bet.
Of course a second hand door will be cheap, but with a respray still far more than the £300. I suspect they are playing a fast one too, and the only real damage is probably around £150 too £200. I've had a quite nasty dent taken out of one of my cars, including the respray to that area etc it only cost £300.
|
You have to see their from the third party's point of view. Their car has been damaged and they are entitled to a proper repair at a body shop. £300 is not actually that much for that sort of repair.
I doubt whether your ex has a third party excess on her policy so the Insurer should meet the claim in full. Unless she has a protected NCD she will lose a couple of years bonus.
Just forward all th correspondence to the Insurer and let them take care of it.
|
Seems - ahem - open and shut to me: she caused the damage, there was no contributory negligence from anybody else, so she should inform her insurer and get it made right. Did you want us to say that the other driver should simply accept it?
The excess is just that: her contribution to the cost of the claim, even if the bulk is paid to the other party. And the fact of that claim will be weighed in the calculation of her next renewal. I'm already bracing myself for June and the consequences of fixing the red car that was where Mrs Beest wanted the back of the LEC to be.
edit: What's a third party excess? Not aware of claims by third parties being exempt from the excess on any policy I've held. Perhaps I should check.
Last edited by: WillDeBeest on Mon 1 Feb 16 at 22:17
|
In no way am I saying she should sort or pay for the actions made. What I don't want is for the other party to packet cash and not make a repair out if her honest conscious.
Yes it seems the claim route is the best, least hassle and possibly cheapest.
Should she contact her insurers or let the third party contact them?
|
|
Her excess is £100, is that all she will pay in addition to increase of premium?
|
> Her excess is £100, is that all she will pay in addition to increase of
>> premium?
>>
The Excess will be an accidental damage excess for damage to her own car. Since whe has no damage to her own car that will not apply. There will be no excess applicable to third party claims. The insurer will pay for the full amount.
The premium may or not go up at renewal.
She will lose NCD unless protected.
|
The Excess will be an accidental damage excess for damage to her own car. Since she has no damage to her own car that will not apply. There will be no excess applicable to third party claims. The insurer will pay for the full amount.
You sound very sure of this, CGN, but I've just checked my Aviva policy and it mentions only my £150 excess as the amount I pay towards any claim. The only exceptions are smaller amounts for windscreen repair or replacement, and the threat of an additional £200 to deter me from going outside their approved repairer network.
Other policies may be different, of course, but I repeat that I've noticed the distinction with any of the half-dozen motor insurers I've used over the years. Anyone else?
|
Looked deeper into the policy document. The Excesses section begins 'If your vehicle is lost, stolen or damaged...' There's nothing explicit to say that the excess won't apply if my own car isn't damaged but I suppose it could imply that.
Post above should also read '...not noticed...'
Last edited by: WillDeBeest on Tue 2 Feb 16 at 06:55
|
>> Looked deeper into the policy document. The Excesses section begins 'If your vehicle is lost,
The key word there is 'your".
As Peter states the RTA requires that you have third party insurance for both personal injury and property damage. Making such insurance subject to an excess would mean that the policy did not comply with the RTA.
When I first worked in motor insurance in the 1960s the law only provided that you must have third party personal injury insurance. Many policies did then have a third party excess and indeed Insurers would sometimes exclude third party property damage completely. An unsatisfactory state of affairs that was amended by changes to the RTA.
If you still uncertain here is what the Liverpool Victoria advise.
www.lv.com/car-insurance/customer-help/questions/pay-excess-third-party-claim
|
We're away at the moment so I can't easily check, but my understanding is the same as CGN's in that no excess is payable on third-party only claims.
But that's based on me thinking that since it is a legal requirement to have insurance that covers third party claims (excepting that some satisfy the requirements for self insurance) allowing insurance companies to insist on an excess starts to undermine the whole point of the legal requirement. What's to stop them offering a cheap policy with a £1k excess to someone, who then doesn't have the £1k when it comes to a third party claim?
|
>>What's to stop them offering a cheap policy with a £1k excess
>> to someone, who then doesn't have the £1k when it comes to a third party
>> claim?
>>
...probably nothing at all, because, like the premium level, that could quite easily be the insurance company's risk, rather than of any third party. (Third party claim is paid in full, excess re-payment is a matter between the insured and the insurance company. IMO, that meets RTA requirements).
Can't really see too many insurance companies wanting to do that, however - and I agree with the general view that excesses are not in play on a third-party claim - the insurance companies will normally get you through increased premiums and/or loss of NCD, however.
|
An Excess may be applied to any part of a policy, it may be applied differently to each section and it actually functions slightly differently.
The insurer only has a contractual duty to pay your accidental damage claim, therefore he is perfectly able to include in that contract that he will not pay the first £50, he will only pay any damage in excess of that amount.
Consequently it will either be deducted that from the payment, or you must pay it first to recover your repaired vehicle.
Ditto glass, personal effects, replacement vehicles etc. etc.
A "Third Party Excess" functions differently. The insurers' behaviour in the event of third party losses is governed by the RTA. They are not permitted to deduct that amount before settling with the Third Party.
It can get a bit more complex than that, but essentially that's how it works. TP Excesses used to be common for young drivers' TPF&T insurance policies and were largely intended to stop them claiming from each others' policies.
|
|
That should read "not pay"
|
My daughter had a similar experience, minor contact when she was parking, she hit an already-damaged wing of some student's small wreck and genuinely doesn't think she caused any additional damage. Other driver was fine at the time but then after she'd spoke to Mum and Dad emailed my daughter to say it was £300 damage or something like. Daughter thought she was being taken for a ride and prevaricated but I persuaded her to cough up (well, via the bank of mum and dad) but because she dithered the others had already put it to the insurers.
She'd have been much better off if she'd coughed up the £300 right away...
|
|
Yes, £100 should be it - for now. Ignore talk of NCD, protected or otherwise; it may once have meant something but these days it's pure window-dressing. The insurers have the computing power to assess your record, calculate the risk and price accordingly. The renewal premium will be what they want it to be.
|
Any way you can check the other vehicle is insured? Taxed and MOT'd?
Just a thought if it wasn't any of them you may have some more bargaining power...
|
>> Any way you can check the other vehicle is insured? Taxed and MOT'd?
Easy to check insurance status, tax and MOT if you have the vehicle reg.
|
That's true as far as it goes, so if your risk rating goes higher then your premium will follow suit, which may happen in any number of ways.
I interpreted the OP as asking whether to involve the insurers or not. And presumably if they weren't involved then then incident would not be reported to them and therefore no increase in premium.
Must be my dishonest mind...
|
Thanks all,
I think it will the insurers route however someone we know is going round to chat with them to assess the true damage and inspect this quote to see if it is genuine.
Here is snippet from the insurers online policy wording in force from August 2014;
Section 3
Liability to third parties
What is covered
•
Your
insurer
will cover legal liability for the death of or injury to any person, and damage
to property, caused by:
- you using or being in charge of
your car
;
- a trailer, broken-down vehicle or caravan while attached to
your car
;
- any person driving
your car
with your permission (as long as your
certificate of
motor insurance
shows that he or she is entitled to drive
your car
);
- any person using (but not driving)
your car
, with your permission, for social, domestic
and pleasure purposes; or
- any person getting into or getting out of
your car
.
•
Your
insurer
will also cover the following:
- Any costs and expenses your employer or business partner is legally liable for as a
result of you using
your car
for their business, providing your
certificate of motor
insurance
shows you have the appropriate business use cover.
- The cost of emergency treatment under the Road Traffic Act.
•
And, if your
insurer
first agrees in writing:
- Fees for any solicitor appointed by your
insurer
for representation at any coroner’s
inquest, fatal accident inquiry or court of summary jurisdiction.
-
Costs of legal services arranged by your
insurer
for defending a charge of manslaughter
or causing death by dangerous, careless or inconsiderate driving.
- Any other costs and expenses your
insurer
has agreed to in writing.
If anyone covered by this section dies as a result of an event covered by this section, their
legal representative will have the benefit of the cover provided under this section.
******************************************************************
This is also included;
Any payment your
insurer
makes under section 8 (Glass damage), or for emergency
treatment under section 3 (Liability to third parties) will not affect your no-claim discount.
•
If you have protected no-claim discount, there is no guarantee that your premium will not
increase.
**********************************************************
And then this at the bottom of the policy changes;
Section 9 of your policy is replaced with the following:
You will be allowed a no-claim discount according to the guaranteed discount rate in force
even if you make claims. This is not a guarantee that your premium will not increase.
|
Looks to me maybe no mention of excess when dealing with a damaged third party claim (there is no damage to her car except paint chips on the door edge).
If she is lucky to escape an excess, I will strongly advise to keep the £100 to the increased premium.
|
Here is pictures of the door. Ok its more than I thought but was told the door swung violently.
onedrive.live.com/redir?resid=269409DB9EA78971!50488&authkey=!AISX1_QXHPiKMzI&ithint=folder%2c
The scuffs on the mirror is from something else.
It is now going via her insurance. Is it wise for ex to inform her insurance first or let the other party call ex's insurance?
Will one way affect the outcome?
|
Yep that's a good £300 pounds worth.
She should tell her insurers herself as she is obliged to under the terms of the policy.
|
>> The scuffs on the mirror is from something else.
But will no doubt be repaired at the same time as the door.
>> It is now going via her insurance. Is it wise for ex to inform her insurance first or let the other party call ex's insurance?
Yes, your ex should inform her insurer herself.
|
Mrs B and I have both had accidents in last 2 yrs where we've damaged a stationary/driverless car due careless reversing. Totally our fault, no wriggle room whatsoever. We reported it to our insurer, LV, together with an account of accident and details of third party and their insurer. Photos were taken at time but LV said they'd only want them if third party alleged extra damage.
Mrs B's car was damaged and LV arranged repair via a bodyshop of my choosing.
Never heard anything more on either re 3rd party except for impact on NCD/premium. Car Mrs B hit belonged to a neighbour's daughter so we know it was repaired.
So advice to OP's ex is report it to her insurer with details as above - seemples!!
|
Duly reported and they have said no initial costs (excess) although I guess future premiums will be up on previous years.
Is it possible to shop around upon renewal with a claim against you. Do they have standard claim type codes (difference between a minor parking prang or a full write off) and is it possible to get a full payout amount made to another party so you can enter that on a comparison site for instance?
|
>> is it possible to get a full payout amount made to another party so you can enter that on a comparison site for instance
My fault probably, but I don't understand the question.
|
No my fault indeed :)
If she shops around at renewal, how does she explain her claim on the web application form.
Does she just put own fault claim which cost £xxx to pay out.
Do they class a write off at many thousands as same as a parking ding which cost a few hundred to sort?
Or
Are claim types issued codes in which you can drill down, e.g, write off, parking ding, stolen etc.
To me there is a huge void in risk between the two.
Last edited by: nice but dim on Tue 2 Feb 16 at 15:20
|
>> If she shops around at renewal, how does she explain her claim on the web
>> application form.
what I have found in the past is that as soon as you answer yest to the "have you had any accidents however ....." question with a yes, you drop in to the please call to confirm your quote message.
Doesn't make it cost more necessarily but allows specific questions to be asked and taken into account
|
Put it down as a fault claim of £x.
>>Do they class a write off at many thousands as same as a parking ding which cost a few hundred to sort?
Kinda sorta. If she had hit a 20 year old Corsa it would be a small claim, if she had hit a brand new Ferrari it would be a big claim. Bit rough to judge them differently.
Within reason moderate claims will be treated similarly whereas a claim which stands out may be treated differently.
There are frequently some form of alternatives for describing the incident.
|
We are insured (on all three cars) with LV at present. A year last November, the boss drove into the back of somebody at a roundabout, for which she was 100% to blame. It made remarkably little difference to her net premium (about £40 I think, on £150), and nothing noticeable on the other two cars that she is a named driver of.
Contrast with a no-fault claim I had as a result of a hit and run in 1999*. Premium went up from £400 to £700 and stayed high for several years.
*long story short, I found the car three days later, in use and uninsured/taxed. Driver denied it was her, saying on that occasion she had lent the car to someone named Jimmy of unknown surname and address! Police got nowhere with it.
|
My experience with LV is same.
>> Contrast with a no-fault claim I had as a result of a hit and run
>> in 1999*. Premium went up from £400 to £700 and stayed high for several years.
While seeking quotes for my recent renewal from Admiral I misunderstood a question. As a result I failed to report my car park barrier encounter last year on which I got 100% recovery. However, it showed up on an insurance database the sales agent consulted. Taking account of it put over £200 on premium removing any advantage of changing.
The database also turned up another 'issue' from April 2013. She had less info on that and thought perhaps it might be 'information only' stuff. Could also, she said, relate to a named driver. Neither Mrs B not I have any recollection and it's not shown with other incidents on my LV renewal.
We *think* Miss B's partner bumped his car about that time, while still at Uni in Southampton. Can only think it has percolated through as she's a named (and main) driver on his policy.
Last edited by: Bromptonaut on Tue 2 Feb 16 at 14:46
|
|
SWMBO is on my policy and inexcusably I had omitted her claims record when renewing my policy in 2014 with her as 2nd driver. Just an oversight. So I corrected that this year - her car was stolen and recovered a year or so back plus she had a knock which, although I'd strongly dispute it, the insurance settled as her fault. it put up my premium by over 25% which I was a bit miffed at, as in reality she doesn't drive the car and is just on it "in case". I suppose she can probably drive it under own own policy anyway. And given the Car Giant only offered me £800 as a part ex I'm seriously considering finding out how much TPFT would be.
|
|
TPFT is often more than comprehensive - to many insurers simply the fact you want TP insurance means you are seen as a higher risk.
|
>> I suppose she can probably drive it under own own policy anyway.
>>
That is something to check. I believe that insurers have been gradually withdrawing that right over the last few years, unless anyone knows better? Worth checking your policy before you drive someone else's car though.
|
|
I';m with More Than, I know I can so long as the car is insured properly with someone else. She is also with More Than so maybe the same, will check.
|
Vauxhall Corsa C - Advice needed - damaged door - Old Navy
