My wife had a minor parking ding about 6 months ago, reported it to her insurer having exchanged details with the other driver.
She didn't make a claim for her car as it was very minor.
She just got her renewal through which had gone up by 30% and on phoning the company, she was told this was due to a claim against her from this parking bump.
This is all fine, but from the date she reported it she has never had any contact from the insurer, nor did her renewal give any details of the incident, just the price rise.
Question is, is this normal practice? She could very easily have changed insurer unaware that a claim had been made, putting her in a very difficult situation.
|
Very unusual I would have thought
How much did she tell them when she reported it?
|
|
I would have expected them to contact her in the event of a claim to ask for her side of the story unless she admitted full liability when she informed them so they just processed it
|
She gave them his full details, even had pictures of the damage and told them she didn't wish to claim for her car. That was the last she heard.
She spoke to renewals who knocked £70 off the premium so it only went up £140 a year instead of the £200+ so small mercies and all that.
She then spoke to claims department who told her they had already paid out to the claimant but case was still open in case she claimed, even though she told them she wasn't claiming ( and has changed the car anyway which they know since they insure it! ).
The chap told her that an error was made at her initial phone call as they should have recorded that she was not claiming on her car, hence it had remained an open case.
Still seems odd that they didn't tell her she had a claim against her since without that knowledge she could have moved insurer this month without knowing.
|
|
But she did admit to her insurer that she damaged this other person's car? In which case a claim was to be expected even if damage was only minor. They probably claimed for damage she hadn't even caused.
|
The damage to the other car was a cracked fog light in the back bumper, the guy was minded to get one from a scrap yard rather than have the hassle of making a claim at the time, so it wasn't clear if he would claim at all.
I thought it was unusual to settle a claim and not provide any details to the policyholder about whether a claim had been made, nor to reference the claim on a renewal in any way ( price rise aside ).
As it was he turned it into a £900 car restoration project, but that is neither here nor there - was my wife supposed to periodically call the insurer to ask if anyone had claimed for the incident? It was 6 months ago and I guess they don't tell you if a claim is subsequently made.
|
Maybe he reported it to his insurer without the intention of claiming. If they knew it was a no-fault claim then they may have passed him straight on to their ambulance chasers.
My son's car was rammed amidships a couple of weeks ago. As soon as Admiral heard it was no-fault, they passed him straight on to Auxillis (formerly Albany, owned by Admiral AFAIK) who shipped out a credit hire car (£60/day for an Aygo). They will make a profit on it at the third party insurer's expense.
I thought they had stopped this nonsense, but apparently not. They were also quite keen to hear whether he had any, for example, neck problems too (he hasn't).
|
Stuu, can you confirm whether she admitted to her insurer that she was at fault.
Own recent experience of two claims is as follows:
(1) My car was hit by a prematurely lowered barrier while exiting the Mayorhold car park in Northampton. The Council admitted liability, met claim for repairs including my excess and hire costs for days mine was in bodyshop.
(2) I reversed into a parked car in broad daylight outside village shop. Nasty dent in his door but as I'd hit with corner of my bumper next to no damage to my car. 100% my fault and admitted. No repairs to my car and his claim was settled without further reference to me.
Both has separate upwards effect on my premium.
|
>>Stuu, can you confirm whether she admitted to her insurer that she was at fault.<<
Yes she did, but at the time she spoke to them it was unclear whether the other party would make a claim as the damage was minimal. She assumed, obviously wrongly, that if a claim was made against her she would get some kind of confirmation of that or that the case was closed.
I also thought it strange that her renewal documents had no mention of any accidents added to the policy details, especially since those documents are what you would look to when shopping around.
|
I'm with you Stuu on this but probably goes to show how ridiculous the insurance industry has become.
The fact that the claim can be processed and agreed without as much as an acknowledgment to your wife, never mind a statement to confirm the detail is ridiculous.
I bet the guy got a new bumper, resprayed and a week's car hire.
|
>>I bet the guy got a new bumper, resprayed and a week's car hire.<<
Met the guy have you?
He turned a cracked fog light ( Chrysler 300 C estate ) into a bumper respray ( £300 ) new fog light ( £120 ) plus £450 car hire. Must have been a heck of a hire car is all I can say :-)
Figures as quoted by insurer btw. My wife asked if they gold plated the car too.
|
|
But with today's claim culture, this was almost guaranteed to happen. Sad but true.
|
>>£450 car hire. Must
>> have been a heck of a hire car is all I can say :-)
If he went to his own insurer they would have dealt with this using their vulture partner whose business is to maximise the claim, not minimise it. £450 goes nowhere. The credit hire Aygo that Admiral/Auxillis have provided my son with is £60 per day. By the time he has a new car next week he will have had this motorised roller skate for 18 days = £1080, which the third party insurer will be stung with (I hope).
Of course he might have gone direct to your wife's insurer, in which case they would probably have jumped at dealing with the claim if your wife was at fault, knowing that his own insurer would fleece them. £900 is a very moderate claim, that the 'claims management' people would hardly get out of bed for.
When somebody ran into my parked car, I rang her insurers who couldn't do enough for me. They knew they would have paid out hundreds if not thousands more if I had gone via my insurer. I do know that her insurer spoke to her and she accepted the blame.
Your wife had already told them she was responsible. The only complaint you have is poor communication isn't it?
|
>>Your wife had already told them she was responsible. The only complaint you have is poor communication isn't it?<<
Indeedy.
As for the car hire, it takes two days to paint a bumper tops by a half efficient paintshop, I know, I worked on site of one for years, so the car hire seems expensive for a couple of days work, but no matter, insurance industry is what it is.
|
>> I'm with you Stuu on this but probably goes to show how ridiculous the insurance
>> industry has become.
>>
>> The fact that the claim can be processed and agreed without as much as an
>> acknowledgment to your wife, never mind a statement to confirm the detail is ridiculous.
>>
Threaten to take it to the Ombudsman, and if no joy, take it to the Ombudsman.
tinyurl.com/h2twawy
We think some complaints could be avoided by better communication. Under the terms and conditions of most motor insurance policies, insurers can settle claims without getting their customers’ permission. We’ve found insurers don’t always tell their customers what’s happened – leaving them surprised and upset when they find out.
case study 3
Mrs L told her insurer she’d had a minor bump with another car in a car park. The insurer agreed to contact her if they heard from the other driver’s insurer. Eight months later, when she renewed her insurance, she found her insurer had settled a claim.
The insurer had received a detailed engineers’ report about the accident – explaining the damage that had been caused. We thought it was reasonable for the insurer to rely on this independent evidence – but told them to pay £100 to make up for their poor communication.
case study 1
When he went to renew his car insurance, Mr J found that there was a fault claim on his records. His insurer explained that they’d settled a claim for an accident in a car park he’d been involved in. But Mr J argued that the accident wasn’t his fault.
Both drivers’ versions of events were very different. But it didn’t appear the insurer had tried to find out any more about the accident. We didn’t think that the insurer had done enough to who was responsible – so we told them to change the Mr J’s records to show a no-fault claim.
|
>>
>> Both has separate upwards effect on my premium.
>>
Did your claim against the council extend to the cost of that uplift for a few years?
|
People who inflate their own claims are like people who read The Sun.
There must be millions of them but I've never met one that admits it.
For as long as I've known even honest people try to screw the insurance company and the taxman. And whether you believe it or not, the issuance industry is massively more sinned against then it is a sinner.
|
After my last Charade was rammed up the back in 2012, I had a call from the compensation vultures telling me that I was inconvenienced and should be compensated.
I replied that no, I wasn't as I at the time had three cars so just had to pick up a different set of keys, plus the insurer had given me a loan car the same day, so I was not really put out by the accident. The guy, clearly not used to people who didn't want to screw the system called me a 'smart alec' and hung up.
I had an accident in 2005 in which it later transpired I had most likely damaged my neck, but I didn't know at the time sadly, I just felt a bit sore and didn't want the fuss. If I had known it would be ongoing physio for years on end I may have gone for it though.
|
|
Its not unsurprising that she didn't receive anymore communication from her insurers, right or wrong but even if you had looked elsewhere for insurance when the renewal was due, you would have has to answer the 'any accidents, claims or convictions in the last 5 years' question. This was an accident, even if you didn't know it was ever a claim.
|
|
That may be true Simon, but a claim and an accident are not the same thing - they often ask for the value of any payout for a claim, but if you are not aware of it, you wouldn't know to supply the information.
|
|
I don't think Insurers will normally tell you the cost of repairs to a third party vehicle even if you ask.
|
>>I don't think Insurers will normally tell you the cost of repairs to a third party vehicle even if you ask. <<
Well given that many insurers ask for the cost of any claims when giving a quote, that would make life difficult if you want to move insurer.
My wife's insurer gave her a full cost breakdown of their pay out to the claimant when she queried the amount, happy to do so.
|
|
Not really. Just say "not known They will check it anyway on the market claims database.
|
>> Not really. Just say "not known They will check it anyway on the market claims
>> database.
Do they always check even if you put a figure in the box?
|
Mrs B had a minor incident a few years back - car in front of her stopped for a crossing, she stopped, car behind stopped, but the 4th car drove in the back causing them all to hit each other.
The ones at the back who caused the incident were elderly and very shaken, and were really upset. They admitted full liability.
Guy behind Mrs B who was pushed into her was very odd - got quite aggressive and started shouting at her that he hadn't driven into her car, and that the damage was already there..........then by a minor miracle a police man wondered across the road who had been parked up opposite. He told the guy to shut up, and gave an official statement as to what he had witnessed. The elderly couples insurer had no option but to settle quickly with a full admission and a police statement, so we dealt directly with them.
|
|
Years ago my car was parked at the end of a line of cars which was hit by someone. The cars were all shunted and mine was hit by the car parked behind. ISTR my claim was against him, and him only - I guess he then claimed his and mine against the next owner and so on.
|
>>mine was hit by the car parked behind. ISTR my claim was against him
No offence, but that is unlikely. Your claim should have been against whoever started the chain.
Last edited by: No FM2R on Wed 16 Nov 16 at 12:53
|
"No offence, but that is unlikely. "
It was a long long time ago... that's certainly how I remember it but probably not how it was... :-)
|
>> >>mine was hit by the car parked behind. ISTR my claim was against him
>>
>> No offence, but that is unlikely. Your claim should have been against whoever started the
>> chain.
>>
I've always understood that in concertina type accidents the claims rippled backwards. You frequently see people complaining about it on forums.
Last edited by: Bill Payer on Wed 16 Nov 16 at 15:55
|
>> I don't think Insurers will normally tell you the cost of repairs to a third
>> party vehicle even if you ask.
>>
Mine did without asking, gave 3rd party costs down to last penny in the renewal notice.
|
>>Mine did without asking, gave 3rd party costs down to last penny in the renewal notice.<<
That is what I would have liked to see with my wife's renewal since it is relevant to the quote they give.
On the plus side, my renewal came through today and my blameless motoring existence continues to pay off as my premium edged down further - now down to £210 a year which is as cheap as I have ever paid for fully comp insurance doing 12k a year.
|
>>But she did admit to her insurer that she damaged this other person's car?
Does the conventional wisdom still say "Never accept responsibility?" I believe the reason was it limited options for one's own insurer in the event of a claim. I had not been involved in this for many years until my wife damaged another car in a parking accident. It was entirely her fault but her refusal to commit herself (following my prior precept) considerably miffed the other driver, who wanted her to acknowledge the guilt.
|
|
Even if you reverse into another car there could occasionally be mitigating circumstances. Still your fault though ;-)
|
>> >>But she did admit to her insurer that she damaged this other person's car?
>>
>> Does the conventional wisdom still say "Never accept responsibility?"
Not admitting liability does not necessarily mean lying or disputing the facts.
If the car in front stopped, and I ran into the back of it, I would happily acknowledge the fact of that. If the facts speak for themselves as to liability, then so be it.
I don't think any insurer could reasonably take issue with you stating the facts.
A contemporaneous account of (all) the facts might even be helpful if the third party later claimed that there were five people in the car, all of whom suffered whiplash.
Without the boring detail, I did once have a non-fault accident after which I wrote down the bare facts and asked the other party to sign it. He was demurring when a copper turned up, and he asked the copper whether he had to sign it. The copper said no, but then added that the facts spoke for themselves so he might as well! He did. Came in very handy when his insurers later tried to claim from mine!
|
>> it. The copper said no, but then added that the facts spoke for themselves so
>> he might as well! He did. Came in very handy when his insurers later tried
>> to claim from mine!
Proof, if proof were needed, that he should not have signed it.
Never sgn anything. There is no conceivable reason to do so, nor any possible value. At absolute best it will have no impact and at worst very negative.
Just don't do it. Not ever.
Of course, if you can get the other party to do it, then well done, it can only help.
|
>> Of course, if you can get the other party to do it, then well done,
>> it can only help.
Anyone running into you is at fault. So I asked the driver who did it to me to sign.. And he did..
If you don't ask, you don't get..
(various salacious stories come to mind)
Last edited by: VxFan on Fri 18 Nov 16 at 01:33
|
>> Proof, if proof were needed, that he should not have signed it.
Well, I also signed the agreed account of what happened, which amounted to a diagram showing the position of the cars when they collided, and arrows showing the direction of travel - had I not signed it, I don't think the other party would have. The circumstances were so odd (he reversed into me as I was going over a junction on a green light, with a clear road in front of me) that an uncorroborated account of events would have sounded as if I had made it up. I had a feeling (based on experience that we have probably all had) that he would have a different memory of events when he had had time to think about it, and I was right.
I would certainly agree that it is not a good idea to sign just anything that is stuck in front of you, especially an admission of liability.
I think a lot of people confuse admitting liability with admitting the facts of what happened - or they find it convenient to do so. They are not the same thing.
|
Insurer doesnt tell you about a claim - commerdriver
