Motoring Discussion > Insurance Claim	Tax / Insurance / Warranties
Thread Author: Pezzer	Replies: 24

New Wed 20 Mar 19 11:06   Insurance Claim - Pezzer

Dont have much experience here to guide No1 son. His car was parked outside his house on the road and has been hit by a lady in a Fiat 500 who was apparently taking avoiding action from another party who did not stop. Police and Ambulance called. He seems to be getting nowhere - the lady's insurers (Coop) are not accepting liability and his insurer doesnt seem to expect them to. His insurers (Hastings) are trying to refer him to a 3rd party claims handler Auxilis which I am concerned about. What is his best course of action as being young he is clearly concerned about his insurance premiums and his car is quite old and the repair costs are likely to be a significant chunk of the car's value. Reply to this message | Report message

New Wed 20 Mar 19 11:47   Insurance Claim - No FM2R

If the unknown Third Party actually existed, then the Fiat 500 driver was probably not negligent. And if she was not negligent, then she is not liable and her insurance will not pay out unless they see it as more economical to do so. Does he have comprehensive or TP insurance? Does the Unknown other driver exist? Do the police think so? Does anybody have a licence plate or a CCTV video? Because that matters. Hastings want to refer him to a claims handler. What happens if they can't recover the money, Is he liable? And of course he has a no *claims* discount, not a no fault bonus, so if he can't claim then his premiums will be impacted. If the unknown TP existed, then perhaps a claim to the MIB under the "untraced drivers H&R Scheme" will work. I am nowhere near up-to-date enough these days to know. If the unknown TP did not exist then the Fiat 500 *is* liable. Time to tread very gently. I would recommend that either you or he speak to Auxilis and gain an understanding of; 1) Who are they intending to claim against? 2) What happens if they fail? [is your son liable for any money?] 3) What is their intended process? [repairs / replacement vehicle / etc] Also speak to his insurer and understand; 1) What will their position be if recovery is not possible; ..a) No claims bonus ..b) Repairs to his vehicle [or replacement indeed] ..c) His excess Then see what you think of the position. Last edited by: No FM2R on Wed 20 Mar 19 at 11:47 Reply to this message | Report message

New Wed 20 Mar 19 12:44   Insurance Claim - Pezzer

Many thanks you have succinctly helped me to pull together most of the issues going through my head. He has comprehensive cover so I guess bottom line is he can claim against that with the resultant impact on his premium and NCD. Not sure about the other TP will ask to him to investigate further. I was surprised that the liability was not against the lady in the Fiat as she physically caused the damage. Reply to this message | Report message

New Wed 20 Mar 19 13:04   Insurance Claim - VxFan

Regardless whether it was another vehicle the Fiat driver was avoiding, or an animal/pedestrian running into the road, she was the one who crashed into your son's car by taking avoiding action. It's up to her (or her insurer) to prove she wasn't at fault. Has it been documented anywhere that she admitted taking avoiding action? Police statement, etc? Reply to this message | Report message

New Wed 20 Mar 19 13:38   Insurance Claim - No FM2R

>>Regardless whether it was another vehicle the Fiat driver was avoiding, or an animal/pedestrian running into the road, she was the one who crashed into your son's car by taking avoiding action. True, but that dos not necessarily make her negligent or liable. >>It's up to her (or her insurer) to prove she wasn't at fault. Not really. Reply to this message | Report message

New Wed 20 Mar 19 13:52   Insurance Claim - VxFan

It makes one wonder then what we are paying our insurance premium for, when they seem to be just as much use as a chocolate tea pot when it comes to issues like this. Or do they expect everyone these days to put it through a 3rd party claims handler instead of doing some work themselves? Reply to this message | Report message

New Wed 20 Mar 19 13:36   Insurance Claim - Fullchat

My understanding of the MIB 'Hit and Run' scheme is that they will undertake a claim for an unidentified H&R vehicle/driver in the case of an Injury Collision. Non Injury would require the driver to be identified and uninsured. Reply to this message | Report message

New Wed 20 Mar 19 13:39   Insurance Claim - No FM2R

I am not current enough to argue with you, but I did think they now covered property damage as well. Only one way to be sure I guess. Reply to this message | Report message

New Wed 20 Mar 19 14:08   Insurance Claim - CGNorwich

You can make a property damage claim under the untraced driver agreement only if there is also personal injury claim for a Significant Personal Injury as defined. Reply to this message | Report message

New Wed 20 Mar 19 14:32   Insurance Claim - No FM2R

You may be right, still better to ask the decision makers though. Reply to this message | Report message

New Wed 20 Mar 19 14:43   Insurance Claim - No FM2R

And I just had a quick look on the MIB site and could see nothing that said an injury claim was a prerequisite for a damage claim. I definitely recommend asking the right people. There's a contact form at... www.mib.org.uk/contact-us/contact-form/ Reply to this message | Report message

New Wed 20 Mar 19 15:52   Insurance Claim - Fullchat

Likewise Ive had a quick look at the MIB website and can find much in relation to prerequisites other than damage to property requires the offending vehicle to be identified. Reply to this message | Report message

New Wed 20 Mar 19 16:28   Insurance Claim - Fullchat

Found this: What if the motorist cannot be identified? If you have been injured by a vehicle that does not stop, you will be able to submit a claim under the Untraced Drivers' Agreement. Damage to property claims can only be considered if the accident occurred on or after 14 February 2003. The accident must be reported to the police within 5 days and a claim made within 9 months. It is a requirement that the vehicle causing the damage must be identified as a condition of being able to claim for property damage. If you have been injured you must report the accident within 14 days to the police or as soon as reasonably possible. So my original assertion that in a non injury the driver must be identified was incorrect - it must be the vehicle. Close :S I am uncomfortable with the idea that the Insurance company can just wash their hands of what appears to be a legitimate claim by saying that there was 'no negligence' due to their being an unknown third party involved. Not knowing the specific circumstances but it may be claimed that the driver should have should have taken into account possible scenarios and driven accordingly. I'd be sending a letter 'Recorded Delivery' to the other party indicating that as their insurance company were declining responsibility for damages then you will be holding them directly responsible for damages. This then puts pressure on them which in turn they pass onto their insurance company. As regards an MIB claim they deal with 'Uninsured' and 'Untraced' drivers neither of which cover the circumstances. However should they accept a claim they may well pass it back to the insurance company to pay up and stop acting like 'daft t***s' Ultimately be prepared for everyone to try and bat it off. Unfortunately in the latter years of my service that also include the Police. As unfair as it may seem Fully Comp insurance gives you that cover but they seem reluctant to 'do the right thing' by its customers and you ultimately take a hit. Last edited by: Fullchat on Wed 20 Mar 19 at 16:29 Reply to this message | Report message

New Wed 20 Mar 19 16:33   Insurance Claim - CGNorwich

We are talking Untraced Driver Agreement nont Uninsured Driver Agreement. www.parksquarebarristers.co.uk/news/new-untraced-drivers-agreement-force-1st-march-2017/ "Property damage was originally excluded from the previous Untraced Drivers Agreement. There has been incremental amendments to this and a gradual corrosion of the principles such that it is possible to make a property damage claim (in reality, usually a claim for the vehicle) in narrow circumstances; Any property damage will not be recoverable if such damage has been paid by an insurer OR that the Claimant could have made a claim for such property damage from his/her insurer; There is an excess of £400 on any claim for property damage (Very significantly) property damage can only be claimed in cases where any Claimant has sustained significant personal injury in respect of the same event." Reply to this message | Report message

New Wed 20 Mar 19 16:58   Insurance Claim - No FM2R

If only we knew how to contact them and ask for sure. Which in the event of me having a similar issue is exactly what I'd be doing. Internet advice has it's place, but when it really matters...… Reply to this message | Report message

New Wed 20 Mar 19 18:07   Insurance Claim - Pezzer

Agreed I think he has paid for legal cover so my view is that if nothing is forthcoming he should invoke this and see what advice is given. Car is drivable although dented to both doors and rear wing. We have sourced a 2nd hand driver's wing mirror to keep him legal. Suspect this will run and run. Reply to this message | Report message

New Wed 20 Mar 19 18:14   Insurance Claim - CGNorwich

Indeed but if you think about it the Untraced Driver Agreement was set up to ensure that victims of hit and run type accidents could get some compensation. Compensation for material damage was added but purely for accidents where there was serious injury. If you could claim from the MIB for every incident of third party damage where the perpetrator was unknown they would be inundated. Ripped off door mirrors alone would amount to millions. That is what Comprehensive Insurance is for. Last edited by: CGNorwich on Wed 20 Mar 19 at 18:15 Reply to this message | Report message

New Wed 20 Mar 19 18:45   Insurance Claim - commerdriver

Surprised nobody has asked about the road & how the other party failed to see and deal with the oncoming vehicle properly. Have you checked it out Pezzer? Is the I had to take avoiding action defence reasonable or should the other party have been going slower, seen the other driver in time to stop safely etc. It may be reasonable if it genuinely couldn't have been avoided but not very often where there are parked cars, might give your lad a chance to challenge the other insurance company or get his own to contest it Reply to this message | Report message

New Wed 20 Mar 19 19:02   Insurance Claim - Manatee

His main exposure to costs from the claims management vultures will probably be the credit hire charges if they fail to recover them. Typically £100 a day, cf. <£20 a day for the insurer-provided courtesy car (using charges given by Auxilis to my son when Admiral referred his claim to them, and charges billed to Direct Line by a third party insurer that I claimed from directly). But that's just my inexpert guess. Best work through NoGM's list. Reply to this message | Report message

New Wed 20 Mar 19 19:05   Insurance Claim - No FM2R

NoGM? That's a new one. Reply to this message | Report message

New Wed 20 Mar 19 19:54   Insurance Claim - Manatee

Finger trouble Reply to this message | Report message

New Wed 20 Mar 19 20:08   Insurance Claim - tyrednemotional

>> Finger trouble >> ...I think some of us thought it might be two-finger trouble..... Reply to this message | Report message

New Thu 21 Mar 19 11:56   Insurance Claim - Pezzer

commerdriver, this is a very good point but from the photos he took it is feasible although I am struggling to see evidence of contact from the unknown TP ( ps I live 200 miles away) Reply to this message | Report message

New Thu 21 Mar 19 17:19   Insurance Claim - Fullchat

Doesn't have to be contact necessarily. The other party may suggest they took avoiding action to avoid one collision which caused another - if you get my drift ? Reply to this message | Report message

New Fri 22 Mar 19 12:29   Insurance Claim - Pezzer

Understand but on a 30 mph residential road and with the claimed direction of travel of the unknown driver, avoiding action with no contact should have sent her into the cars on the other side of the road. The story is that he tagged her back near side quarter when emerging at a side street which is why she then hit the cars parked on her near side Reply to this message | Report message