Accident, not my fault, should I even tell insurance company?

2»

Comments

  • nearlyrich
    nearlyrich Posts: 13,698
    First Post First Anniversary Combo Breaker Hung up my suit!
    Forumite
    When you fill in the form for insurance it asks about accidents, who was to blame and the costs involved. If the other party was completely to blame your premium should not increase due to loss of your no claims bonus.

    If the other driver has hit 2 cars then the chances are he will be putting it through his company insurance, why would he pay out his opwn pocket when he has insurance cover for the risk?

    Don't risk your insurance company refusing to pay if you have an accident because if you fail to disclose a material fact they can and probably will and it will cost you a lot more than if the premium goes up a little.
    Free impartial debt advice from: National Debtline or Stepchange[/CENTER]
  • andy88_2
    andy88_2 Posts: 3,676
    Combo Breaker First Post
    Forumite
    Don't forget that that driver's job may depend on his denying his responsibility for this to his employer.

    Why did you pull out to overtake the car in front without looking? He could not avoid collision, and as it hit the back of his van, that swung him inwards to hit the rear of the car you were about to overtake.

    The only thing wrong with this is the account of the driver in the front car, so you should be safe, but let the insurers do the arguing.
  • Liz19
    Liz19 Posts: 673
    First Anniversary Combo Breaker
    Forumite
    My husband has a company car which has been involved in two accidents neither his fault. We have a second car which is insured in his name though I am the main driver and when getting quotes for insurance I have had to mention the two no fault accidents and immediately the quote goes up despite us having protected no claims. They say that as he has been involved in two no fault accidents, he is more likely to have a fault accident!! - can anyone explain this to me as I cannot make any sense of it.
  • Hi Liz19,

    There is a massive amount of accident history data available to insurance companies, and they perform their risk analysis on this information. For example, the data shows that (after accounting for other factors) the average young man will cost them more than the average middle aged woman etc.

    Different companies put more weight on different factors, but I expect that the reason that you are having your premiums increased is that the data available to them shows that people who have had no fault accidents do tend to go on to have more accidents.

    This would of course be an 'average' result, and it may well be a very small one.

    It's frustrating isn't it. I am under 25, and pay the corresponding increased premium, yet I have passed the Institute of Advanced Motorists test, examined by a serving traffic policeman. I know damn well I am a better driver than most, because I respond much sooner to hazards than others and am often making allowances for other people's poor planning. I'm also now training people to take their own IAM tests.

    But, the data shows that under 25s are more likely to have an accident, so pay up I must. Unfortunately the insurance companies can't take their customers wider lifestyles into account, they can only look at the general trends (of their choice) and price you up accordingly.
  • Was thinking about this some more today, I thought of a hypothetical example.

    Say that you always indicate late and brake late, and hence sharply. There is more chance of the car behind hitting you than if you had given earlier warning of your intentions, and begun to slow down earlier and hence more smoothly.

    This would be a 'no fault' accident for you. However, you could have significantly reduced the chances of the accident occuring in the first place by giving the traffic behind more warning (earlier indication) and slowing down in good time.

    By observing, anticipating and planning well, it is possible to forsee potential accidents early, and stop them from happening in the first place. Many people (certainly not all) could have avoided their no fault accident by paying better attention and driving to a higher standard.

    Therefore, people who have not managed to avoid an AVOIDABLE no fault accident, are likely to have weaknesses with their driving which mean that they are more likely to be involved in an accident for which they do have some blame and their insurance company will have to pay out.

    As I said before, insurance companies operate on general trends. I am sure that Mr Liz19 is a very good driver, but as he is just one fish in a big sea (ie he alone will have negligible difference on the accident trends), it would make sense that the premiums are being increased.
  • Liz19
    Liz19 Posts: 673
    First Anniversary Combo Breaker
    Forumite
    Yes Mr. Liz19 is a very good driver. Ist accident - he was hit from behind while stationary (no sharp braking involved). 2nd Accident - he was hit in the side of car by paperboy cutting a corner - again stationary. Very unlucky! Only way to avoid these would have been to leave car in garage!:)
  • andy88_2
    andy88_2 Posts: 3,676
    Combo Breaker First Post
    Forumite
    waterbaby wrote:
    By observing, anticipating and planning well, it is possible to forsee potential accidents early, and stop them from happening in the first place. Many people (certainly not all) could have avoided their no fault accident by paying better attention and driving to a higher standard

    Thank you for your kind advice. Just in case a lorry follows you through 1+1/2 miles of chicaned roadworks only 3-5 feet away at 50 mph, then at the end rams from behind rather than overtake when, totally dazzled by his switch to 6 main beam headlights, you fail to accelerate (but do not brake, and indicate left to invite it to pass), you'll have had plenty of time to foresee it and plan your escape.

    At least the accident did not happen in the roadworks, for it would have killed some workmen and closed the road for over 5 hours. The main reason we rebutted the claim was because my car was undamaged, and we said we were not responsible for the insecurity of his load (unfettled lorry engine crankshafts burst through the front of the trailer under braking and severed all the brake lines).
  • waterbaby
    waterbaby Posts: 500
    First Anniversary Combo Breaker
    Forumite
    Er... not sure of your tone, do you disagree with me?

    You describe a situation where it wasn't possible to avoid an accident. In considering Liz19's question, I described one where it could be. Both exist, don't they?
This discussion has been closed.
Meet your Ambassadors

Categories

  • All Categories
  • 342.5K Banking & Borrowing
  • 249.9K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
  • 449.4K Spending & Discounts
  • 234.6K Work, Benefits & Business
  • 607.1K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
  • 172.8K Life & Family
  • 247.4K Travel & Transport
  • 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
  • 15.8K Discuss & Feedback
  • 15.1K Coronavirus Support Boards