accident that wasn't..insurance company has no backbone

ckdoube

A few months ago I pulled my sisters car out of a parking space along a main road, checked my mirror didn't see anything coming along the road. As I pulled out I heard a car horn and braked straight away. A car had pulled out from a recess a few metres back and we avoided hitting each other. The driver came out of her car and started to shout and curse claiming that I had hit her car. As cars behind us had started horning I told her to take the car to the next exit. There she claimed that i had hit her car and showed me small dent in her car. I told her that I had not hit her car but before she left I gave her my name and address and mobile phone number. I didn't bother getting her address thinking that she was just a loon. Next day i contacted my insurance company, I am a named driver on my sister's insurance and explained what had happened. They sent me a letter confirming that i had reported the incident. On the same day She called my mobile and left a message saying that she had got my insurance details through her insurance company and was going to make a claim.

A few weeks ago i received a letter from my sister's insurance's claims handlers stating that the other driver was making a claim and she had a engineers report about the damage and thet unless I had any evidence to refute their claim they would pay her 'reasonable costs'!

I then wrote back and explained exactly what had happened and today i recieved a letter signed by the same person the gist fo which was that 'the engineers report could be used to determine whether the the damage was pre-existing and whether it related to a motor accident or any other form of collison'! It also stated that if there was no accident then why were details exchanged at the scene and discussion over the damage take place. They also stated that with the info provided they feel that they would be unable to defend a claim and as such it would generate additinoal costs and they want to settle the claim with the third party.
my questions are-

1. Are the able to settle when I have clearly stated that no collision took place and the damage was pre-existing?
2. How can they settle the claim without at least doing some attempt at investigating the case further..ie check my car for damage which I have offered that they do
3. Is there anything i can do like contact the insurance company and state that I am unhappy with the way the claims handlers seem to be willing to admit liability and ask for them to allocate it to another company of claims handlers.
4. Can I complain to the supervisor of the claims handler?
5. At what stage can I complain to the FSA insurance ombudsman.

PS The NCD is protected but it the principle of the thing which I object to. Basically someone can just claim against your insurance based on a non existent accident. Thanks in advance for your help

dacouch

1) Yes
2) They will want to settle the claim at the cheapest possible way for them and will look at investigating it further as a waste of money
3) Yes but unlikely to affect the way they deal with it
4) Yes
5) After you have made an executive complaint with your Insurers and they have not sorted it to your satisfaction

Incidently the other Insurer will probably have used an engineer to evaluate the damage and check the quote. Their report would normally indicate if the damage did not correlate with the accident or was pre existing

ckdoube

Thanks for just a fast response Dacouch!

I attempted to contact the claims handlers and their telephone is always engaged. I intend to complain to the insurance company and then to the ombudsman.

It's disgusting the way an insurance company can blemish your claim free record solely so that they can cut their costs! Btw I've have over 10 claim free years.

dacouch

If you want to help try and avoid this in the future either buy a disposable camera from the pound shop or use your camera phone. Take photos of where the cars both end up, any damage, any existing damage, road markings, skid marks and signs etc. Its also a good idea to take a picture of the driver and any of the passengers and their names (This is handy as its not unusual for passengers with injuries to appear at a later date).

If you get the above it can help deal with claims that are not clear cut or where the other driver is claiming for additional damage etc.

If you had this sort of information your Insurers are more likely to investiagte the claim and might consider defending the claim but would still base it on whats cheapest for them eg its pointless spending say £500 getting an investigator involved if the claim is only £400 etc

Quentin

ckdoube wrote: »

I intend to complain to the insurance company and then to the ombudsman.

The problem here is that no matter where you take this, it is always going to be a case of your word against the word of the victim. With no witnesses, who can know who is lying? (And why did you give your details when you say no collision took place?)

Drivers involved in collisions regularly change their position/attitude/story when they get away from the scene of the incident and get advice from their mates/advisers etc.

The insurance policy conditions virtually allow the insurer to deal with any claims in any way they want to, and in the interests of all policyholders/shareholders etc it's their duty to do so in the most economic way.