URGENT Help - Just had a crash.

sharpy2010

thescouselander wrote: »

Its probably worth noting that an MOT certificate doesn't prove the car was roadworthy anyway - all it means is that the car was roadworthy on the day of the test.

In fact, all it actually means is the car was roadworthy at the TIME of the test. Not even on the day of the test, since it is possible (although unlikely) that the car suffers some sort of defect immediately after being driven away from the test center.

Splitting hairs really, but for the sake of correctness

sho_me_da_money

To the ones who stood by me,


I just want to say a quick thank you for all your time and support regarding my Car Accident.

The insurance company was hesitant at first and tried it on a few times but in the end, the letter held up and they had to deal with the claim as normal. The payout was £2750 + approximately £600 in damages for the inconvenience and storage costs. A deduction of 15% was made due to the lack of MOT. Considering the car cost us £2100, I think we came up trumps.

Lessons learned – An MOT does not invalidate an insurance policy (see policy wording) and Don’t forget to put your handbrake on!

[FONT=&quot]Just some extra details:

1. They verbally declined my claim
2. They wrote a letter declining my claim
3. I wrote an official complaint back (one letter) attaching case studies and argued the violation of the "Contra Preferentum" rule as well as the "Roadworthiness" of the vehicle. The letter was awesome and big thanks goes out to SCOUSE and DACOUCH for their input on this.
4. QD sent out a claims inspector to check the condition of the vehicle 2 days after receiving the letter. He was appointed to check the condition of the handbrake etc.
5. Another claims investigator met with me 7 days later for a statement of events.
6. The investigator called me about 3 days later and said "They are still going going to repudiate the claim and stand by there rejection as per some advice from the Ombudsman" - a load of bollox and a cheap scare tactic. I told them "No problem, please send me the rejection letter so I can take this up to the next level".
8. Four days later - "Hi Mr. D, the claims handler had not considered the points raised in your letter thoroughly. Now that they have, QD IS going to deal with the claim as normal",

Bada boom bada bing bada BANG!

To the naysayers - go get a life and stop giving people the crappers on here. There are loads of you about (not just in this thread). You need to just chill out, have some faith and stay +ve. For those that were taking the p!ss out of me - Whose having the last laugh now? I'll give you a clue - muhahaha (apologies for my arrogance).

Again, thank you to all but a special thanks to the two who helped me privately - God bless you both!

CHEERS :beer:




[/FONT]

vikingaero

sho_me_da_money wrote: »

To the ones who stood by me,


I just want to say a quick thank you for all your time and support regarding my Car Accident.

The insurance company was hesitant at first and tried it on a few times but in the end, the letter held up and they had to deal with the claim as normal. The payout was £2750 + approximately £600 in damages for the inconvenience and storage costs. A deduction of 15% was made due to the lack of MOT. Considering the car cost us £2100, I think we came up trumps.

Lessons learned – An MOT does not invalidate an insurance policy (see policy wording) and Don’t forget to put your handbrake on!

[FONT=&quot]Just some extra details:

1. They verbally declined my claim
2. They wrote a letter declining my claim
3. I wrote an official complaint back (one letter) attaching case studies and argued the violation of the "Contra Preferentum" rule as well as the "Roadworthiness" of the vehicle. The letter was awesome and big thanks goes out to SCOUSE and DACOUCH for their input on this.
4. QD sent out a claims inspector to check the condition of the vehicle 2 days after receiving the letter. He was appointed to check the condition of the handbrake etc.
5. Another claims investigator met with me 7 days later for a statement of events.
6. The investigator called me about 3 days later and said "They are still going going to repudiate the claim and stand by there rejection as per some advice from the Ombudsman" - a load of bollox and a cheap scare tactic. I told them "No problem, please send me the rejection letter so I can take this up to the next level".
8. Four days later - "Hi Mr. D, the claims handler had not considered the points raised in your letter thoroughly. Now that they have, QD IS going to deal with the claim as normal",

Bada boom bada bing bada BANG!

To the naysayers - go get a life and stop giving people the crappers on here. There are loads of you about (not just in this thread). You need to just chill out, have some faith and stay +ve. For those that were taking the p!ss out of me - Whose having the last laugh now? I'll give you a clue - muhahaha (apologies for my arrogance).

Again, thank you to all but a special thanks to the two who helped me privately - God bless you both!

CHEERS :beer:




[/FONT]

Good news indeed showmedamoney. :beer: And well done to Scouse and Dacouch who are always on the ball regarding insurance matters. :beer:

Maybe this will put the brakes on the useless pub lore that "No MOT = No Insurance". People trot it out time and time again. :mad: And it shows the poor attitude of the management of the Insurers who tell their claims handlers to enforce this policy. :mad::mad::mad: I personally would still persue a Ombudsman complaint against the Insurer, but then I have too much time on my hands.

gaz_jones

Congrats mate I bet you're over the moon!

Jakg

sho_me_da_money wrote: »

For those that were taking the p!ss out of me - Whose having the last laugh now? I'll give you a clue - muhahaha (apologies for my arrogance).

My cars parked on a incline with the handbrake on

iamana1ias

And one less micra on the road :T

how can we get rid of the rest?

sho_me_da_money

I feel absolutely ecstatic!

If anyone finds themselves in this situation, please feel free to give me a shout - I have retained copies of my letter, which I will gladly share.

Cheers again.

Mischa8

Jakg wrote: »

My cars parked on a incline with the handbrake on

This young scrote (Sho_me_da_money) has had occurences where *miraculously* he's in the wrong and everyone else is in the right and *ohmygodeveryone'stargettingmeandI'mnotinthewrongatall* not only in this thread (see post above where he gets sympathy and lack of sympathy in equal doses and then when he mentions about putting insurance on dad's insurance to save money then another poster quickly loses pity for him.

Read Sho's other post on *how to defraud a large American company in Manchester (guessing where this is) by giving my young brother full access to a work mobile phone, brother then runs up £3K mobile bill (i think this was the amount) and Sho (who's also been on a FWW but in recent year has *miraculously* been promoted up and above his capabilities and literally been made a saint of at his company - Sho gets *scared* as he's now questioned re scam... but by some quirk of fate eventually gets off....

I have several emails from Sho asking me how he should get his and brother's stories straight for his company and police (if it got that far) as to where company mobile phone which was *borrowed* by said brother was kept (at Sho's house). As myself and several other posters pointed out, there were more than enough *suspicions* about Sho and his brother.

Lovely eh? If I worked with the little sh*t I'd want to know how he manages each time to escape by the skin of his teeth.

:eek:

Weirdlittleman

Report him to his employer and wait for the dismissal and proseuction threads

Mischa8

Weirdlittleman wrote: »

Report him to his employer and wait for the dismissal and proseuction threads

I wouldn't be that sad or vindictive.

Just annoys me that some people swan through life like that and get away scot free every time.