Tesco Car Insurance How Are They Getting Away With It

cmg127

lisyloo wrote: »

The problem is this is your word against his and your word on it's own means little.
You need independent witnesses and photos can help.

It doesn't matter how strongly you feel you are right.
It's just one persons word against anothers and no insurer will go to court on that unless there is something independent to bakc it up.

See thats the thing i do have two independent witness that said they would be happy stand up in court and say wat happened. I have told tesco this and they didnt act on it or would'nd act on it. they didnt even send anyone out to interview them

lisyloo

If these genuinely are independent witnesses (as opposed to your passengers) then I think I would be starting a formal complaint.

cmg127

lisyloo wrote: »

If these genuinely are independent witnesses (as opposed to your passengers) then I think I would be starting a formal complaint.

It turned out someone who lived not to far away from me was in a few cars back and seen it all happening as it was close to where i live.

dacouch

The formal witnesses will no doubt gives statements to what they have seen, however it does not neccessarily mean that Tescos can not pay the claim. It may well be that the claim is settled 50/50 (Or other split). It would depend on the exact circumstances of the accident.

I would not be surprised if the motorcyclist has at least one witness which may or may not have been at the scene of the accident

lisyloo

however it does not neccessarily mean that Tescos can not pay the claim. It may well be that the claim is settled 50/50 (Or other split). It would depend on the exact circumstances of the accident.

But at the moment they haven't even considered what these witnesses versions of events.

It may be that some insurers have agreements below certain levels to go 50/50 to save costs.
Undoubtedly it looks like they are trying to save costs here.
This can seem very unfair to individuals.

foggytown

lisyloo wrote: »

But at the moment they haven't even considered what these witnesses versions of events.

It may be that some insurers have agreements below certain levels to go 50/50 to save costs.
Undoubtedly it looks like they are trying to save costs here.
This can seem very unfair to individuals.

Are you saying it isn't? I wouldn't take it too kindly if my insurer was sacrificing my NCB (and therefore increasing my premium) for the sake of their expediency and cost-cutting. Might as well return to the "knock for knock" era.

Keeping_Positive

Tesco staff lied to me when I had a claim. So I know what they are like and wont go back. They dont investigate anything they do seem keen just to pay out despite promising they would look into it carefully.

lisyloo

Are you saying it isn't?

No I wasn't saying that.
On a moral level it's very unfair.

But on a logical level I do accept that every £500 bump cannot justify a full time team of forensic analysts, DNA scientists, lie detectors and private invetigators.
If every case was given the resources of a murder investigation then premiums would be sky high.
There has to be some balance.

Not even listening to the witnesses does not seem balanced at all to me and why I suggested a complaint as I would be unhappy with the treatment given.