Diamond Insurance Settled Claim Without my Knowledge

forcefullpower

Hi,

I need some help regarding a problem with my previous car insurance policy. In July this year we reversed into a car which showed only a small amount of damage; purely paint transfer not dents or anything. Their car was parked on double yellow lines behind my car which was in a car parking bay opposite.

When we got out to speak to the driver they could not speak english. Subsequently his boss came out of the Pizza Hut who translated for the person. We have a feeling that the person driving the car was not the owner or insurance policy holder of the vehicle.

We ran our insurers to inform them on what has happened which we are bliged to as per their policy documents. We were directly told that thanks for letting us know and that if they do not claim within 12 weeks there would be not be further repercussions or impact on our policy. We also informed them at this time of our concern that is was possible that the driver was not the policy holder, and in support of this of the inability of the driver to exchange details- his boss wrote them down. We also told them that the other person was in uniform and actively working, delivering pizza in their uniform at the time, and were told by the customer service representative that they could see over their database that the registered owner and policy holder did not have business cover.

Well 6 months later we get a renewal through the door saying that our premium had doubled and no no-claims bonus. We rang them and found out that they had pursed the claim in June with the drivers 'as they were obliged to' and it was to save costs, minimise potential expenditure on the claim'. This does not make sense as the insurance company of the person making the claim can dictate the aproved garages for repairs and as such our insurers could not control where the person got any work if any was necessary. They they continued with telling us that his not having business cover was not relevant and that his insurance would retrospectively allow him to pay a premium to cover him for business use?!! After many arguments they later told us they were happy with the investigation and that it was handled- even telling us they had a conversation with him. Seems very hard since they guy did not speak english. I did not even get told of any claim being processed so was not able to defend it or say no to them paying out on it, or using the legal cover I had paid extra for in my premium.They maintain that they sent us a letter but we did not receive one at all ; funny their renewal notice got to us and after a lot of further arguments as to why they did not email or phone us- both bits of information they had all along then changed their story saying that they e-mailed on 9th June. We did not recieve such an email. They said they would forward it but all we recieved was a newly constructed email with an attached letter with a date of 9th June; no forwarding of an 'original email' they maintain they sent. Furthermore this letter is dated only a day after the incident; the phone call to them was not made till about 9pm the evening of the 8th and yet by the 9th a 'thorough' investigation had been carried out and decided liability on our part. We now know they paid £200 out ' as we are entitled to deal with claims on your behalf' yet at no time did we know of the existence of a claim being handled and I am sure they had to tell us how much they were paying in some form of later correspondence, again nothing was recieved and so we remained completely ignorant of any matters being pursued until their renewal notice and had we been aware of a potential claim we would have argued it on the basis they never phoned our insurance company at all and they did not have requisite business cover and as such had void insurance.

What we need to know is how we pursue this as it has cost us our no claims bonus and also going to cost an additional £500 on our insurance this year.

We never made a claim but just informed them of the accident. Should the insurance company be chasing a claim we never ask them to claim for? This seems ludicrous. Also retrospective insurance cover seems impossible too? And they made representations which were false and never once contacted us at all. Please we would be grateful for any help. Someone said something about doing an SAR? where they would have to give us copies of all info on us and our insurance under the Data Protection Act? Any tips we would be grateful.

dacouch

Being parked on a double yellow line does not prevent someone claiming against you, in addition being uninsured does not prevent someone claiming against you, also not having business use does not prevent someone claiming against you.

As the car you hit was parked the actual owner whether or not it was the person you spoke to would no doubt have claimed against their policy.

You could repay your Insurers their outlay and have your no claims bonus reinstated which will bring your premium down although you may still have a loading for being involved in a claim. Bear in mind you may have the other driving also claiming their excess back as well.

You are entitled to make an "Official Complaint" to your Insurers which they are obliged to investigate properly and report back to you.

vikingaero

At the end of the day you hit a parked car and seem to want to squirm out of a claim on the basis of other factors which may or may not be true.

If you were involved in an accident with me then you cannot dictate where I get my car repaired. I can take my car to any bodyshop of my choosing whether it's a manufacturers approved bodyshop which may be top price. Probably the only stipulation where I can get my car repaired is that it is VAT registered.

At the end of the day, whether the claim is for £1 or £100,000, it is a claim which will reduce your no claims

dacouch

Being VAT registered does not come into it, Insurers are not VAT registered anyway

Hintza

I agree with both the above.

The only thing you might be able to do is pay the claim and gt your NCB reinstated (but it might be too late for that)

Hammyman

You reversed into a parked car. End of. If you don't want expensive insurance, try not running into large lumps of metal.

Quentin

dacouch wrote: »

Being VAT registered does not come into it, Insurers are not VAT registered anyway

Insurers are VAT registered! (All businesses have to when their turnover exceeds the exemption level, irresepective of whether or not the services/products they sell are subject to VAT)

JQ.

Quentin wrote: »

Insurers are VAT registered! (All businesses have to when their turnover exceeds the exemption level, irresepective of whether or not the services/products they sell are subject to VAT)

Really, I thought Financial Services companies were exempt - Banks certainly don't pay VAT and I'd have thought, Insurance co's falls under the same category.

In response to the OP - you hit a stationary vehicle, you are at fault, your insurance co. has paid out for the damage you have caused as is their obligation, all the other issues are irrelevant.

forcefullpower

This is to do with getting out of a claim we never made but on the understanding that the insurance company was wrong in what they did.

We called the insurers to inform them this happened. What we where told is if they do not claim within 12 weeks this would not go any further and we would not lose our no claims bonus. The insurance company went and did the complete opposite and started a claim process and rang the third party.

If the third party had rang their insurance company and started a claim i would not have an issue with it. My issue is that MY insurance company processed a claim that was never going to happen.

iamana1ias

forcefullpower wrote: »

Hi,

I need some help regarding a problem with my previous car insurance policy. In July this year we reversed into a car which showed only a small amount of damage; purely paint transfer not dents or anything.

Well done :T

forcefullpower wrote: »

Their car was parked on double yellow lines behind my car which was in a car parking bay opposite.

Irrelevant.

forcefullpower wrote: »

When we got out to speak to the driver they could not speak english. Subsequently his boss came out of the Pizza Hut who translated for the person.

Irrelevant.

forcefullpower wrote: »

We have a feeling that the person driving the car was not the owner or insurance policy holder of the vehicle.

Irrelevant.

forcefullpower wrote: »

We ran our insurers to inform them on what has happened which we are bliged to as per their policy documents. We were directly told that thanks for letting us know and that if they do not claim within 12 weeks there would be not be further repercussions or impact on our policy. We also informed them at this time of our concern that is was possible that the driver was not the policy holder, and in support of this of the inability of the driver to exchange details- his boss wrote them down. We also told them that the other person was in uniform and actively working, delivering pizza in their uniform at the time, and were told by the customer service representative that they could see over their database that the registered owner and policy holder did not have business cover.

Plenty of irrelevance in there.

forcefullpower wrote: »

Well 6 months later we get a renewal through the door saying that our premium had doubled and no no-claims bonus.

Since when was July to September 6 months?! It's at most 3!

forcefullpower wrote: »

We rang them and found out that they had pursed the claim in June with the drivers 'as they were obliged to' and it was to save costs, minimise potential expenditure on the claim'.

How did they pay a claim in June for an incident that didn't occur until July?

forcefullpower wrote: »

This does not make sense as the insurance company of the person making the claim can dictate the aproved garages for repairs and as such our insurers could not control where the person got any work if any was necessary. They they continued with telling us that his not having business cover was not relevant and that his insurance would retrospectively allow him to pay a premium to cover him for business use?!! After many arguments they later told us they were happy with the investigation and that it was handled- even telling us they had a conversation with him. Seems very hard since they guy did not speak english.

forcefullpower wrote: »

I did not even get told of any claim being processed so was not able to defend it or say no to them paying out on it, or using the legal cover I had paid extra for in my premium.

That's not what legal cover is for. You'd only use that to claim from a 3rd party that had hit you. You've employed your insurers (by buying their policy) to handle the situation as they see fit. You were 100% at fault for damaging another vehicle. They were 100% entitled to pay out on the claim without your consent.

forcefullpower wrote: »

They maintain that they sent us a letter but we did not receive one at all ; funny their renewal notice got to us and after a lot of further arguments as to why they did not email or phone us- both bits of information they had all along then changed their story saying that they e-mailed on 9th June. We did not recieve such an email. They said they would forward it but all we recieved was a newly constructed email with an attached letter with a date of 9th June; no forwarding of an 'original email' they maintain they sent. Furthermore this letter is dated only a day after the incident; the phone call to them was not made till about 9pm the evening of the 8th and yet by the 9th a 'thorough' investigation had been carried out and decided liability on our part. We now know they paid £200 out ' as we are entitled to deal with claims on your behalf' yet at no time did we know of the existence of a claim being handled and I am sure they had to tell us how much they were paying in some form of later correspondence, again nothing was recieved and so we remained completely ignorant of any matters being pursued until their renewal notice and had we been aware of a potential claim we would have argued it on the basis they never phoned our insurance company at all and they did not have requisite business cover and as such had void insurance.

What we need to know is how we pursue this as it has cost us our no claims bonus and also going to cost an additional £500 on our insurance this year.

We never made a claim but just informed them of the accident. Should the insurance company be chasing a claim we never ask them to claim for? This seems ludicrous. Also retrospective insurance cover seems impossible too? And they made representations which were false and never once contacted us at all. Please we would be grateful for any help. Someone said something about doing an SAR? where they would have to give us copies of all info on us and our insurance under the Data Protection Act? Any tips we would be grateful.

Too irrelevant and waffly to warrant any further comment.

Quentin

JQ. wrote: »

I thought Financial Services companies were exempt - Banks certainly don't pay VAT and I'd have thought, Insurance co's falls under the same category.

Companies don't "pay VAT", they collect it from their customers and pass any on (after deducting any they have paid to suppliers) to the revenue collector.

Insurance policies are exempt from it.

Nevertheless banks/insurance companies/etc still have to be registered for VAT.