car insurance claim

dgrego123

i was involved in a minor motor collision with a taxi whereby i shunted the back of his car whilst stationary at a set of lights due to my foot slipping of the clutch there was no damage to his car or my car, we exchanged details and that was that. couple of weeks down the line i received correspondence in the post and it turns out the two passangers of the taxi are claiming whiplash. In the details ive received from there solicitor is states that they yet are still to attend hospital which now is 8 weeks since the original incident.
i have noted with my insurer that i wanted to dispute it as its impossilbe they could have suffred any injury, plus no damage from the owner has been registred or a damage claim.
im concerned as i will lose my no claims bonus plus my premium will go up. i only have a years no claims bonus and i am still building it up as im only 19.
what is the likleyhood this will go anywhere
opinions apreciated
thankyou

MrRedundant

Why is it impossible?

They can if they so wish claim. It is your insurers for to decide whether to dispute or settle based on the statements. If they claim Whiplash which is supported by any sort of evidence it is likely your insurers will settle losing out your NCB.

dgrego123

MrRedundant wrote: »

Why is it impossible?

They can if they so wish claim. It is your insurers for to decide whether to dispute or settle based on the statements. If they claim Whiplash which is supported by any sort of evidence it is likely your insurers will settle losing out your NCB.

i just personally dont know how somebody can claim whiplash when both cars where stationary plus they have not attended hospital 8 weeks down the line. thats why i stated its impossible.

MrRedundant

dgrego123 wrote: »

i just personally dont know how somebody can claim whiplash when both cars where stationary plus they have not attended hospital 8 weeks down the line. thats why i stated its impossible.

It's not impossible however I agree its unlikely. The problem for you is how do you prove this? You can't. If they claim whiplash which is backed by any evidence then you are responsible as you caused it. They may not have been to hospital but what about a GP or physio?

The only get out I see for you here is if they were not wearing seatbelts which may have increased the "injuries" in which case any payout may well be reduced due to their contributory neglience. This is one thing that may help you as many people ignore the seatbelt requirements in taxis.

Do you have the taxi drivers details? If so I would possibly think your insurers will contact him and dependent on what they say give you a possible defence.

dgrego123

MrRedundant wrote: »

It's not impossible however I agree its unlikely. The problem for you is how do you prove this? You can't. If they claim whiplash which is backed by any evidence then you are responsible as you caused it. They may not have been to hospital but what about a GP or physio?

The only get out I see for you here is if they were not wearing seatbelts which may have increased the "injuries" in which case any payout may well be reduced due to their contributory neglience. This is one thing that may help you as many people ignore the seatbelt requirements in taxis.

Do you have the taxi drivers details? If so I would possibly think your insurers will contact him and dependent on what they say give you a possible defence.

thats probably a better way to put it, ye i understand it was my fault which i agree with just frustrating because i know there probably just trying to pull a fast one.

due to my inexperience i didnt take any details of the taxi driver such as contact details. i panicked during the situation, we both had agreed that there was no damage as it was that small of a collision so i didnt beleive it go any further. which obviously i was wrong.
not taking details was probably a stupid thing to do.

lisyloo

I agree with your scepticism, but just to point out that they could already be suffering from a disease (like arthritis) or a neck injury.

If they had existing conditions and you did damage then I'm afraid you are responsible regardless of whether they were healthy, diseased, injured.

Of course if that was the case, I would expect them to go to hospital or the doctors so I understand how you feel.
The fact they didn't get medical help may weaken their case.
At the end of the day it's up to the insurers to decide if they are genuine or not, but it's quite hard to prove someone did NOT suffer if they have medical evidence of suffering about the time of the accident.
Doctors tend to believe what people say, so will usually document it as the patient relays their symptoms.
So if someone tells a doctor they had a stiff neck following the accident, then the doctor will tend to believe them and document it as such.

Another factor (and you may not like this) is that it may costs say £2K to pay them off but £4K to disprove their injuries.
What do you think insurers should do in this case?
If they did the RIGHT thing morally then you're premium might go up through higher costs.

It is very hard/impossible to prove someone does not have a pain in the neck.

dgrego123

lisyloo wrote: »

I agree with your scepticism, but just to point out that they could already be suffering from a disease (like arthritis) or a neck injury.

If they had existing conditions and you did damage then I'm afraid you are responsible regardless of whether they were healthy, diseased, injured.

Of course if that was the case, I would expect them to go to hospital or the doctors so I understand how you feel.
The fact they didn't get medical help may weaken their case.
At the end of the day it's up to the insurers to decide if they are genuine or not, but it's quite hard to prove someone did NOT suffer if they have medical evidence of suffering about the time of the accident.
Doctors tend to believe what people say, so will usually document it as the patient relays their symptoms.
So if someone tells a doctor they had a stiff neck following the accident, then the doctor will tend to believe them and document it as such.

Another factor (and you may not like this) is that it may costs say £2K to pay them off but £4K to disprove their injuries.
What do you think insurers should do in this case?
If they did the RIGHT thing morally then you're premium might go up through higher costs.

It is very hard/impossible to prove someone does not have a pain in the neck.

I understand everything you say.
so either way its possible my premium is going to go up?

Quentin

It's probable your premium will increase.

You won't get any NCD for the current year, and you will lose 2 years of any you already have. So that will mean an increase on its own, but your base premium will also be loaded as a result too.

Whenever involved in a crash, never agree "no damage done" at the scene. You need your car checked over after a collision - all the energy of the crash ha to be absorbed somehow, eg. bumpers that have internal absorption components can only work once and need replacing etc.

lisyloo

Chances are they will put in a claim, liability is clear and it's very hard to disprove, so chances arr you ahve a "fault" claim against you.
You will lose your 1 years no claims and go down to zero and have to put down a fault claim for quotes.

You can go an do quotations now with 0 NCD and 1 fault claim and see what the quotes come up with (fake the email and phone numbers unless you want calls & spam).

dgrego123

Quentin wrote: »

It's probable your premium will increase.

You won't get any NCD for the current year, and you will lose 2 years of any you already have. So that will mean an increase on its own, but your base premium will also be loaded as a result too.

Whenever involved in a crash, never agree "no damage done" at the scene. You need your car checked over after a collision - all the energy of the crash ha to be absorbed somehow, eg. bumpers that have internal absorption components can only work once and need replacing etc.

well i suppose the only thing a can say it was my lack of experience and naivety after the collision. just frustrating because it was litreally just a bump the car i hit never moved, i know its entirely my fault and it is my reponsibilty, just it seems its almost impossible both passangers could of had whiplash.

so just to understand properly. either way ill lose my ncb? or if it goes in my favour then i wont but i could suffer from a rise in my premium?

thankyou for everyones opinions.

Quentin

Whenever you have an incident, there is the potential for it to increase your premium (ie your profile has changed, and this is often seen as change to your risk).

But if there is any payment at all (no matter how small) to the third party you will also lose your NCD in line with their scale, and not get any awarded for the year in which the claim is made.

(If a small payment is involved, you can reimburse your insurer and thereby get all your NCD reinstated, though the incident will remain on your record and have to be declared (usually for 3/5 years) should you change insurers in future. (Though two whiplash minimum payments won't be viable for you to repay just to "save" your NCD.)