Minor Car Accident

Quentin

JohnG wrote: »

I probably should have said "Not to inform your insurer" as I believe that's what he recommends for minor repairs.
For example "Do NOT inform your insurer" is part of a reply given to someone on his website who was pursuing a third party for a repair cost of £250......

Honest John often gives iffy advice in his column.

This is a prime example.

We are all bound by the policy conditions to inform our insurers of all incidents/losses even if we do not intend to claim. Failure to do so is a breach which could result un the insurer declining a claim in future and voiding the policy.

If you have experienced a loss of £250, and you pursue a third party, then your insurer (and/or future insurers) will definitely find out if the matter is then passed on by the third party to his insurer to deal with!

That is because the third party insurer may send a cheque for the £250, but will also put the details of the claim on the CUE database for insurers to see.

JohnG

Quote "If you have experienced a loss of £250, and you pursue a third party, then your insurer (and/or future insurers) will definitely find out if the matter is then passed on by the third party to his insurer to deal with!"

Yes that's quite possible but in the case he was referring to here, the two parties were haggling over the amount up to £250 - there was no mention of the insurers being involved at that point.
The question is, what would be the chances of someone who was clearly at fault (as in this case) going through their insurance to contest an amount that's probably within the excess limit anyway and jeopardising their NCD in the process?

Quentin

JohnG wrote: »

The question is, what would be the chances of someone who was clearly at fault (as in this case) going through their insurance to contest an amount that's probably within the excess limit anyway and jeopardising their NCD in the process?

There are good reasons to involve your insurer:

1) It is a breach of the policy conditions if you don't.

2) There is no excess at all to pay if you are just paying out to a third party and not claiming for your own damage.

3) Your insurer will ensure the matter is closed off, and no comeback from the third party (which there could be subsequent to you doing a "private" deal when eg "hidden" damage becomes apparent/whiplash materialises/unexpected hire car charges/other miscellaneous costs etc end up coming through from the third party

4) Your insurer will ensure you are liable (they will advise on whether or not there is any/partial/full liability, and deal with any claim accordingly). eg if partial liability is agreed, then you can claim the corresponding partial amount of your own costs off the third party.

5) The innocent party has no restriction on doing the correct thing and reporting the incident to his own insurer, thereby ensuring the "culprit" will have the incident entered on the database and his insurers will find out anyway that he has breached the policy conditions.

6) Once concluded, and you want to reinstate your NCD you can reimburse your insurer their outlay.

fozzeh

Also, I'd advise not to get hit by a woman in a hurry on a dark road when she is over the line on New Years Eve, drives away from the scene of the incident, pulls over only when you J turned your own car to get her reg, then claim she didn't hit you, has horses to feed and a party to go to, then denies she wasn't over the line/drunk/threatening your wife...and take 6 weeks to answer her phone.

That's my only advise...oh, and don't speak to muppets at Swiftcover. E-mail them as it shows their incompetence more and someone with brains picks their work up and sort it out for you.

Why do I get the rubbish ones? *please insert crying smily here*

lisyloo

I was going to mention the personal injury scenario.
They have 3 years to claim (assuming someone was in the car).
You can get whiplash from even very slow bumps (especially if you are exaggerating or inventing the symptoms) and you'd be suprised how many passengers they had on the back seat too !!!

JohnG

Well I understand there are unscrupulous people out there who may subsequently put in a claim for whiplash or something but surely if it's a very minor knock or even a damaged mirror this is an unlikely scenario especially if the fault of the accident/incident was their's in the first place? I think I would take my chances as I'm sure many have and will do in the future.

Tammer

Hi JohnG,

What Quentin and others above have said is correct.

You can choose not to inform your insurer.

By doing so you are happy to accept the risk that you will never be able to drive again and will spend some time in prison. Comfortable with that?

mikey72

Tammer wrote: »

Hi JohnG,

What Quentin and others above have said is correct.

You can choose not to inform your insurer.

By doing so you are happy to accept the risk that you will never be able to drive again and will spend some time in prison. Comfortable with that?

:rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:

Not a bit extreme?

JohnG

Tammer wrote: »

Hi JohnG,

What Quentin and others above have said is correct.

You can choose not to inform your insurer.

By doing so you are happy to accept the risk that you will never be able to drive again and will spend some time in prison. Comfortable with that?

Comfortable with that? How condescending can you get? :mad:

Wow, there must be alot of drivers out there who have life bans and prison sentences hanging over them! :eek:

Somebody better let "Honest John" know of this or there will be even more over time - still at least the roads should become less busy for those who don't break the law and advise their insurers of every minor scratch, dent or broken wing mirror.

Tammer

Hi guys,

Yes, it was a bit extreme - but really just to illustrate a point.

It's not hugely likely, but would you say the following scenario is impossible?-

>You decide not to inform your insurer.
>In the future, you have a crash and the other person is unfortunately badly injured.
>Your insurer finds out about your current accident from their database and therefore rejects your claim for fraudulent non disclosure.
>You are never able to get insurance in the future as you've "had a claim refused.."
>The police prosecute you for driving without insurance.
>You are sued by the other person for a six figure sum, plus legal costs.

The purpose of taking out insurance is to reduce your 'risk'. Not informing your insurer means you increase your risk and could be wasting money on void insurance.

Hope that helps.