Car insurance..fault or none fault

Impet_Limpet

Hello, a nice person from rac forum sent me here, I wondering if anyone can help?

Back in June 2005 I was involved in a motorway accident, my insurance company (CHURCHILL) paid out to the car behind within 2 weeks, however they failed to tell me this until it was time for myself to renew the following December. I was rather stunned as I had maintained that I couldn't have been liable. I sent in a letter of complaint (twice, one in December and one in January) and eventually in February 2006 they responded with

"The circumstances of the accident you were involved in were such that we should have undertaken a more thorough investigation. As this action was not taken we are now unable to state for certain the cause of the accident and therefore unable to confirm liability.

I understand that (employees name) has been in touch to advise you that this claim will no longer affect your 'no claims discount'. this has been confirmed with our customer services dept who have updated their records and will send you written confirmation of this. Once received, if you pass this onto your current insurers they will be able to adjust their records and your premium accordingly"

Now this sounded like they had decided it was no longer a fault claim on my record as I got my NCB back (all 3 years of it) and never paid an excess, however I rung CHURCHILL insurance company today to find out the cost of the claim (another company requested it for an insurance quote) and churchill said as they (churchill) never recovered the costs they paid to the other party it is still classed as my fault.

Surely if they paid out in this circumstance it is their own fault they can't recover the cost?

Its causing havoc as £2000 fault claim looks bad on most websites, whereas other insurance companies such as diamond decide whether it was fault or not purely on the basis of whether you lost your NCB (or would have in the case of protected NCB).

Any advise would be great!

Kind Regards
Martine

Astaroth

It is a case that liability is still effectively unknown but as a guesture of goodwill they have modified there records to say it is non-fault because of the failings of their claims department.

Ultimately it is up to your new insurers if they want to honour the guesture of good will or not.

mattymoo

Just because the insurers might have closed their file doesn't stop you from recovering your excess / uninsured losses from the negligent party. A full recovery of these is all it normally takes to recover NCD and have the claim classed as non-fault.

Ask your own company for details of the other persons insurers and then write to them enclosing copy of the receipts and ask for reimbursement.

Astaroth

If your own insurers wrote to the other party (or their representatives) accepting liability on your behalf and the claim falls under the small track of the courts (ie under £5000 of property damage or under £1000 of personal injury) then that admission basically cannot be legally withdrawn even if it was made in error - though the other insurers may allow it to be withdrawn as a gesture of good will I suspect this is highly unlikely.

I would disagree that it is the UIL recover that defines fault though, I suspect that your new insurers would see fault defined my the more common if your insurers recovered their losses/ your insurers decision on liability (in certain circumstances)

mattymoo

Astaroth wrote:

I would disagree that it is the UIL recover that defines fault though, I suspect that your new insurers would see fault defined my the more common if your insurers recovered their losses/ your insurers decision on liability (in certain circumstances)

If an insurer failed to take steps to recover their outlay but the policyholder made a full recovery of their uninsured losses then I reckon the insurer would have difficulty defending a decision not to reinstate NCD.
Certainly when I managed a claims team in the early 90's we would allow the NCD in these circumstances. Insurers of course may have taken a harder stance since then.

Impet_Limpet

I got my NCB back, which is fine theres no argument over that. Its just that some insurance websites have the selection "Non Fault - recovered excess, NCB and losses" which doesn't apply to me, all I can select is "Fault - Loss of excess, NCB and losses not recovered"

The losses were just those that they paid out to the car behind, even though I did not admit liability at any time, I didn't claim anything. In fact I didn't even know the case had been closed until it was time to renew. By which time they couldn't investigate the accident as the cars had been repaired or sold.

The NCB was reinstated after my friend who works for an insurance company (previously in motor claims), wrote a letter for me using other cases as an example that no negligence on my part caused the accident and therefore the claim should not have been paid out. The letter in the first post was the response I got.

My friend says that as they do not have evidence that suggests I was responsible for the accident they should not hold it against me and therefore should allow me to regard it as a none fault claim. He is going to get in touch with them again for me

Impet_Limpet

I got a letter back today. The fault tab has been removed and the claim is now classed as non fault (even though they paid out to the 3rd party). I'm very pleased and just in time for my renewal this month my insurance with 4 yrs no claims TPFT and all modifications on my car declared was £195

Nice one