Paying 2 years later for an accident thats not my fault!!!!!

haribo27

Hello!
I am quite annoyed. At the end of 2005 I was hit from behind by a motorcyclist causing £700 worth of damage to my car. None of it was my fault, police attended etc. Then last May when I came to insure my car, I switched companies and the new company added £25 to my quote because I had been involved in accident - (even though it was not my fault). Their justification was 'oce you've been involved in one you are more likely to be involved in another'. (?) They were still the cheapest so I went with them resentfully. I am still chasing that £25 as I was told that I should not have to suffer any financial lose over the accident, by the ins comp I was with at the time. Anyway, renewal time is a couple of months away and I have found a company Im thinking of going with, so I did 2 quotes, one metioning the accident one not. (Is that a bit naughty?) And the difference is now £75!!!!!

I think this is grossly unfair. This accident was no way my fault. How can I convince the ins comps to give me the cheaper price and be honest at the same time and tell them I have had an accident?

If it were my fault, then I would pay the extra because I think thats fair! But its not!!!

GRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR.

Thankz

olly300

To be honest I don't think you can due to the way car insurance work using statistics to evaluate risk.

Motorcyclists are vunerable road users and most accidents involving motorcyclists are caused by passenger vehicle drivers crossing the path of the motorcyclist, not seeing the motorcyclist and injurying them. Quick google search throw this up: http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Publications/2004/10/20131/45655

I have friends' who ride motorbikes and they say they have been taught how to look out for car drivers however it doesn't stop them weaving in and out of traffic and breaking the speed limit. I have been told by the motorcyclists who have past their bike test in the last 10 years have been told to take up as much space as a car and not weave in and out of traffic.

Under the insurance pool method if you as a car driver have an accident with a vunerable road user, then statistically most accidents involving car drivers and motorcyclists are the fault of the car driver.

This sort of stuff make me understand why people sue in other courts over accidents and not leave it to the insurance company.

haribo27

Well to me this doesnt hold water. This accident wasn't my fault at all, the motorcyclist was too close and when the traffic stopped he didn't! I can completely understand that if it had been my fault I would have to pay more, because it is quite likely that Im inattentive or a bit reckless or whatever. However, as I had the police out and everything and it was decided it was definitely NOT me at fault I dont see why I should have to pay more. Really its just bad lcuk that I happened to be the person in front of someone who either wasnt paying attention or was too close - or both.

Anyway thanks for your thoughts.
I just think its a money making scam by ins comps, you pay more either way.

pinkfluffybabe

I personally think it is a lot of tosh that once you have had one accident, you are more likely to have another.

I had an accident a couple of years ago and it has made me much more aware of my driving - I would say I am a better driver as a result.