Automatism-Third Party Insurance

Beagle2_2

I had a RTA last year when another driver had a stroke at the wheel and crashed head-on into my car on my side of the road. My car was off the road for five weeks and I had to pay £350 excess to get my car back. After nearly one year my insurer now says "they have been unable to recover their outlay because it is a case of automatism where the Third Pary cannot be held negligent and are closing the file". This means I can't have my £350 back and my protected No Claims discount will have a "life" lost.Can I ask the driver for the £350? Please does anyone know what I can do? I have lost my :mad: money and have a black mark against me and I didn't do anything wrong!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

marlot

Unless the other driver was driving against doctor's advice, they didn't do anything wrong either. Its unfortunate, but the other driver's insurance covers them for negligent acts - and it sounds like the other driver wasn't negligent.

Sorry.

Unless someone else is aware of some other way you can claim

raskazz

Beagle2 wrote: »

I had a RTA last year when another driver had a stroke at the wheel and crashed head-on into my car on my side of the road. My car was off the road for five weeks and I had to pay £350 excess to get my car back. After nearly one year my insurer now says "they have been unable to recover their outlay because it is a case of automatism where the Third Pary cannot be held negligent and are closing the file". This means I can't have my £350 back and my protected No Claims discount will have a "life" lost.Can I ask the driver for the £350? Please does anyone know what I can do? I have lost my :mad: money and have a black mark against me and I didn't do anything wrong!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

You're £350 down, the other driver had a stroke. Who do you think is worse off as a result?

kiddy_guy

raskazz wrote: »

You're £350 down, the other driver had a stroke. Who do you think is worse off as a result?

Depends or not whether he's fully recovered? Depends or not whether the stroke saved him from a future more fatal incident? Your point is completely irrelevant to the OP's issue where he has lost out when not his fault...

Beagle2_2

raskazz wrote: »

You're £350 down, the other driver had a stroke. Who do you think is worse off as a result?

You must be a wealthy person that £350 isn't a lot of money, I just hope the same doesn't happen to you!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

martinthebandit

Sorry, but I don't think you have any chance of getting your money back.

The reality is that you took a gamble, you got cheaper premiums because you agreed to stand the first £350 of any claim that your insurance company could not get paid out in full from someone else.

As with any gamble there are winners and losers, I suppose it depends on how much you have saved in insurance premiums over the years by agreeing to have an excess. If its more than £350 then you are still ahead.

maninthestreet

If the OP had been injured in the accident, would any claim for injury against the other driver also fail???

sarahg1969

maninthestreet wrote: »

If the OP had been injured in the accident, would any claim for injury against the other driver also fail???

Yes, it could, because the claim would be based on negligence. However, it would be open to the OP to issue proceedings, and the court could decide whether or not there has been any negligence. The OP could still do that, but there are no guarantees.

In this case, the claim hasn't really "failed" - it's just been rejected by the other driver's insurers. It would only have failed if a judge ordered that there has been no negligence.

mikey72

Kind of defeats the purpose of insurance though, if insurers can claim no negligence, and so you could be killed by an other "innocent" party, with no compensation to next of kin.

I would really try to get a good solicitor to pursue medical records then to see if the other party had been to see the doctor, and hadn't declared anything, or was feeling unwell, but for £350 it doesn't seem worth it in this case.

zappahey

martinthebandit wrote: »

The reality is that you took a gamble, you got cheaper premiums because you agreed to stand the first £350 of any claim that your insurance company could not get paid out in full from someone else.

As with any gamble there are winners and losers, I suppose it depends on how much you have saved in insurance premiums over the years by agreeing to have an excess. If its more than £350 then you are still ahead.

It makes sense if you can afford the excess. I have always worked out how much it costs me to insure the excess. This year, I decided that I wasn't happy to pay £69 to insure £300, so took the £300 excess.

Arg

raskazz wrote: »

You're £350 down, the other driver had a stroke. Who do you think is worse off as a result?

Everyone with the current insurance system.