Hastings Motor Claims 'Scam'

PDAH

This is a complaint I have made to this insurer but they are not prepared to investigate because I am not the policyholder.......have a look

Dear Sirs

We have been instructed to open our enquiries into arrangements that exist between Hastings Insurance and other service providers that, on the face of it are highly questionable. We would expect you to acknowledge this complaint promptly and outline a timeframe for a thorough investigation.

Claim ref CHAS006/000801972

Your insured had a non-fault accident where another vehicle drove into the rear. The damage to the at-fault vehicle was a broken headlamp that was repaired for £80. Your insured drove away from the scene with no obvious damage. You then instructed a motor engineering firm called Copart UK Engineering Services that declared the vehicle a write off indicating that there was damage to the rear bumper, panel and boot floor. The valuation was £1420 with no salvage value. You also made a referral to hire company Drive Assist who provided your insured with alternative transport. The hire company submitted an invoice for 29 days car hire for over £1000. You then attempted to claim back the total loss value of £1420 but in view of the slight damage to the at-fault vehicle an inspection of your insured’s vehicle was requested. However, you had transferred the ownership to Copart UK who had disposed of the vehicle on an online auction. It was possible to trace the eventual owner and a statement was taken from him. He purchased the ‘written off’ vehicle, that had no salvage value, for £625. The vehicle was drivable and all he did was to valet the vehicle. A subsequent forensic inspection showed very minor unrepaired accident damage estimated at £320.There was no damage to the panel and boot floor. Hastings instructed McKeowns Solicitors to recover their outlay but eventually Hastings Insurance accepted £320 in reimbursement of their £1420 outlay. We understand that Hastings Insurance use Copart UK Engineering Services to inspect their vehicles but Copart say their contract does not allow them to charge for the inspection/assessment service. The contract allows them to automatically obtain all vehicles they say are written off and sell them. We submit that Copart have a vested interest in declaring vehicles written off and in stating that such vehicles have little or no salvage value so they maximise the opportunity. If they inspect 100 vehicles and they are all repairable, Copart would receive nothing so their engineers would be keen to write vehicles off. The agreement between Hastings and Copart is confidential but we will be seeking its disclosure. It also has to be shown whether you profit from the salvage disposal in terms of commission or profit share. We will also seek a report indicating all vehicles inspected by Copart where they declared the vehicle written off indicating the salvage value, if any, and what eventually Copart sold the salvage for. The effect of using them in this case also lead to a referral to a hire company for a hire vehicle that was not required because the damaged vehicle was drivable. We will seek disclosure of the commission agreement between Hastings and Drive Assist. It would also appear you sold the details of the driver to Donns Solicitors who pursued a personal injury claim and clearly it would be easier to sell a potential claimant who has had the vehicle written off as oppose to one with little or no damage. We will seek disclosure of the commission agreement with Donns Solicitors.
You should also be aware that customers who have minor accidents generally have every expectation of receiving their repaired vehicle back. They do not want it written off in some contrived manner and then be faced with having to replace the vehicle on the second hand market. They will also unaware of the myriad of trading agreements you have in place that will work against them when they have a claim and the secret profit Hastings makes out of the accident.

We have noticed that from your website that you state, ‘We’ve recently won at the 2011 Insurance Fraud Awards. Through our investment in the latest anti-fraud technology, we’re helping to stop the cost of fraud being passed on to our customers.’ However, does that make customers think their insurance with you will be better or cheaper?

Hastings Exaggerated Claim
Total Loss Value Claimed £1420 Received £320
Recovery Charge £165 Received £0
Car Hire £1100 Received £0
An incident where the client losses are ‘engineered’ to a level 600-700% of what they should be, clearly impacts premium levels.

It remains for Hastings Insurance to demonstrate that commercial interests do not take precedence over fairness, to make full disclosure with a view to rectifying the position. From a regulatory standpoint there would appear to be several breaches of FSA rules and principles but we await to hear from you in the first instance.