Increase in car insurance after accident not my fault

vaio · 15 January 2012 at 11:13PM

as the loading is a direct consequential cost of the accident why don't you reclaim the cost from the at fault party?

username80 · 15 January 2012 at 11:21PM

vaio wrote: »

as the loading is a direct consequential cost of the accident why don't you reclaim the cost from the at fault party?

thank you for the quick response, this is what i intend to do. however, being a law graduate i believe there is no legal requirement for them to do so and legally they are not responsible for the increased price, although they should have not disclosed the info in the first place. it just infuriates me that insurance companies (and banks!) seem to set out rules that are totally unfair and unjustified

vaio · 16 January 2012 at 12:19AM

username80 wrote: »

..... being a law graduate i believe there is no legal requirement for them to do so and legally they are not responsible for the increased price, although they should have not disclosed the info in the first place. it just infuriates me that insurance companies (and banks!) seem to set out rules that are totally unfair and unjustified

on what grounds do you think that a consequential non fault loading should be treated any differently from a consequential injury or loss of earnings cost?

Mr_Toad · 16 January 2012 at 11:38AM

username80 wrote: »

thank you for the quick response, this is what i intend to do. however, being a law graduate i believe there is no legal requirement for them to do so and legally they are not responsible for the increased price, although they should have not disclosed the info in the first place. it just infuriates me that insurance companies (and banks!) seem to set out rules that are totally unfair and unjustified

I thought that these days insurance company databases shared some sort of automated link that enable other companies to check if prospective customers are being truthful?

Don't they say as much in their T&Cs - 'We share information with other insurers' or some such wording.

Simply by dealing with you and the accident the info will be on the other insurers system and therefore be shared.

username80 · 16 January 2012 at 10:17PM

you are both right to what you have mentioned. will call them up tomorrow morning :T

mikey72 · 16 January 2012 at 10:22PM

vaio wrote: »

on what grounds do you think that a consequential non fault loading should be treated any differently from a consequential injury or loss of earnings cost?

username80 wrote: »

you are both right to what you have mentioned. will call them up tomorrow morning :T

It's widely quoted that the increase is directly due to the risk you present to the insurer increasing, as a direct result of a no claim accident, and it's a measurable increase, so it should be easy to quantity the loss over the next five years.
Insurance has risen at 20 to 40% year on year, insurers tell us car insurance is still loss making, so rises will have to continue, so again, projected rises should be quantifiable.

Let us know how you get on.

username80 · 17 January 2012 at 9:14PM

I called the case handler of the one in fault. he said that he HAS NEVER HEARD OF SUCH THING!!he said there is no chance that my insurance would go up since i am not responsible for the accident. he concluded that he will need to see specific evidence that proves the clear link between the accident and my insurance's price rise.:mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad:

im just concerned that my insurance company now, will not be very interested in helping me out since i have already bought it. i will need to ask for a price breakdown but again noone says that i will stay with the same insurance next year so this rise could be even bigger. the case handler of the one in fault told me to ask them to call him and explain why they did such thing and how they can justify the increased price (i dont think any insurer would even bother)

thnk you in advance for comments and advice

mikey72 · 17 January 2012 at 9:24PM

username80 wrote: »

I called the case handler of the one in fault. he said that he HAS NEVER HEARD OF SUCH THING!!he said there is no chance that my insurance would go up since i am not responsible for the accident. he concluded that he will need to see specific evidence that proves the clear link between the accident and my insurance's price rise.:mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad:

im just concerned that my insurance company now, will not be very interested in helping me out since i have already bought it. i will need to ask for a price breakdown but again noone says that i will stay with the same insurance next year so this rise could be even bigger. the case handler of the one in fault told me to ask them to call him and explain why they did such thing and how they can justify the increased price (i dont think any insurer would even bother)

thnk you in advance for comments and advice

Try posting on the insurance forum.
There's more than enough insurance employees who always quote this, and many more that repeat it, but like you, I've never actually managed to get any evidence as to the reason for it.
You may be lucky.

Lum · 17 January 2012 at 9:26PM

Easy way to get evidence would be to get online quotes without the accident, then go back and add in the accident and get another quote. Then just pass on the quotation summary from your email to your claims handler.

scabendon · 5 February 2012 at 2:31PM

I'm going through the same thing and had already done a with and then with out accident quote (currently unresolved, as since not my fault the other side takes a lifetime to cough up), but the price difference was an extra £150. :mad: I shall be looking at claiming an extra £750 at least off the other side.