car insurance claim against self

vaio

Be careful, I think there is an archaic insurance principle that you can't claim against yourself which I think manifests itself as if you own two cars and drive one into the other then the damage to the non driven car won't be covered by the insurance of the driven car because you own both.

I think this will result in both cars ending up with excesses to pay (and not recover) and loss of NCB & future loading due to a fault accident.on record.

Dacouch, help me out here please, this is your sort of thing......

Guess...wife claims as named driver on husbands policy for damage to his car but because she owns the other car husbands policy won't pay so she has to claim on her own policy? Two fault claims, two irrecoverable excesses to pay & two loss of NCB/future loadings?

If I'm right you'd be way better off keeping the insurance companies out of it and just fixing them yourself

rs65

Vaio, I was thinking about that. I reckon she claims (as owner of her car) against him (as owner of his car) despite the fact that she was driving it. No excess to pay unless he claims for bumper scuff.

She will have to declare a claim as a driver and he as a policyholder.

ritzman

vaio wrote: »

Be careful, I think there is an archaic insurance principle that you can't claim against yourself which I think manifests itself as if you own two cars and drive one into the other then the damage to the non driven car won't be covered by the insurance of the driven car because you own both.

I think this will result in both cars ending up with excesses to pay (and not recover) and loss of NCB & future loading due to a fault accident.on record.

Dacouch, help me out here please, this is your sort of thing......

Guess...wife claims as named driver on husbands policy for damage to his car but because she owns the other car husbands policy won't pay so she has to claim on her own policy? Two fault claims, two irrecoverable excesses to pay & two loss of NCB/future loadings?

If I'm right you'd be way better off keeping the insurance companies out of it[/QUOTE

Thanks, that's what I wondered if there was some hidden rule.

vaio

rs65 wrote: »

Vaio, I was thinking about that. I reckon she claims (as owner of her car) against him (as owner of his car) despite the fact that she was driving it. No excess to pay unless he claims for bumper scuff.

She will have to declare a claim as a driver and he as a policyholder.

Not sure about that, that sounds like RTA cover which I think only comes into play is there isn't a "closer" policy in force, which in this case would be her as a named driver on husbands policy.

But, all just guesswork based on vague (and increasingly fallible) memory of something I read somewhere.

Guesswork or not, if the OP can fix it for <£1k then that's the way to go

ritzman

Unfortunately car only worth 2k max and had just £500 on MOT and tax last week so could sell in next month.

Expensive mistake, she knows has some serious making up.

adamc260

vaio wrote: »

Be careful, I think there is an archaic insurance principle that you can't claim against yourself which I think manifests itself as if you own two cars and drive one into the other then the damage to the non driven car won't be covered by the insurance of the driven car because you own both.

I think this will result in both cars ending up with excesses to pay (and not recover) and loss of NCB & future loading due to a fault accident.on record.

Dacouch, help me out here please, this is your sort of thing......

Guess...wife claims as named driver on husbands policy for damage to his car but because she owns the other car husbands policy won't pay so she has to claim on her own policy? Two fault claims, two irrecoverable excesses to pay & two loss of NCB/future loadings?

If I'm right you'd be way better off keeping the insurance companies out of it and just fixing them yourself

I think your correct, if you have a financial interest in both I think you have to claim under both policies seperately.

rs65

vaio wrote: »

But, all just guesswork based on vague (and increasingly fallible) memory of something I read somewhere.

I know that feeling.

It just seems odd that you can trash your own car into a ditch and be covered but dent another car that you own and you're not covered.

I do have a vague memory that if you drove your own car into your own house wall, then it would be the vehicle impact peril on house insurance that would have to pay the wall damage (rather than the TP liability under car insurance).

So glad I don't have to deal with these things any more.

TSx

rs65 wrote: »

I do have a vague memory that if you drove your own car into your own house wall, then it would be the vehicle impact peril on house insurance that would have to pay the wall damage (rather than the TP liability under car insurance).

Correct, because the way subrogation works means although you assume the right of recovery against a third party, any proceedings would still be issued in the insured's name.

Given you can't sue yourself, no right of subrogation exists and the house insurance has to pay in full. I'm not sure how it will work in this situation though, can you legally sue your spouse for property damage? Generally speaking, insurers won't pursue family members for a recovery in the case of accidental damage (certainly in the case of the household claims which I deal with).

InsideInsurance

vaio wrote: »

Be careful, I think there is an archaic insurance principle that you can't claim against yourself

It is not an insurance principle it is both law and common sense. You cannot sue yourself.

Before looking at this case lets take the more classic example of a guy who drives his own car into his own house. If there was a dispute on the value of the claim he would go to court but would be both the claimant (as the owner of the house) and the defendant (as the driver of the vehicle). The fact an insurance company is the one that will actually pay the agreed settlement is irrelevant.

As to the OP, as your wife owns the damaged "third party" vehicle and is the at fault driver she cannot claim off of your policy for the damage to both vehicles as she would again be both claimant and defendant. This assumes that "her car" is legally her car and not just the one she happens to drive most often but is legally in your name.

If she disagrees, she can sue the driver of the vehicle that caused the damage directly and see herself in court!