Excess Payable

mattb27

Hi I am just wondering if anyone has any idea about the following:-

A few weeks back we had severe hail. Which has caused a fair bit of damage to my partners car.

We have filed a claim with the insurance company, for repair to take place.

They are now insisting that we pay an excess of £600. The voluntary excess is £350 and £250 compulsary for young drivers. I was driving the car to pick up my other half from work. Once I had parked the car the damaged was caused by the hail. They are saying that it is the last person to use the car. However when I questioned if this was in the terms and conditions they said "I don't know as I haven't read them, but it should be". I have been through the T & Cs with a fine tooth comb and can not find any mention of such policy etc.

I know they class this as accidental damage, however I fail to see how they can say it was my fault, when blatantly I can't control the weather.

The problem is not paying the £600, I just have an issue of paying more than I should. I believe that they are being very unfair and unjust. As well as being passed around to three departments before I got this answer, even then the chap on the phone had to go off and ask someone about it.

If anyone has any idea on the stance with this one or has had a similar experience then I would appreciate any input you may have.

Just for the record the car insurer is Di*ectLi*e.

Thanks in advance.

Matt

Quentin

DL are correct.

Whoever was in charge of the car when it was damaged is the claimant.

The excess is always payable when you make a claim off your own policy.

This is a fault claim as far as you are concerned (no-one else involved to claim off), so your excess is unrecoverable, and will also result in the loss of NCD unless you have it protected.

InsideInsurance

I have known people complain about young drivers excess being applied to malicious damage claims and have successfully had the compulsory excess being waived - the voluntary and any vehicle compulsory excess still being payable.

Register a complaint stating the last driver is irrelevant to the matter and therefore the YDXS shouldnt apply.... for the money it is probably worth a punt

mattb27

@Quentin,

Thanks for the info. I am aware of how the excess works as well as the procedure for no claims etc. My point is that it doesn't seem to be stated anywhere with regards to damage of this type or similar issues.

If nobody challenges it then they will continue to make the most money possible. It wasn't so long back when companies were selling PPI & the banks were charging Bank Charges unethically / unlawfully. Until it was challenged they carried on.

@InsideInsurance

Again thanks for the information, I shall be writing to them to complain and see where that gets me.

To be honest I can't end up any worse off by complaining about the fact they want to charge an extra £250.

I will be sure to update you on how I get on.

Matt

Quentin

mattb27 wrote: »

@Quentin,

Thanks for the info. I am aware of how the excess works as well as the procedure for no claims etc. My point is that it doesn't seem to be stated anywhere with regards to damage of this type or similar issues.

If nobody challenges it then they will continue to make the most money possible. It wasn't so long back when companies were selling PPI & the banks were charging Bank Charges unethically / unlawfully. Until it was challenged they carried on. ...

Do you mean you shouldn't have to pay any excess at all?

If so, you are mistaken, read up in your policy and it will set out that the excess isn't covered when you are claiming for damage to your own car.

(If you only had third party cover, then you would have no cover for this at all!)

mattb27

No. What I am saying is that. We should only have to pay £350 and not £600.

Faith177

@mattb27 because the younger driver was driving I think you will have to pay the higher excess.

The claim will go against the driver at the time regardless of the type of incident. This is why the higher excess is being applied.

soolin

Faith177 wrote: »

@mattb27 because the younger driver was driving I think you will have to pay the higher excess.

The claim will go against the driver at the time regardless of the type of incident. This is why the higher excess is being applied.

No one was driving though- the car was parked.

Quentin

mattb27 wrote: »

No. What I am saying is that. We should only have to pay £350 and not £600.

OK, that's a separate issue to this grumble, then,:

I know they class this as accidental damage, however I fail to see how they can say it was my fault, when blatantly I can't control the weather.

As far as the compulsory excess is concerned, then that too will be set out in the policy document, and by its name, the policy holder agreed to accept it for younger drivers and is bound by the agreed conditions to pay it.

If it's cost effective to retain the NCD you might want to cancel the claim and take it to a local back street bodyshop and pay the repairs yourself.

Quentin

soolin wrote: »

No one was driving though- the car was parked.

Who chose where to park it?

mattb27

NCD is protected. So no issue with that. If you don't ask you don't get so I will see what they say. Across the whole area they are estimating £50 million in damage due to the weather.