Admited liability but indemnity problems

Eonel

Hoping someone can help me out with a car insurance problem.

We live & park on a hill. Last week someone parked 30 yards further up the hill & failed to engage the handbrake. Their car rolled rolled back down the hill and hit our car, breaking the bumper. The estimate is £700 to repair.

There were witnesses and the police attended the incident. The car did not roll back in a completely straight line so was blocking the road. Police were called to try and locate the driver.

I phoned my insurance company, who contacted the other drivers insurance. I was advised by my insurance company that the other had admitted liability and that I should contact them to arrange direct settlement. ( I could go through my insurance, but they advised it is simpler to go directly through his )

However, when I contacted his insurance company they said they admitted liability but due to "indemnity problems" they would not cover my claim. Data Protection prevented them from telling me anymore.

So I phoned back my insurance company who said I could pursue the claim through them, however unless the other company settled costs my policy would be affected.

I am confused. Under what circumstance can his insurance company admit liability but refuse to indemnify a claim?

& does anyone have advice on how to handle the situation.

Thanks in advance.

pendulum

Not very many at all, I wouldn't have thought.

If there was a policy of insurance in place on the car, then it should cover you as a third party, no matter how much he may have lied.

I think you have two choices; let your insurer handle it, or serve a Letter Before Action on the responsible party who left the handbrake off and see if that prompts them or their insurance company into action.

Quentin

Eonel wrote: »

Under what circumstance can his insurance company admit liability but refuse to indemnify a claim?

Maybe they discovered the policy had ended prior to the incident.

InsideInsurance

A lot depends who the insurer is and exactly what the problems are etc.

In many cases the insurer will be the RTA insurer of the vehicle even if there are indemnity issues. That said different insurers take different approaches in terms of the fact that some simply put their hands up and deal with it where as others make you go through the whole court process to get them judged RTA insurers.

There may be a few circumstances where the indemnity issues do prevent them being the RTA insurer - the most common isnt relevant in this example which is where the person believed they were driving under the Driving Other Cars part of their policy but either the policy doesnt have such a part or they breached the terms of it.

95% of these will be sorted but it may take time

Eonel

Thanks for the advice. I have read-up a bit on the concept of the RTA Insurer & will be better armed next time I speak to his insurance company.

I was also thinking of threatening to appoint third-party claims management solicitors. Might put the wind up them a bit.

& if these fail, go through my insurance company & make reclaiming the money their problem.

Thanks again.

chanz4

Eonel wrote: »

Thanks for the advice. I have read-up a bit on the concept of the RTA Insurer & will be better armed next time I speak to his insurance company.

I was also thinking of threatening to appoint third-party claims management solicitors. Might put the wind up them a bit.

& if these fail, go through my insurance company & make reclaiming the money their problem.

Thanks again.

no money in it for them