insurance dispute-help!

InsideInsurance

vaio wrote: »

But surely we are talking about RTA s151 here where liability only arises if a judgement against the driver is obtained? If judgement has been obtained then I can't see how the OP/father wouldn't have known.

Strictly for them to be RTA insurers then yes, many insurers will act without judgement (as it simply adds cost) and almost all policies state that that the insured will provide indemnity to the insurer should they breach their policy terms. By not prosecuting for theft the Father has condoned the action and so would be required to indemnify the insurer for their losses.

vaio

To be honest I suspect either troll or, at best, half a story but....

as tradex are trying to recover from the OP then that can only be under s151 for which they need the judgement. Recovery under the terms of the policy could only be against the father.

As you say, it makes sense for insurers to act without a judgement under s151 to save costs but only if they have gathered the evidence from both sides and assessed it so they can agree liability between all parties, which according to the OP, hasn't happened.

dacouch

vaio wrote: »

To be honest I suspect either troll or, at best, half a story but....

as tradex are trying to recover from the OP then that can only be under s151 for which they need the judgement. Recovery under the terms of the policy could only be against the father.

As you say, it makes sense for insurers to act without a judgement under s151 to save costs but only if they have gathered the evidence from both sides and assessed it so they can agree liability between all parties, which according to the OP, hasn't happened.

Tradex specialise in covering the type of customers no one else wants, motor traders from home and anyone else without the sense to look into their reputation.

Because of the type of clients they deal with, they deal with this type of scenario more often that other Insurers. I've seen Tradex deal with these and if the p/h or driver ignore their letters / calls they employ enquiry agents to go find them and take a statement so they can handle the claim as best they can.

I would not be surprised if the p/h denied knowing the son's whereabouts as this is quite common.

The amount they want is surprisingly low for an injury and I assume the solicitors costs. It will also include any extra costs Tradex incurred such as the enquiry agents and their own solicitors.

Tradex are experts in using the policy wording to their benefit and getting money due to them from their clients.

I once quoted a client, I offered Tradex as the cheapest but not recommended and a normal company at a higher premium. She agreed Tradex were best avoided as she worked in a salvage yard and they had a disproportionate amount of cars from Tradex. This was where they had voided the policy after the car had been recovered. Tradex would not pay the salvage yard so they had to try and chase it from the policyholder. The figure was something like five times more than any other Insurer and Tradex are a small Insurer.

hugoshavez

adh90 wrote: »

2 years ago i took my dads car without his consent and was involved in an accident with a pedestrian.

Brilliant.

dacouch

hugoshavez wrote: »

Brilliant.

To be fair the pedestrian was reversing into a parking space at the time

rs65

dacouch wrote: »

Tradex are experts in using the policy wording to their benefit and getting money due to them from their clients.

Also, I would be very surprised if they paid out if there was any way they could avoid it.

OP, you said the police were involved so I guess there was a police report on the accident.

What advice are you actually looking for? You said you accept all responsibility and have enough money to repay them. What is your actual question?