Car damaged as passenger in their car opened door

PDC

It really depends on the damage, if its gone through to the metal and damaged the door then the area may be beyond your average chip type quick repair and need a respray which would lead many repairers to quote for the whole door in order to achieve a good match. Agree its hard to say without seeing the damage to to see everyone saying that seems too much without seeing the damage seems rather harsh.

If it were me I would let him know I would be reporting him/the event to my insurers and if that doesn't get a response go ahead and do just that.

Quentin

bryanb wrote: »

To answer your points
!, Costs can be included in the claim
2, She has attempted to get the claim paid amicably
3, All insurance companies deal with 3rd party claims
4, An insurer defending a private claim in the small claims court? I don't think so.
5, Agreed she must inform her insurer. Premium loadings can also be claimed from the guilty party.

1) Yes, costs are included in the claim, but you need to follow the correct protocol to be able to get the courts agreement the other side have to pay (assuming you win 100% liability against the defendant). If you just spring court action on them without prior warning expect not to get the court costs allowed.)

(In particular, read up on Letter Before Action)

2) She needs to show this (and prove that the other side were negligent - if they choose to tell a different story in court, how can the judge decide who is telling the truth? (50/50 decisions are often the unsatisfactory outcome)

3) So pursue them first!

4) Nevertheless, a claim will be passed by the third party onto their insurer, and they will defend it (or pay up if they agree with you)

5) They can be claimed - though unlikely they will pay them!

Quentin

PDC wrote: »

...... If it were me I would let him know I would be reporting him/the event to my insurers and if that doesn't get a response go ahead and do just that.

Most would say making a claim off your own policy over the sum being discussed is just not worth the hassle of having to pay and then pursue a refund of your excess as well as the (temporary) loss of any unprotected ncd. And it could go pear shaped if it ends up 50/50!

InsideInsurance

bryanb wrote: »

2, She has attempted to get the claim paid amicably
3, All insurance companies deal with 3rd party claims
4, An insurer defending a private claim in the small claims court? I don't think so

Quentin has already addressed most of the points well but....

2) Just by sending 2 quotes doesnt automatically equate to trying to settle the claim amicably especially when there is a dispute on liability.

3) Most do, I wouldn't say all

4) Insurers will defend small track cases, remember if there is no bodily injury aspect the limit is now 10k and certainly economical to defend using your in house barristers, even much smaller claims can be.

I remember the Head of Litigation or his two colleagues in our old claims office was probably in court 2 days a week or so defending small claims.

Even in larger cases the insurers would often agree to exclude their own losses in the court case itself to try and push it down into the lower court tracks by making the case UIL only with the agreement that insurer losses would be settled on the same basis as the UILs (assuming quantum for repairs etc not disputed)

Buzby

In a similar bump, a body shop quoted me £290 plus VAT to respray the whole door. A Smart Repair cost £78 and is invisible some two years on. If you don't need the whole door sprayed, there's no need to pursue for the extra.

artbaron

An act of God, that made me laugh. As if God couldn't be bothered to hold on to the door when He opened it. And £240 is not excessive at all, it's what I would expect for a good quality repair. Don't let your daughter be bullied into accepting a substandard bodge for a few quid.

sussexbhoy

£240 sounds reasonable to me especially as it's dented as well, people don't seem to understand the costs involved in bodyshops these days.

real1314

InsideInsurance wrote: »

Wind is an Act of God however it doesnt automatically absolve someone of blame. Was it overall a fairly windy day? Could you see bushes/ trees moving in the wind? etc. If it is then clearly you need to hold on to the handle strongly enough. If however it was 1,000% calm and a freak gust of wind caused it then there may be an argument of it being an Act of God

Wind is a characteristic of the movement of air between areas of differing atmospheric pressure. It is not an act of god.
It is a known factor in the daily events of countries worldwide. Insurance companies and indeed individuals have the ability to consider the extent of the weather, including wind, and can act to mitigate its effects.

Insurance policies do have exclusions, but they are no longer deemed an "act of god".

Basically he's trying it on. Issue a "Letter before action" giving him 14 days to settle.

http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/bills/article-1677744/Insurance-myths-True-false.html

InsideInsurance

real1314 wrote: »

Wind is a characteristic of the movement of air between areas of differing atmospheric pressure. It is not an act of god.
It is a known factor in the daily events of countries worldwide.

Erm, Act of God = Act of Nature, it not iterally meaning "God" personally intervened in the situation

real1314 wrote: »

Insurance policies do have exclusions, but they are no longer deemed an "act of god".

Basically he's trying it on. Issue a "Letter before action" giving him 14 days to settle.

http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/bills/article-1677744/Insurance-myths-True-false.html

I suggest you learn a little more about insurance unless you enjoy showing off your ignorance?

What you are talking about is a first party claim, ie where somebody claims off their own policy.

What this thread is talking about is a third party claim, ie claiming under the Third Party Liability section of another persons policy and/ or not anything at all to do with insurance but purely claiming from the Third Party directly themselves.

Act of God is a valid defence, the two classic examples are (a) storms causing roof tiles to come off and damage neighbours cars/ property and (b) someone having a heart attack etc whilst driving and having an accident.

There was a thread on here a few weeks ago about a Court of Appeal ruling that someone who hit black ice and caused serious head injuries to a third party was not liable as it was an "Act of God" as he had been driving in a reasonable manor for the road conditions.

barneysl51

Thank you all for your comments (even if some are just on about the cost) and taking the time to help.

After reading the posts on here and elsewhere my Daughter rang her insurance company today. They have been very helpful and at the moment they have listed it as "made aware" and are getting their solicitors to have a look at this and they will advise her the best way forward without (hopefully) changing her payments.

It is just so annoying that from 17 she has worked full time and paid for her cars and costs (including initial insurance over £1200) herself, working up to buying a 6mth old VW that she looks after all the time that some person thinks it's ok to damage some ones car and get away without fixing it and thinking it's ok to try a bully young girls.

Thanks again for your input. I shall try and remember to let you all know how she gets on.