Insurance mess...advice please

sam1970

Last year My wife had an accident in a supermarket car park. It was clear cut that the other driver was driving against traffic (one way traffic system) looking for a parking space. We informed our insurer who told us after couple of weeks that the other driver insurer has accepted liability. We had our car repaired (£4000) by our insurer garage. It took 3 weeks during which we had a hire car from a car hire company. Our insurer garage offered us a small ford Ka but as our car was 7 seater we asked for a bigger car and were told that as the accident was not our fault we could get a bigger hire car and our insurere will claim the cost from the other driver insurer. Three months later we were called by our insurer saying that the other insurer changed their minds and are denying liability and refusing to pay. It is been going through solicitors for over a year now and eventually were told to accept 50/50 fault as somehow the other driver has found a witness to support their version of the story and it is not worth going to court. We accepted reluctantly (very unfair system) and now we are required to pay the excess for the claim (we did not have to pay originally)...even worse they are saying that they may have to bill us for the hire car as it was not their standard car and it was our choice to go for a bigger car :mad:.....I am very furious at this unfair system. We only went fr the bigger car because we were told that we dont have to pay for it....What shall we do?

Retrogamer

Sadly, this is the way insurance works these days.

If you claim from your own insurance company and they can't recover the costs from the third party, then you will have to pay the excess and any charges for hire cars not normally provided for "at fault" claims

The thing that i find silly in these things is although the other party has disputed it, the end result is the same for them, but the difference is now they have dragged you in and messed things for yourself and it won't benefit them in any way at all (they still have an at fault claim and premium / NCB affected)

The best way to avoid these scenarios is if someone hits you and it is their fault then deal with their insurance company directly. It can be a bit more hard work with chasing and haggling with things but if they then provide a hire car and their clients change their mind that's their fault and not yours.

This will affect your yearly premium as well now as it has went 50/50 and if you have unprotected NCB then that will be affected as well.
I had one bad experience with an insurance claim against me that i went out and bought a dash cam so if they deny something they actually did, then i have some evidence

sam1970

Thanks for the reply. My wife's NCB is protected and to be honest we stayed with the same insurer as the renewal quote was not bad (actually cheaper than any other insurer). Although I accept that I might have to pay the excess (based on their crappy rules) but i am not happy at all to pay for the hire car. I took it on good faith and based on their advice that I dont have to apy for it. I actually even paid £100 (excess waiver) to the hire company which my insurer promised then to reimburse but obviously not any more

dacouch

Retrogamer wrote: »

Sadly, this is the way insurance works these days.

If you claim from your own insurance company and they can't recover the costs from the third party, then you will have to pay the excess and any charges for hire cars not normally provided for "at fault" claims

The thing that i find silly in these things is although the other party has disputed it, the end result is the same for them, but the difference is now they have dragged you in and messed things for yourself and it won't benefit them in any way at all (they still have an at fault claim and premium / NCB affected)

The best way to avoid these scenarios is if someone hits you and it is their fault then deal with their insurance company directly. It can be a bit more hard work with chasing and haggling with things but if they then provide a hire car and their clients change their mind that's their fault and not yours.

This will affect your yearly premium as well now as it has went 50/50 and if you have unprotected NCB then that will be affected as well.
I had one bad experience with an insurance claim against me that i went out and bought a dash cam so if they deny something they actually did, then i have some evidence

The end result of 50/50 for the other driver and the OP is that each party can claim 50% of their loses from the other party. So other driver is better off than before.

The OP can try and reclaim 50% of the excess she pays from the other Insurer

sam1970

dacouch wrote: »

The end result of 50/50 for the other driver and the OP is that each party can claim 50% of their loses from the other party. So other driver is better off than before.

The OP can try and reclaim 50% of the excess she pays from the other Insurer

So does that mean if we end having to pay for the hire car we can ask the other insurer to pay 50% of that?

Retrogamer

dacouch wrote: »

The end result of 50/50 for the other driver and the OP is that each party can claim 50% of their loses from the other party. So other driver is better off than before.
other Insurer

Ahh, i wasn't aware of that.

I assumed it was just out of spite since they will still have an at fault claim against them regardless,.

dacouch

Retrogamer wrote: »

Ahh, i wasn't aware of that.

I assumed it was just out of spite since they will still have an at fault claim against them regardless,.

It's basically saying each party is equally to blame so each party and their Insurer can recover 50% of their costs from the other party. If one party has a Ferrari and the other a Mini then the amount each party receives could be considerably different.

As neither party recovered all their losses they each have a claim regarded as being "Fault" and each would have their no claims bonus affected as ncd is for not making a claim.

On a similar basis a claim might be decided to be 70% one parties fault and 30% the other parties fault. In this case one party would recover 70% with the other receiving 30%.

Quentin

sam1970 wrote: »

So does that mean if we end having to pay for the hire car we can ask the other insurer to pay 50% of that?

You can claim for all your uninsured losses and expect to get 50%.


You may have to justify your decision to have a hire car rather than the complimentary courtesy car you were covered for.

Nodding_Donkey

And get a dashcam, then you can prove who was at fault if the collision occurs at the front of your car.

sam1970

The dash cam would have been useless as our car was hit from the back ( driver rear side). Regarding the hire car, we have 3 kids and our car is 7 seater.. They offered us 2 doors ford ka which would not have been suitable..the car we hired was not even 7 seater .. Just a saloon Hyundai

Quentin

Who supplied the hire (ie. who paid for it)?


Were you made aware that you were responsible in the event you were found liable/partly liable? Were you given any paperwork to sign regarding the hire?