Car insurance open claim

Meghan23

To cut a very very long story short.


Back in January 2014, I had a collision. A woman was in the wrong lane at a roundabout and tried to over take me and scrapped along my car.


I rang up my insurance company as standard but I decided not to claim because there was minor marks to my car, it was just a scrape on my wheel arch and wheel trim but my car already has a little bump from a previous owner, so to me, it was no big deal but I reported it for obvious reasons.


By law they are allowed 6months to claim, and for those many months she had ignored letters,emails, phone calls etc. until the last 4 days of the 6months ending, she got in contact claiming it was my fault, so the case is still 'open'


Now, I have had to renew my insurance since then and I have to pay £220 a month, when previously before the claim situation, I was paying just £70! and my no claims bonus has gone.


My car cost me £400 so I am paying more insurance than my car is worth, I am a full-time student so finding this money is hard and I've had to borrow money. To make matters worse, I was recently made redundant in August.


Now all of a sudden, the third party is claiming she has a witness, when I know there were no witnesses at the scene and she didn't state she had a witness in her first statement and now my insurance company are contacting hers for the 'witness' statement and they have had no response as of yet.


This has caused me immense stress and I want this sorted quick but I wont admit to something I didn't do.

Quentin

Make sure your insurer knows the facts and leave it to them to sort out liability.


(You are misinformed regarding the length of time you have to make a claim for damage following an incident - it's 6 years)

magpiecottage

Sounds like you will now be making a counterclaim against her after all.

David_InsDef

Quentin wrote: »

Make sure your insurer knows the facts and leave it to them to sort out liability.


(You are misinformed regarding the length of time you have to make a claim for damage following an incident - it's 6 years)

Not the case if it's personal injury she is claiming for.

Quentin

David_InsDef wrote: »

Not the case if it's personal injury she is claiming for.

As posted, the 6 month "by law" the OP told us was the limit for claiming is incorrect, and the correct time limit for claiming for damage is 6 years not months.


There are different time limits for claiming for injury depending on various criteria eg. how old the claimant is, whether the claimant is still alive, whether the claimant is being treated under the mental health act etc


The minimum time limit to claim though is 3 years from the date the claimant became aware their injury is related to the incident, and irrelevant to your pointless (or is it point scoring without helping) remark.

David_InsDef

Quentin wrote: »

As posted, the 6 month "by law" the OP told us was the limit for claiming is incorrect, and the correct time limit for claiming for damage is 6 years not months.


There are different time limits for claiming for injury depending on various criteria eg. how old the claimant is, whether the claimant is still alive, whether the claimant is being treated under the mental health act etc


The minimum time limit to claim though is 3 years from the date the claimant became aware their injury is related to the incident, and irrelevant to your pointless (or is it point scoring without helping) remark.

You've edited your original post to add in the reference to claiming for damage.

There is nothing pointless about my remark about the statute of limitations for personal injury claims, if that's what the third party wants to claim for. I was giving the OP the fairly fundamental piece of guidance that you omitted,

You spend a lot of time aggressively shooting down other contributors' advice, but it's clear you don't like it / can't deal with it when it happens to you. More people should stand up your aggressive ways and similarly more people should challenge your often-flawed advice. Some of the things you've guided people to do via here are frankly negligent and likely damaged the poster's chances of a favourable outcome to the problem(s) they've presented. As I said before, a little bit of knowledge is dangerous - whereas you often present your little bit of knowledge as fact and the only prescribed course that people should follow - and then you frequently attack others for daring to have a different viewpoint to yours.

Quentin

David_InsDef wrote: »

You've edited your original post to add in the reference to claiming for damage.....

That is a lie which all can see (edited posts are marked as such!). Have the decency to retract it.

What's rattled you to post such an obviously flawed attack in which you just let yourself down?

Quentin

David_InsDef wrote: »

There is nothing pointless about my remark about the statute of limitations for personal injury claims, if that's what the third party wants to claim for. I was giving the OP the fairly fundamental piece of guidance that you omitted,

Your post was far from being "fundamental" - it was basic!

David_InsDef wrote: »

Not the case if it's personal injury she is claiming for.

This doesn't explain anything regarding "the statute of limitations for personal injury claims" whatsoever.


(Though my subsequent post which you are so scathing about does!)