How long to get car insurance excess back?

losgiganteskid

Quentin wrote: »

You didn't say where you get this from?


(It doesn't happen)

Its a fact - it happens. Are you suggesting that following a RTA whereby you notify your insurers of your involvement - stating you are going to deal with the third party direct to settle your claim that your own insurers won't withold ncb pending settlement ? - if so where did you get that from ??

Quentin

It doesn't happen as you say ("a virtual certainty")


And that is certainly not a "fact"!


(How do you square this with the many insurers that farm off claims to management companies when their client is blameless?)


You are making this up.


It is a well trodden path to contact the third party when liability is clear cut. This keeps your NCD intact and avoids paying excess - and you face less pressure to stop you going to your own choice of repairer

OnanTheBarbarian

Quentin wrote: »

It doesn't happen as you say ("a virtual certainty")


And that is certainly not a "fact"!


(How do you square this with the many insurers that farm off claims to management companies when their client is blameless?)


You are making this up.


It is a well trodden path to contact the third party when liability is clear cut. This keeps your NCD intact and avoids paying excess - and you face less pressure to stop you going to your own choice of repairer

Wouldn't that scenario be a win win for your insurer though?

Nice kickback for referring the punter to a credit hire firm and maybe an injury bonanza too, whilst holding a cautionary reserve against the claim until the punter notifies that liability has been admitted and/or recovery has been made?

Quentin

Were this kid correct all your clients would be unhappy to discover their ncd reduced just cos they engaged an ambulance chaser

losgiganteskid

Quentin wrote: »

It is a well trodden path to contact the third party when liability is clear cut. This keeps your NCD intact and avoids paying excess - and you face less pressure to stop you going to your own choice of repairer

Obviously if one deals with and is 100% successful in claiming all losses directly from the 3rd party or their insurer ncd will remain unaffected and excess (if applic) will not apply.


That is not in dispute - what I am saying is that even if you attempt to claim directly from the guilty party UNTIL such time that you receive settlement 100% in your favour and your insurer will not be called upon to either deal with or pay a partial liability settlement - your ncb is more than likely to be suspended pending the settlement.


As for being a well trodden path to go direct to the third party again I would suggest that much more often is the case that a policyholder will avail themselves to claim initially from their own insurers (after all thats what they pay their premium for) - the claim will be dealt with in a timely fashion, vehicle inspected, repairs authorised and a courtesy vehicle provided whilst repairs are underway excess to be paid upon completion of repairs and of course ncb will be suspended for the duration

rs65

losgiganteskid wrote: »

Its a fact - it happens. Are you suggesting that following a RTA whereby you notify your insurers of your involvement - stating you are going to deal with the third party direct to settle your claim that your own insurers won't withold ncb pending settlement ? - if so where did you get that from ??

I can't speak for all insurers but one major UK motor insurer's system allows you to put a 'Y' in an 'info only' field which means that NCB is unaffected. If you notify a incident for info only, your NCB will be unaffected.

Your fact is bunkum I'm afraid.

losgiganteskid

rs65 wrote: »

I can't speak for all insurers but one major UK motor insurer's system allows you to put a 'Y' in an 'info only' field . If you notify a incident for info only, your NCB will be unaffected.

Your fact is bunkum I'm afraid.

Whether they put a "Y" , "X" or a "ZEE" in their field (ploughed or otherwise) is irrelevant - ok, if you report that you hit your own gatepost whilst reversing and there is no third party involved at that stage the insurer might put a flag that ncb is not to be effected - but where an incident is reported involving a third party i'm saying it is more than likely ncb will be disallowed until the incident is settled.


You are of course entitled to state my thoughts are "bumkum" - but why are you afraid ? - is it because i'm correct and you are not ?

rs65

losgiganteskid wrote: »

but where an incident is reported involving a third party i'm saying it is more than likely ncb will be disallowed until the incident is settled.

Incorrect again.

InsideInsurance

losgiganteskid wrote: »

Whether they put a "Y" , "X" or a "ZEE" in their field (ploughed or otherwise) is irrelevant - ok, if you report that you hit your own gatepost whilst reversing and there is no third party involved at that stage the insurer might put a flag that ncb is not to be effected - but where an incident is reported involving a third party i'm saying it is more than likely ncb will be disallowed until the incident is settled.


You are of course entitled to state my thoughts are "bumkum" - but why are you afraid ? - is it because i'm correct and you are not ?

If you hit your own gate then certainly you are at fault and so certainly they wouldnt be waiving your excess being impacted.


How insurers deal with claims does vary greatly. Some will register an open claim impacting the NCD on all cases but if they are not handling the claim for their insured (either main policy or LE) then the file is closed after 3-6 months and reinstate the NCD.

Some insurers will register the claim in such a way that it never will impact the NCD unless a future approach is made by the TP making allegations against the insured.

Where a claim is being made via the LE cover then the claims file often will be left open for the full duration of the uninsured loss claim so that the insurer can do its at least partial duty of monitoring their panel solicitors. In all cases where this is done from my experience the insurer adjusts the claim file after the 3-6 months of no approach or after the admission of liability (assuming PH hasnt claimed AD through the main policy) the flags are changed to ensure it doesnt impact the NCD

Any insurer that withheld their insured's NCD for 3+ years whilst a complex injury case is fought out when liability was never in dispute would have an exceptionally hard job justifying that to the FOS

Obviously all of this is different if the PH has claimed off their own policy and the liability switches to the point that the insurer recovers their outlay

Quentin

losgiganteskid wrote: »

.....You are of course entitled to state my thoughts are "bumkum" - but why are you afraid ? - is it because i'm correct and you are not ?

Previously you insisted you were posting that it was a "fact" that it was a "virtual certainty" NCD would be reduced if you haved an incident where liability is clear cut and the third party insurer deals with you as an innocent party.


Now you admit to just posting your "thoughts" on the issue.


(And no they aren't "bumkum" - (sounds unpleasant). Though they are bunkum!)