We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.
This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
The Forum now has a brand new text editor, adding a bunch of handy features to use when creating posts. Read more in our how-to guide
Claiming against two seperate accidents
ajnicho
Posts: 72 Forumite
Hi
I would really appreciate some help regarding a predicament that we're in and any advice I can get would help me no end.
Back in February, my wife was involved in a car collision. A taxi driver pulled out and smashed in to the side of her work van.
She immediately contacted her insurance broker, Swinton, to register the claim. In the following days she received notification from her underwriter that a claims handler had been allocated to her, she then had contact from the claims handler to proceed.
On that call, my wife was asked to pay the £600 excess on her policy so that they could commence work on her van. As she didn't have that kind of money available and as the van was still in a drivable condition she asked if the work could be delayed until liability was accepted by the third party. This was agreed.
Couple of days later my wife received a call from Hertz Accident Support, acting on behalf of her insurance, to bring the van in for an estimate on the damages. The following week the van was inspected.
During this period Hertz Accident Support requested all witness statements, photographs and evidence so that they could pursue liability with the third party insurers. After a couple of weeks of back and forth, liability was accepted by them.
By this time we received outcome of the assessement and the damanges were so extensive that Hertz Accident Support deemed that the vehicle was a write off. As such they could no longer proceed with the claim and we had to contact Zenith (the underwriters) to proceed with the claim.
My wife then contacted Zenith and this is were the issues begain. Zenith had no knowledge of anything and had stated that because we had not been in contact with them they assumed we were not pursuing the claim.
Obviously confused and very upset my wife starting ringing around a multitude of companies to try and find out what was happening. It turned out that the broker (Swinton) had instructed Hertz to conduct an assesment on the van and Zenith had no knowledge of it. After lots and lots of calls, we managed to trace the person from Hertz who had dealt with our claim, who then forwarded all the details to Zenith.
By this two months had passed and Zenith now decide that, based on their assessment of two photographs of the van that we had taken, they would have repaired the vehicle and not written it off and so referred us back to their own garage to conduct another assessment. This was booked in for Tuesday just gone.
On Monday night, two yobs, joy riding in a stolen car smashed in to the van, in the exact same place, causing further damage. The two yobs, obviously not insured ran off.
Now, the van still went in for an assessment on Tuesday, Zenith instructed the garage to try and assess what damage was caused by the first incident against what damage was caused by the second incident. Obviously this is 'best guess'.
Zenith have now stated that based on the photographs provided, they're not prepared to write off the vehicle based on the first claim, and that as the second incident was an uninsured accident we would now have to pay the £600 excess and lose any NCD we had accrued. Not the best case scenario.
My argument is that the only genuine evidence available is the report conducted by the initial assessment and that is what should be taken in to account when considering what action should be taken. They should not be basing their decision from desktop engineers looking at photographs on a computer.
The other really annoying point is the delay in Zenith arranging an engineer to assess the damages, or at the very least pursue liability from the third party - they done nothing. Had they have acted within a reasonable time, a full and proper estimate would have been completed - as it wasn't, they should rely on the only real evidence they have - that initial assessment.
I'd really like peoples opinions on what I should do
I would really appreciate some help regarding a predicament that we're in and any advice I can get would help me no end.
Back in February, my wife was involved in a car collision. A taxi driver pulled out and smashed in to the side of her work van.
She immediately contacted her insurance broker, Swinton, to register the claim. In the following days she received notification from her underwriter that a claims handler had been allocated to her, she then had contact from the claims handler to proceed.
On that call, my wife was asked to pay the £600 excess on her policy so that they could commence work on her van. As she didn't have that kind of money available and as the van was still in a drivable condition she asked if the work could be delayed until liability was accepted by the third party. This was agreed.
Couple of days later my wife received a call from Hertz Accident Support, acting on behalf of her insurance, to bring the van in for an estimate on the damages. The following week the van was inspected.
During this period Hertz Accident Support requested all witness statements, photographs and evidence so that they could pursue liability with the third party insurers. After a couple of weeks of back and forth, liability was accepted by them.
By this time we received outcome of the assessement and the damanges were so extensive that Hertz Accident Support deemed that the vehicle was a write off. As such they could no longer proceed with the claim and we had to contact Zenith (the underwriters) to proceed with the claim.
My wife then contacted Zenith and this is were the issues begain. Zenith had no knowledge of anything and had stated that because we had not been in contact with them they assumed we were not pursuing the claim.
Obviously confused and very upset my wife starting ringing around a multitude of companies to try and find out what was happening. It turned out that the broker (Swinton) had instructed Hertz to conduct an assesment on the van and Zenith had no knowledge of it. After lots and lots of calls, we managed to trace the person from Hertz who had dealt with our claim, who then forwarded all the details to Zenith.
By this two months had passed and Zenith now decide that, based on their assessment of two photographs of the van that we had taken, they would have repaired the vehicle and not written it off and so referred us back to their own garage to conduct another assessment. This was booked in for Tuesday just gone.
On Monday night, two yobs, joy riding in a stolen car smashed in to the van, in the exact same place, causing further damage. The two yobs, obviously not insured ran off.
Now, the van still went in for an assessment on Tuesday, Zenith instructed the garage to try and assess what damage was caused by the first incident against what damage was caused by the second incident. Obviously this is 'best guess'.
Zenith have now stated that based on the photographs provided, they're not prepared to write off the vehicle based on the first claim, and that as the second incident was an uninsured accident we would now have to pay the £600 excess and lose any NCD we had accrued. Not the best case scenario.
My argument is that the only genuine evidence available is the report conducted by the initial assessment and that is what should be taken in to account when considering what action should be taken. They should not be basing their decision from desktop engineers looking at photographs on a computer.
The other really annoying point is the delay in Zenith arranging an engineer to assess the damages, or at the very least pursue liability from the third party - they done nothing. Had they have acted within a reasonable time, a full and proper estimate would have been completed - as it wasn't, they should rely on the only real evidence they have - that initial assessment.
I'd really like peoples opinions on what I should do
0
Comments
-
If you are unhappy with your insurer then your avenue is a complaint.
And if you are unhappy with the response you can then escalate to the FOS for their adjudication at no cost to you.
Your problem arose because you were unable to pay your excess (which you did agree when taking out the policy), and your insurer is correct that the second claim is a fault claim and will mean paying your excess and losing some NCD (normally 2 years and none awarded for the current policy year)0 -
Thanks.
The insurance company agreed to delay the repair work whilst liability was being disputed but it wasn't agreed that they would just put a halt to the claim.
Not only that. Hertz continued to pursue liability and assess damages (on behalf of my insurance)
If we reject the second claim and base it purely on the first, it should be a write off anyway.0 -
The issue is going to be whether Zenith - the underwriter and the ones who pay out - will total loss the initial damage from the first incident.
They have gone by the photos provided and then had a inspection and estimate from their garage as to the repair cost of the vehicle from the first incident. If they're saying they would have repaired it following the first incident (which it sounds like they advise you of this before the second incident), then they would likely, now, have to cash settle as cash in lieu.
But surely your excess is due anyway, because you're claiming on your own policy, then you'd claim this back from the third party insurer as an uninsured loss.0 -
The broker's garage estimate wrote it off after the first collision and it then reverted back to the underwriter who hadn't even bothered to pursue anything whilst this was all happening.
Once it was reverted back they said they wanted to have another estimate taken but that didnt happen because the second incident occured before they could. (Which was their fault as they hadn't bothered to take anything forward).
Obviously second claim is a write off but i think the second claim should be void as it was deemed a write off after the first incident by Hertz, acting on behalf of my insurance.0 -
You stopped your claim as you couldn't pay your excess.
That is why the underwriter knew nothing about your claim!0 -
They did know about the claim. It was the underwriter who agreed to hold back repair work until liability was admitted0
-
Yes. You stopped the claim.
The underwriter knew nothing about the assessment that Swinton arranged via Hertz accident support! No doubt Swinton hoping for a bung for passing you to the AMC!0 -
No. We didn't stop the claim. We asked that repair work only be halted until the third party admitted liability. We were under the impression Zenith were taking this forward by instructing Hertz to conduct the assessment on their behalf.
Either way the issue is the fact that the only actual assessment writes off the vehicle but Zenith dispute this and are basing their findings on a few photographs0 -
......Either way the issue is the fact that the only actual assessment writes off the vehicle but Zenith dispute this and are basing their findings on a few photographs
The AMC assessment is irrelevant. Your insurer makes the decision on whether to repair or write off.
Why did Hertz give up on their involvement?? (Your op says they were acting for your insurer - are you sure about this? They are primarily a credit hire operation and unlikely to be instructed by zenith)0 -
They were instructed by Swinton who i took my insurance out with.
Zenith are saying because they were no longer able to offer a hire van because it was a total loss. They referred it back.0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 354.3K Banking & Borrowing
- 254.4K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 455.4K Spending & Discounts
- 247.3K Work, Benefits & Business
- 604K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 178.4K Life & Family
- 261.5K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.7K Read-Only Boards