Claiming against two seperate accidents

Quentin

Swinton are a broker not an insurer!

Hertz would not have been acting on behalf of zenith

ajnicho

Well we know that now. Not at the time.

Quentin

So you see the issue? Your insurer played no part in the assessment you now want them to adhere to. (When you halted your claim, your insurer had no reason to pursue the third party, and Hertz Accident Support for whatever reason didn't pursue the third party to admit liability - maybe because you didn't require a credit hire van!!) Swinton look to have let you down by not explaining the role of the AMC when you halted the claim initially


The second incident with the yobs will be a fault claim as they are saying, with your excess payable and loss of NCD.


Your avenue to dispute all this is a complaint (as outlined in #2)

ajnicho

Obviously I've not explained myself....

I never halted any claim. It was agreed that we could delay the repairs on the van until liability was admitted, which Zenith were supposedly pursuing.

But yet, my wife was a victim of two accidents and a totally confusing insurance system yet ends up losing out. It seems wrong to me.

When you have an accident repair company calling on behalf of our insurance, you expect it is being taken forward.

Retrogamer

Not able to or not willing to pay the excess and asking them to delay the repairs is the same as stopping the claim

ajnicho

So why have Zenith continued to seek liability and booked my car in for two estimations yet I still haven't paid any excess. Surely it would still be on hold...?

It's because it was agreed that they would still continue to pursue it right at the beginning. Zenith agreed to that.

Quentin

As previously posted.

Zenith didn't " continue to seek liability", and didn't book your car in for the original quote

Swinton instructed the AMC to do this. (After you were unable/unwilling to pay your excess). The AMC/credit hire company were acting on your behalf, not your insurers.

As far as Zenith were concerned you did halt your claim with them.

You said earlier that the AMC pulled out because they couldn't continue after the second incident (that was because that incident was a fault claim - so no third party for them to claim back the cost of a credit hire vehicle.

ajnicho

But Zenith are pursuing it now and we still haven't paid any excess

And I didn't say they pulled out because of the second incident. They pulled out prior to that and Zenith continued with it.

Quentin

In your op you did say zenith have now pointed out the second claim is a fault claim and you will lose ncd and pay your excess.

If the vehicle is now a write off then maybe this excess could be deducted from the settlement??

FutureGirl

You pay your excess towards your own claim for damage. So when it comes to repairing your vehicle, or issuing payment for total loss, that is when the excess is due. You will usually pay it direct to the garage repairing your vehicle before they will release it, or the insurer will deduct it from the cash settlement.

You don't pay your excess for the insurer to investigate liability.

Zenith will continue to deal with liability whether you pay your excess or not, as they will need to agree who is liable with the other insurer whether you claim or not.