Car Insurance - Not updated address

AdrianC

I didn't realise they were the same poster...

DoaM

atrixblue.-MFR-. wrote: »

Did you miss the update where the insurer is now known and the cement site had admitted fault.

No I didn't - that's how the TP insurer is known.

[Deleted User]

Tell Admiral that their first offer is not enough and that you need more to put you back in the same position. I thought that was the general rule - never accept the first offer.

compingqueenjrm

UPDATE.

Thanks again dacouch for pointing me in the direction of the above act.

I went back to Admiral pointing out that this is now a non-fault claim, as the hit & run driver was eventually located, and therefore as the costs will be recovered in full from the fault party we didn't feel it fair for the claim to be settled 'proportionately'. I picked apart the above act and said that I didn't actually feel the FOS would support this decision as it wouldn't be classed as 'important' - therefore they wouldn't be able to void the policy, settle proportionately or apply additional terms to the policy.

They came back this morning saying they will just be charging the difference in premium cost.

Wahoo! :beer:

dacouch

Great news.

Thanks for the update, good to see a piece of law achieving it's intended result