Car insurance: 'At fault because no other party identified'?

ditty1234

HI
I am basically furious as on the 21 of January I was driving home during rush hour in the dark and a truck dropped a ladder on to the road and under my car. As there was a lot of traffic I had no chance to avoid it. The truck didn't stop, neither did anybody else. I called the emergency services, the police and the insurance company but there is no cctv, no witnesses, just me and a mashed up car in a parking lot, as I managed to drive the car off a busy dual carriage way with out a hard shoulder.

Apart from being in chock, my car being written off, I am now left with a fault on my car insurance that says that I am at fault for hitting an immobile object. This will cost me hundreds, probably thousands, and more than what I got back from my old car.

Any ideas for how to complain over this situation, as I know it is industry standard, but I still find it unacceptable and unfair!
:mad::mad:

Comms69

Complain to who exactly?


This is one of the risks of driving

jimbo6977

Your MP.


(added to meet min length)

Tom99

Did you keep the ladder as evidence?

foxy-stoat

ditty1234 wrote: »

Any ideas for how to complain over this situation, as I know it is industry standard, but I still find it unacceptable and unfair!
:mad::mad:

Its been that way from the start - nothing new.

Will it really cost you thousands of pounds because your car is written off and you now have an at fault claim?

Only thing you can do is buy a dash cam for the future - it may not of saved you this time but it may save you in the future.

spadoosh

This is exactly what you pay insurance for.

Imagine you hit a deer instead if it makes you feel better but the end result is the same, an unavoidable accident in which you will have to claim on your insurance if you wish to be recompensed for the damage to your vehicle.

Accidents are typically frustrating you can either choose to be more frustrated at a series of unfortunate events or choose to move on and accept there are times in life when you lose out. The latter is generally better for your health and those around you.

Mercdriver

You need to look beyond the term 'at fault'. It is misleading. The insurance company are not necessarily describing you as at fault. It is simply that they cannot claim from the third party, so they have had to pay out.

foxy-stoat

Mercdriver wrote: »

You need to look beyond the term 'at fault'. It is misleading. The insurance company are not necessarily describing you as at fault. It is simply that they cannot claim from the third party, so they have had to pay out.

Thats why they ask, any accidents or losses - you have had a loss not an accident.

Mercdriver

foxy-stoat wrote: »

Thats why they ask, any accidents or losses - you have had a loss not an accident.

I get that- but people do get bogged down by the concept of 'at fault' hence the reason for my post

ditty1234

Yep kept a photo of ladder!

Comms69

ditty1234 wrote: »

Yep kept a photo of ladder!

I think that was a joke post...