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!
false car insurance claim made against me
Comments
-
I feel very strong about being false accused against. Perhaps I am not know how the insurance industry works, but this sounds to me to be too sluggish.
But the world doesn't revolve around what lumixldn thinks.
The other party thinks and believes an incident occurred by your car, they are entitled to think that or more so they have good reason to believe that, it is not you who will adjudicate the episode.0 -
I hear what you said, I believe the role of the underwriter at least need to exam the evidence before paying out.But the world doesn't revolve around what lumixldn thinks.
The other party thinks and believes an incident occurred by your car, they are entitled to think that or more so they have good reason to believe that, it is not you who will adjudicate the episode.
As a customer and policy holder, I have the rights to complaint or take actions against it, should who adjudicate the episode is not sufficiently fair.0 -
I hear what you said, I believe the role of the underwriter at least need to exam the evidence before paying out.
That is not your call, they have T&Cs and business policy.
They could examine the footage, however...…. the footage could be from anywhere at anytime.
The cost to administer may outweigh the cost to settle.0 -
That is not your call, they have T&Cs and business policy.
They could examine the footage, however...…. the footage could be from anywhere at anytime.
The cost to administer may outweigh the cost to settle.
It is not the underwriter'final call either, it is a 2 party agreement and there are complaint procedure or regulators to protect on that.
I get the economic /cost point of view, that is why I think the insurers will be sluggish.
The dashcam footage have time GPS location, speed meter on it cover the full day. I guess it is more creditable source than just some paint transfer photos. If the underwriter didn't exam those, it is a neglected act which I beliece affect my consumer rights.0 -
It is not the underwriter'final call either, it is a 2 party agreement and there are complaint procedure or regulators to protect on that.
I get the economic /cost point of view, that is why I think the insurers will be sluggish.
The dashcam footage have time GPS location, speed meter on it cover the full day. I guess it is more creditable source than just some paint transfer photos. If the underwriter didn't exam those, it is a neglected act which I beliece affect my consumer rights.
It is the underwriter's final call .
The footage could actually harm your defence as it may well place you in the locality of where the claim incident occurred. Then along with the other evidence...…..0 -
-
Oh, yes i hope the world does not revolve what you think now.
Trouble is you want to apply emotion rather than logic.
The other party didn't just pluck your car out of the air to raise a claim, you perhaps have more chance of winning the lotto.
Your car wasn't there when he parked up but was once the owner had returned, for whatever reason he observed some fresh damage that wasn't there when he parked up, the time difference between your arrival to his departure, leads him to believe it was your vehicle and no other that caused the damage, he has left you a note before action. Perhaps if you hadn't responded to the note then he may have considered it may have been another car in that spot .0 -
Trouble is you want to apply emotion rather than logic.
The other party didn't just pluck your car out of the air to raise a claim, you perhaps have more chance of winning the lotto.
Your car wasn't there when he parked up but was once the owner had returned, for whatever reason he observed some fresh damage that wasn't there when he parked up, the time difference between your arrival to his departure, leads him to believe it was your vehicle and no other that caused the damage, he has left you a note before action. Perhaps if you hadn't responded to the note then he may have considered it may have been another car in that spot .
I can see ur logic which is sort of biased, if I didn't respond to the call then I won't be pick? That does not seem logical at all; I merely call back to tell it wasn't me.
Is it the practice of leaving note to assume at fault vehicles not considered as fishing letters?0 -
I can see ur logic which is sort of biased, if I didn't respond to the call then I won't be pick? That does not seem logical at all; I merely call back to tell it wasn't me.
Is it the practice of leaving note to assume at fault vehicles not considered as fishing letters?
Phishing only works if the recipient responds to it.
Where is the bias?
If an old lady gets robbed locally to you, do you ring the Police to tell them it wasn't you?
0 -
What a logic! If the old lady is a stranger, and if the old lady knock my window said it was me.... I will talk to understand what she is talking about and then deny it.Phishing only works if the recipient responds to it.
Where is the bias?
If an old lady gets robbed locally to you, do you ring the Police to tell them it wasn't you?0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 352K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.5K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 454.2K Spending & Discounts
- 245K Work, Benefits & Business
- 600.6K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177.4K Life & Family
- 258.8K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.2K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.6K Read-Only Boards