Should learner driver make a claim

Dannnny

My 17 year old child is currently learning to drive. Whilst on a lesson, they had just completed a parallel parking maneuver and was discussing how they had done with the instructor when a vehicle reversed from off-road parking into the left side of the learner car. The third party has admitted total liability.
My query is that although my child is being told that they can claim for the shock and mild discomfort they suffered, I'm worried that as and when they get a car they will have to declare the claim and this will increase an already high insurance premium.
Do they claim or not bother?

wongataa

I wouldn't bother for claiming compensation for shock from a likely low speed collision. If they weren't seriously hurt don't bother. Spurious compensation claims drive everyone's premiums up.

[Deleted User]

They wouldn't be making a claim on their own insurance, but on the third party's.

They would need to declare the accident in any case.

If their suffering is such that they need compensation to help their recovery, then they should pursue it. If not, and there's no loss, then they should put it behind them and move (or drive) on.

Dannnny

Sorry can't reply at the mo, busy graftin'

Dannnny

Thanks guys for your replies. No one was seriously hurt. Instructor and my child both had a minor jarring to the neck which they both self-medicated for, plus the shock (especially for my child on a driving lesson). Now, this is where it gets interesting, the claims handler (booooo) has stated that those conditions can be claimed for and the instructors claim had already been accepted and that my child's "pot" is ready to be claimed. This could go someway to paying for their first ever insurance, but I'm concerned that this claim would push an already high premium even higher for the next 5 years

MovingForwards

What claims handler? From the actual third party's insurance company or an ambulance chasing company?

There is no pot as an injury cannot be quantified until assessed and that includes age, sex, injury, recovery time or projected recovery time.

The accident will have to be declared, even though it was a non-fault one.

If your son wants to pursue a PI claim then does he have any medical evidence? See his GP? Attend hospital? Have receipts for the self-medicated / self-treated items?

Dangermac

Dannnny wrote: »

Thanks guys for your replies. No one was seriously hurt. Instructor and my child both had a minor jarring to the neck which they both self-medicated for, plus the shock (especially for my child on a driving lesson). Now, this is where it gets interesting, the claims handler (booooo) has stated that those conditions can be claimed for and the instructors claim had already been accepted and that my child's "pot" is ready to be claimed. This could go someway to paying for their first ever insurance, but I'm concerned that this claim would push an already high premium even higher for the next 5 years

lol - that's funny !!

Socajam

The boundaries for greed are endless these days; now that PPI is no more, other ways need to be found.

NCC-1701

There is no 'pot' of money. Insurance companies are wise to false/inflated claims of injury. They'll have a good idea by the damage done to the vehicle. If you think car insurance for a 17 year old is expensive now...wait to you see how much it is if they decide the claim is false.

Dannnny

Thanks to all that offered advice (and those that didn't!). Looks like my original concerns weren't unfounded. Though the £2k was tempting it'll just end up as a millstone for the next 5 years.

MovingForwards

Your kid is probably facing higher premiums due to the non-fault accident, regardless of whether they claim or not.