Car insurer claiming against another insurer in my name

GroceryStore

A small damage caused to my car by a bus, so small we were going to get it sorted ourselves until the bus company's insurer admitted liability, was paid for by my insurer (based on bus company's insurer admitting liability). Apparently the other insurer never paid my own insurer. So my insurer wants to claim in court against the other insurer. But they want to do it in my name - i.e. it would be me claiming in court against the bus company's insurer. This makes no sense to me since the money isn't owed to me, it is owed to my insurer. Also I don't want to have a claim in court in my name. 
Are they allowed to do this? It doesn't event make sense. My insurer is owed the money, not me. I am owed no money.

Car_54

You read your policy, you will find that they have the right to claim in your name.

The reason it is in your name is that it is you who who have the claim against the bus driver, and so his insurer.

GroceryStore

Yes, I assume that was the case. But in this case, my own insurer already paid the claim. It is them who is owed the money. In legal terms, the other insurer owes me no money. They owe my insurer money. Surely in legal terms, it is my insurer who should claim the money back, not me. How can the court  order the money to be paid to me when I am owed no money?

452

GroceryStore said:

Yes, I assume that was the case. But in this case, my own insurer already paid the claim. It is them who is owed the money. In legal terms, the other insurer owes me no money. They owe my insurer money. Surely in legal terms, it is my insurer who should claim the money back, not me. How can the court  order the money to be paid to me when I am owed no money?

You do realise that until your insurance company recover their money this will be counted as an at fault claim on your record?

AdrianC

GroceryStore said:

A small damage caused to my car by a bus, so small we were going to get it sorted ourselves until the bus company's insurer admitted liability, was paid for by my insurer (based on bus company's insurer admitting liability). Apparently the other insurer never paid my own insurer. So my insurer wants to claim in court against the other insurer. But they want to do it in my name - i.e. it would be me claiming in court against the bus company's insurer. This makes no sense to me since the money isn't owed to me, it is owed to my insurer. Also I don't want to have a claim in court in my name. 
Are they allowed to do this? It doesn't event make sense. My insurer is owed the money, not me. I am owed no money.

Yep, that's the way it works.

Why don't you want the claim in your name? The debt is because of your incident.

GroceryStore

No,. the other insurance company already admitted liability. I have a text from my own insurer stating that fact. It was a non-fault claim and I didn't have to pay the excess.

GroceryStore

The reason it is wrong to claim in my name is that I only proceeded with the claim because my insurance company sent me a text stating that the bus company's insurer had admitted full liability. I had to use the insurer's repair garage, which was obviously a lot more expensive than the little bodyshop I would have taken my car to. They have even chosen to file the claim in a court close to my house. I suspect this is because I may have to attend the court because the claim is in my name. But I am not owed any money! The insurer should surely claim directly against the other insurer. The bus driver is not being claimed against, so why do I have be involved. We should both be represented by our insurers. I am really worried about having to go to court for a claim I don't even want to submit - it is coronavirus pandemic and I am not even leaving the house to go to the shops. My son has bad asthma. I am self-employed and I would lose more in lost earnings than the original cost to fix the tiny damage at the bodyshop of my own choosing.

GroceryStore

Are my insurers doing it this way because it is below £1000, so can only be claimed in a small claims court?

GroceryStore

actually my insurers are claiming in the County Court

GrumpyDil

 They are not claiming a debt but will be claiming that the bus company's driver caused the accident and hence the bus company are liable for any damages.  If you choose not to agree to going to court they will record this as a fault accident and charge you any excess. 

Courts are not operating normally at the moment and you will not be seeing the inside of a court for some time yet, if at all.

GroceryStore

I heard that courts were operating as normal throughout this. The bus driver's insurer already admitted full liability. That does not need to be proven.
How can it then be recorded as my fault if the bus driver and his insurer have already admitted liability?