Non-fault claim: should I use Auxillis or own insurer?

l.c.elliott

I was involved in an accident today, after providing details and circumstances to admiral my insurer I was told that I was not at fault. I was given either the option to go through Auxillis who would sort it for me or to go through Admiral but I'd have to pay excess and lose NCB but this would be refunded/reinstated once TP admitted liability.

I asked the difference between auxillis and admiral and was told I wouldn't have to pay excess or lose NCB with auxillis and wouldn't be able to pick and choose the garage so of course I picked auxillis as it clearly sounds the better option.

Then auxillis sends me a huge and scary looking credit hire agreement saying that if the costs couldn't be recovered by the TP after 49 weeks, id have to cover the costs! I've been told by my insurer that I'm not at fault but if TP doesn't admit liability could those costs eventually come back to bite me? A friend of a friend used to work with car insurers and he told me that auxillis usually try to chase the TP insurer who ignores them for weeks so the repair goes on for weeks and weeks...and can eventually go to court!!! He said avoid like the plague. I havent signed the auxillis credit agreement yet as I'm unsure what to do.

Obviously my insurer admiral have said as far as they're aware, im not at fault. I dont know if the TP has admitted liability yet? Is there any way I could find out if he has? Even though I verbally told admiral I would go with auxillis, could I then change my mind and go down the route of paying excess and losing NCB with admiral as I havent signed anything yet with auxillis? What are the chances of me getting my excess and NCB back if I do this route? Will admiral fight my corner if TP won't admit liability? He didn't give way to me on a roundabout that I had already entered so its clear as day that he is at fault.

Any advice welcome, TIA

daveyjp

You are right to be wary of what I know from experience can be insurance claim (mis) management companies.

Roundabout claims typically end up 50:50, unless you have dash cam or good third party evidence.  If your car is still roadworthy sort out liability before arranging repairs.  

If not avoid credit hire.

l.c.elliott

daveyjp said:

You are right to be wary of what I know from experience can be insurance claim (mis) management companies.

Roundabout claims typically end up 50:50, unless you have dash cam or good third party evidence.  If your car is still roadworthy sort out liability before arranging repairs.  

If not avoid credit hire.

Yeh I heard about the 50:50 rule, annoying as hell as I was already on the roundabout so no way my fault and the admiral employee said she could tell by the damage how his car had gone into mine so he should be at fault. But hey ho the world is never fair is it.

Car is still road worthy I *think* unless there is something nasty hiding underneath the front bumper where the visible damage is. So you think I shouldn't sign the agreement with auxillis or go down the route with admiral until liability is established? Do you reckon TP would have admitted liability or not by now with their insurance company? Wondering if its worth me calling in the morning to check.

l.c.elliott

daveyjp said:  If your car is still roadworthy sort out liability before arranging repairs.  

If not avoid credit hire.

Also are you saying here that if my car is roadworthy (which i think it is), I could entertain the credit hire option?

missile

Do not use auxillis. They inflate the claim. You have a responsibility to limit your costs. Even if 3rd party do admit liability, if costs are excessive, they can challenge this and you may be liable.

daveyjp

l.c.elliott said:

daveyjp said:  If your car is still roadworthy sort out liability before arranging repairs.  

If not avoid credit hire.

Also are you saying here that if my car is roadworthy (which i think it is), I could entertain the credit hire option?

No.  Keep driving it until liability is sorted.

RBN20

Working in car insurance I do agree that roundabout claims often settle 50/50 but that’s in the case of changing lanes on a roundabout. If someone hasn’t given way when entering a roundabout to someone already on the roundabout to their right, then the person entering the roundabout would be at fault, as they have a greater duty of care. 

As said above, avoid auxillis, they inflate costs and drag out repairs. 

If you claim through admiral they may not pursue the liability for you until your repairs are underway, as if no repairs are being done/being paid for they have no outlay to pursue, so it is not worth their time chasing. 

There is also the third option of claiming through the third party insurer if you know who they are. You may find they call you to offer services anyway

l.c.elliott

RBN20 said:

If you claim through admiral they may not pursue the liability for you until your repairs are underway, as if no repairs are being done/being paid for they have no outlay to pursue, so it is not worth their time chasing. 

So what you're saying is, I would start off my claim through admiral, paying the excess and surrendering my no claims bonus, then when repairs are done, admiral pursue liability through the TP insurer? How likely is it that admiral will bother to chase liability from them if I've already paid? Would they still fight my corner?

l.c.elliott

RBN20 said:

There is also the third option of claiming through the third party insurer if you know who they are. You may find they call you to offer services anyway

I read about this option but apparently I wouldnt have protection if something went wrong and the ombudsman wouldn't support me?

RBN20

l.c.elliott said:

RBN20 said:

If you claim through admiral they may not pursue the liability for you until your repairs are underway, as if no repairs are being done/being paid for they have no outlay to pursue, so it is not worth their time chasing. 

So what you're saying is, I would start off my claim through admiral, paying the excess and surrendering my no claims bonus, then when repairs are done, admiral pursue liability through the TP insurer? How likely is it that admiral will bother to chase liability from them if I've already paid? Would they still fight my corner?

It would be in admirals best interest to still pursue liability for you, as they will recover their costs along with your excess etc. They won’t want to be out of pocket for a non fault claim, just like you don’t want to be. 

With the claiming through TPI, you are correct that you don’t have rights to use the ombudsman as you’re not technically one of their customers, so if you did have a complaint with them they would deal in house and if you’re not happy with the outcome there’s no escalation from there. 

There’s pros and cons to whichever way you go. 

I claimed through a TPI once but used my own repairer who I knew and trusted to try and lessen the chances of any complaint arising from poor repairs etc. Their approved repairer may have been fine but you never know 

Were_Doomed

RBN20 said:

l.c.elliott said:

RBN20 said:

If you claim through admiral they may not pursue the liability for you until your repairs are underway, as if no repairs are being done/being paid for they have no outlay to pursue, so it is not worth their time chasing. 

So what you're saying is, I would start off my claim through admiral, paying the excess and surrendering my no claims bonus, then when repairs are done, admiral pursue liability through the TP insurer? How likely is it that admiral will bother to chase liability from them if I've already paid? Would they still fight my corner?

With the claiming through TPI, you are correct that you don’t have rights to use the ombudsman as you’re not technically one of their customers, so if you did have a complaint with them they would deal in house and if you’re not happy with the outcome there’s no escalation from there. 

There's always MCOL / County Court as the last line of resort.