Advice needed - Insurer asking me to sign a Consent and Assignment Form

Knapper

Would appreciate any advice

A few years ago, in March 2017 I was rear ended at a roundabout. I was insured by Swiftcover at the time and put in a claim. I sent them dashcam footage and they immediately restored my NCB, waived excess and could see I was not at fault, and promptly directed me to a garage which fixed my rear bumper and other bits and that was that. Pretty seamless.

I thought that was the end of the matter. Simple claim, other driver at fault for rear-ending, job done.

Then a year later in May 2018 a chap from AXA (which I believe Swift is part of) emailed me with a form to complete entitled "RTA Insurer Consent And Assignment Form".

This, if I were to sign it, appeared to establish a contract between me and some 3rd party company called CISGIL (CIS General Insurance Limited). I am attaching a copy below.

Turns out CISGIL is the Cooperative's Insurance Company and is the insurer of the other driver's vehicle.   CISGIL are not indemnifying the driver, I suspect it was a company car and he was not named on the policy or something similar.

Either way I couldn't see why I should have anything remotely to do with the other driver's insurance company.  My insurance was with Swiftcover and they dealt with my claim.

Obviously, Swiftcover/Axa are struggling to reclaim their costs because the other insurer won't pay out unless they can themselves take the driver to court or otherwise get payment from them for the damages.

So CISGIL have, through my insurer AXA, asked me to sign the RTA Consent And Assignment Form below.

I'm nervous of signing anything I don't really understand and again can't see why I should have any part in AXA's internal processes for dealing with the 3rd party's insurer.

But clearly AXA can't get their costs back unless CISGIL can proceed with whatever actions they want to take and that apparently needs me to sign this form.   Wondering if this is normal procedure or whether I'm being given the runaround for whatever reason.  Anyone else suffered this?

The accident happened in March 2017 and their first request for me to sign this form was a year later in 2018.   At the time I emailed back asking them to explain why they were asking me to sign the form and they never got back to me.   Now 4 years later, this December just gone, the same guy from AXA has again emailed me and asked me to sign the form.

Just so unsure what to do and what the implications are for me if I do sign it

For clarification, the rear-ending was at relatively low speed, no-one was hurt and our only claim was to get the car fixed which happened pretty quickly and was little more than a new bumper and heat shield underneath.

Here's the form, any advice welcomed:

RTA Insurer Consent and Assignment Form

This Conditional Assignment is made the ……….…..……………………………….….day of 2016 between………..……………………………………………………………………. hereinafter referred to as ‘the Claimant’) and CIS General Insurance Limited, whose registered office is at Miller Street, Manchester M60 0AL (hereinafter referred to simply as “CISGIL”).

WHEREAS

(a) a collision occurred on …………………..……... at or near ………………………... (hereinafter referred to as “the collision”).

(b) the Claimant establishes that he or she has suffered damage to property and/or bodily injury caused by or arising out of the collision (hereinafter referred to as “the damage to property and/or bodily injury”), brief details of which are set out in the claim form.

(c) CISGIL’s investigations establish that:

(i) the person(s) named by you in the claim form as the driver you considered responsible (hereinafter referred to as the Defendant) is liable to the Claimant in respect of the damage to property and/or bodily injury,

(ii) the liability is a relevant liability as defined in paragraph 6 below,

(iii) there is no insurer (or no insurer whose identity can be ascertained) who is obliged to indemnify the Defendant in respect of this liability,

(iv) under the provisions of Part VI of the Road Traffic Act 1988, the Insurer will become liable to satisfy a judgment obtained against the Defendant.

IT IS AGREED AS FOLLOWS:

PAYMENT

1. The Claimant will accept a payment to be agreed or ordered. Save as provided in paragraph 5 hereof this payment will be made and accepted in full and final satisfaction of all claims whatsoever which the Claimant may have or acquire against CISGIL in respect of the damage to property and/or bodily injury caused by or arising out of the collision and any obligation to satisfy any judgment obtained in respect thereof. Insofar as the payment received is an interim payment on account, this assignment shall only operate as fully effective either once the full and final settlement/award is agreed/ordered or the claim is not pursued further such that the interim payment stands as the final award.

ASSIGNMENT

2.1 Subject to receipt of the aforementioned payment in full and final settlement, this assignment ceases to be conditional and becomes fully effective such that the Claimant assigns to CISGIL absolutely, all rights of action (other than in contract) of the Claimant against the Defendant, or any other person who may be discovered to have a liability (including any owner of a vehicle involved in the collision who caused or permitted the vehicle to be driven without insurance), in respect of the damage to property and/or bodily injury caused by or arising out of the collision.

2.2 Accordingly CISGIL shall be free, but not obliged to make claims and take legal proceedings in its own name against the Defendant or other persons referred to in 2.1 above. The costs of such claims or legal proceedings shall be borne by CISGIL. The following provisions operate only after settlement is made in full and final settlement and the assignment is fully effective.

CONSENT TO MAKE CLAIMS AND TAKE PROCEEDINGS IN THE NAME OF THE CLAIMANT

3.1 Additionally the Claimant irrevocably agrees to permit CISGIL to make claims and take or continue legal proceedings in the name of the Claimant. Subject to paragraph 5 hereof the benefit of such proceedings shall be the property of CISGIL absolutely.

3.2 The costs of such claims and legal proceedings shall be borne by CISGIL and CISGIL agrees to indemnify the Claimant against any and all orders for costs which may be made against the Claimant.

INFORMATION AND ASSISTANCE

4.1 The Claimant undertakes to give CISGIL or its agents all information and reasonable assistance in his/her power, to enable CISGIL to make any claim or prosecute any proceedings as referred to in paragraphs 2 and 3 above.

4.2 Without prejudice to the generality of the foregoing the Claimant undertakes to make available to CISGIL or its agents all witness statements, expert reports and other evidence in whatever form in his/her possession or power or in the possession or power of his/her solicitors or other agents (upon CISGIL undertaking to pay the reasonable costs of such solicitors or other agents in supplying such information) which may enable or facilitate CISGIL to make any such claim or to prosecute any such proceedings.

4.3 The Claimant further undertakes, if so requested by CISGIL or its agents to provide a witness statement setting out any relevant evidence and give evidence in legal proceedings (upon CISGIL undertaking to pay the reasonable expenses incurred in so doing).

RECOVERIES

5. If CISGIL is successful in recovering any sum or sums from the Defendant and/or other persons referred to in Paragraph 2.1 or 3.1 above then if and insofar as the same exceeds the sum paid to the Claimant (after deducting all costs and expenses incurred by CISGIL or its agents in effecting such recovery) CISGIL will pay to the Claimant a sum equal to the balance of such excess up to but not exceeding the applicable excess referred to in paragraph 1 above.

DEFINITIONS

6. In this Assignment and Agreement-

“contract of insurance” means a policy of insurance or a security;

“insurer” includes the giver of a security;

“relevant liability” means a liability in respect of which a policy of insurance must insure a person in order to comply with Part VI of the Road Traffic Act 1988;

“collision” includes two or more causally related accidents or incidents.

SIGNED …………………………………………………………. Dated ……………………………………….

Claimant

SIGNED …………………………………………………………. Dated ……………………………………….

For and on behalf of CISGIL

AdrianC

This is all perfectly normal.

You were in the collision, the insurer wasn't.
The claim is between you and the other driver. Your insurer are acting on your behalf, but need you to sign the paperwork to do so.

If you don't sign it, they can't act, they won't get paid, and they'll come back to you because your actions have stopped the normal process of the claim.

Ectophile

AdrianC said:

This is all perfectly normal.

You were in the collision, the insurer wasn't.
The claim is between you and the other driver. Your insurer are acting on your behalf, but need you to sign the paperwork to do so.

If you don't sign it, they can't act, they won't get paid, and they'll come back to you because your actions have stopped the normal process of the claim.

That's not the way I read it.  See the "WHEREAS" section, (c) (iii).

To me, CISGIL are trying to argue that they didn't actually insure the Defendent (presumably because of some un-stated technicality).  But that they are willing to pay out, on the condition that the Claimant will help to get the money back of the Defendent.

It's complicated.  Ideally, it's a "get legal advice" situation, but I appreciate that will cost money and may not actually give anything in return.

AdrianC

They can't get out of covering their side - they're insurer of record at MID. What they can do is refuse to help the other driver, and hand him the bill at the end of the day. But that's not the OP's problem.

Mickey666

Ectophile said:

AdrianC said:

This is all perfectly normal.

You were in the collision, the insurer wasn't.
The claim is between you and the other driver. Your insurer are acting on your behalf, but need you to sign the paperwork to do so.

If you don't sign it, they can't act, they won't get paid, and they'll come back to you because your actions have stopped the normal process of the claim.

That's not the way I read it.  See the "WHEREAS" section, (c) (iii).

To me, CISGIL are trying to argue that they didn't actually insure the Defendent (presumably because of some un-stated technicality).  But that they are willing to pay out, on the condition that the Claimant will help to get the money back of the Defendent.

It's complicated.  Ideally, it's a "get legal advice" situation, but I appreciate that will cost money and may not actually give anything in return.

But section (c) (i) defines the other driver as the defendant:
(i) the person(s) named by you in the claim form as the driver you considered responsible (hereinafter referred to as the Defendant) is liable to the Claimant in respect of the damage to property and/or bodily injury,

I don't see why the OP should have to 'assign' anything to anyone.    They were insured by Swiftcover and their claim was dealt with years ago.  The (possible) fact that the 3rd party that caused the accident was not insured can hardly be of concern to the OP. 

 If anything, because Swiftcover represented the OP in this matter, any correspondence regarding the claim should just be passed on to Swiftcover to deal with.

ciderboy2009

The way I look at it is this.

The OP has a right to issue a claim against the other driver (the defendant).

The insurance company are willing to pay for the costs of the accident (albeit the OP has already been paid) but, in order to make their life a bit easier, they want the OP to assign the right to make a claim against the defendant to them so they have a better "cause of action" than they currently have.

OP - you should sign the form and send it back.  There is no valid reason for you not to do so and you may be in breach of your insurance policy (even though it's expired) if you don't - they normally have a clause where you agree to assist as required for them to get their money back.

Mickey666

ciderboy2009 said:

The way I look at it is this.

The OP has a right to issue a claim against the other driver (the defendant).

The insurance company are willing to pay for the costs of the accident (albeit the OP has already been paid) but, in order to make their life a bit easier, they want the OP to assign the right to make a claim against the defendant to them so they have a better "cause of action" than they currently have.

OP - you should sign the form and send it back.  There is no valid reason for you not to do so and you may be in breach of your insurance policy (even though it's expired) if you don't - they normally have a clause where you agree to assist as required for them to get their money back.

Er, yes, but the OP has ALREADY done all of that and their claim was agreed and dealt with nearly FOUR YEARS AGO!

So why is all this being dragged up four years later?  

m0bov

OP do you have legal cover with you current insurance or maybe house insurance? Ask them for advice?

Knapper

Mickey666 said:
 If anything, because Swiftcover represented the OP in this matter, any correspondence regarding the claim should just be passed on to Swiftcover to deal with.

To clarify, this agreement I am being asked to sign was sent by CISGIL to Swiftcover who then sent it to me.

This is what AXA said in the email they sent me in Dec:

"As per your below email the attached letter was received from  third party insurer who are the insurer of fault driver.
They are not indemnifying their client, hence they send us assignment & agreement form to be signed by you.
Once we receive signed form from your side will pass it to third party insurer to recover our outlay cost.
Without your signature third party insurer will not reimburse our outlay cost."

This is clearly a case of the other driver not being insured.    Again I don't see why any of this should be my issue.  When we take out insurance it's to ensure we are protected and covered regardless of the other driver.  Uninsured driving is of course on the increase and we're all paying increased premiums as a result.

I think I can see why CISGIL want me to sign this.  If after 4 years they haven't been able to recover monies from the other driver then they will likely have to go down the court route and then you kind of envisage that it will end up like one of those cases on "Can't Pay We'll Take It Away".

If I read the agreement right, CISGIL want assurance from me that I won't personally go looking for damages myself.  In other words they'll go to court and put the effort in for themselves provided I agree to assign everything over to them.

ciderboy2009

Mickey666 said:

ciderboy2009 said:

The way I look at it is this.

The OP has a right to issue a claim against the other driver (the defendant).

The insurance company are willing to pay for the costs of the accident (albeit the OP has already been paid) but, in order to make their life a bit easier, they want the OP to assign the right to make a claim against the defendant to them so they have a better "cause of action" than they currently have.

OP - you should sign the form and send it back.  There is no valid reason for you not to do so and you may be in breach of your insurance policy (even though it's expired) if you don't - they normally have a clause where you agree to assist as required for them to get their money back.

Er, yes, but the OP has ALREADY done all of that and their claim was agreed and dealt with nearly FOUR YEARS AGO!

So why is all this being dragged up four years later?  

This is all being dragged up again as the insurance company that paid out the OP wants to get their money back from the other driver. If the insurance company have to issue a claim they haven't got much longer to do so (statute of limitations etc) so they want to make sure that everything is ready.

ciderboy2009

Knapper said:

Mickey666 said:
 If anything, because Swiftcover represented the OP in this matter, any correspondence regarding the claim should just be passed on to Swiftcover to deal with.

To clarify, this agreement I am being asked to sign was sent by CISGIL to Swiftcover who then sent it to me.

This is what AXA said in the email they sent me in Dec:

"As per your below email the attached letter was received from  third party insurer who are the insurer of fault driver.
They are not indemnifying their client, hence they send us assignment & agreement form to be signed by you.
Once we receive signed form from your side will pass it to third party insurer to recover our outlay cost.
Without your signature third party insurer will not reimburse our outlay cost."

This is clearly a case of the other driver not being insured.    Again I don't see why any of this should be my issue.  When we take out insurance it's to ensure we are protected and covered regardless of the other driver.  Uninsured driving is of course on the increase and we're all paying increased premiums as a result.

I think I can see why CISGIL want me to sign this.  If after 4 years they haven't been able to recover monies from the other driver then they will likely have to go down the court route and then you kind of envisage that it will end up like one of those cases on "Can't Pay We'll Take It Away".

If I read the agreement right, CISGIL want assurance from me that I won't personally go looking for damages myself.  In other words they'll go to court and put the effort in for themselves provided I agree to assign everything over to them.

CISGIL have paid you already for your damages as required by law - probably as the car was insured by them and they are required to pay out to third parties.

For whatever reason they are refusing to indemnify the driver - this could have been because they weren't named on the policy, they lied when purchasing the insurance or a multitude of other reasons.  However, this isn't your problem - it's theirs.

I would imagine that they have made a mistake and they should have got you to sign this before they actually paid out your damages/repairs.  All it is is a form that will be included in the court bundle to make it clear that you won't be issuing a claim against the other driver and are allowing them to do so on your behalf.

Sign it and you'll more than likely never hear from them again - this would have also been the case when you initially received it.