Mum seems to have contacted a third party insurance company rather than Churchill

Flachi10

Hi, 

My mum was involved in a car accident in September and somehow ended up going through to a company called Stocalfe Response despite calling the Churchill Claims number from her insurance policy. I wasn't aware of this situation until she told me about it yesterday, but here's the situation...

She thought she'd called Churchill and logged the incident. A couple of weeks later, Stocalfe call her and tell her they need pictures of the damage. She sends the pictures, they review and say the car cannot be driven. They tell her they'll collect and provide a car for her, she believes this is a courtesy car as per her insurance policy but it's a hire car. Her car is collected and repaired over the period of a couple of weeks and she gets it back and swaps back the hire car.

Anyway, after a little while, Stocalfe inform her that, whilst the person who hit her in the accident has accepted liability for the accident, Allianz the insurer are rejecting the claim for the hire car, a cost of approx £2.5k.

Stocalfe have been going back and forth with her on this, telling her that Allianz are typically hard to get money out of etc etc. She's now been sent a County Court witness liability statement in which Stocalfe have put a lot of information but some of it mum disagrees with, such that she knew it was a hire car etc. There is a risk she could be responsible for the work and hire car costs, somewhere from £2.5k to £5k.

All this is because a) mum thought this was Churchil who had unstructured Stocalfe to own her claim and b) she's a bit naive and vulnerable since losing my dad. I'm frustrated with her that she's only told me about it now, but we are where we are.

Could anyone advise on how I help her with this? Legal aid would presumably be more expensive than the costs involved.

Sandtree

So she has gone through an accident management company who have provided credit hire and repairs. Some of these companies advertise on Google with insurance companies names and so if she googled to get the claims telephone number rather than looking in her paperwork then this is how she likely made contact with them.

Ultimately you need to read the paperwork signed but in most cases as long as you support them then you will have no personal liability for the costs... the problems happen when you start to refuse to deal with them or say their statements are wrong etc. With some of these things it depends what lens you look through... your mum signed a credit hire agreement and therefore should have known it was a hire car... the fact she blindly signs paperwork without reading it is a side matter. 

Not sure what you mean by legal aid? If you mean legal advice then you could but as you say, solicitors are expensive and after spending half the money they may just say to support them in their claim. If you mean legal aid as in state paid for legal advice then it almost certainly wont apply to this kind of situation... it was stripped back significantly with the introduction of no win no fee etc.

Flachi10

By legal aid I was meaning legal assistance. So it sounds like she should sign the witness liability statement and hope that the claim is supported? If not, I guess she’ll have to foot the hire car bill and put it down as an expensive mistake?

Flachi10

She’s also adamant she didn’t sign any paperwork but I have no way of knowing if she did or not. This is what she was querying.

Sandtree

Flachi10 said:

By legal aid I was meaning legal assistance. So it sounds like she should sign the witness liability statement and hope that the claim is supported? If not, I guess she’ll have to foot the hire car bill and put it down as an expensive mistake?

As I say, read the agreement... normally if they are unable to recover all their outlay and you've supported them and not committed fraud etc then they write off the shortfall. How its worded in the contract will sound a bit weird, normally talking about your liability being adjusted to the court awarded liability etc but thats just a legal fudge to deal with previous court findings.

The theory of the higher rates, which many companies have signed up to via the ABI GTA, is because there is a genuine service element being provided and they are taking on financial risk in supplying it. 

If there are things in the statement she isnt happy with then speak to them on the phone first before signing it... some may be better looked at through a different lens though.

Flachi10

Thank you Sandtree, I’ll check the agreement as mum seems to have told my sister she wouldn’t be liable to pay if signed. 

Sandtree

Flachi10 said:

Thank you Sandtree, I’ll check the agreement as mum seems to have told my sister she wouldn’t be liable to pay if signed. 

Thats how it normally works... you only pay if you stop supporting them or they can definitively prove fraud was involved (ie she'd arranged for the other person to hit her so they could split the injury monies she can get).

Grey_Critic

Has anyone spoken with Churchill about this? They are the official insurer

Flachi10

She’s going to call them tomorrow. 

Flachi10

Update on this, mum signed the witness agreement but now Stocalfe have stated that they've been unable to settle out of court and now want mum to attend a court hearing. This worries me because I don't know why the court hearing will entail and nobody in this situation has her back, Stocalfe don't care about her just their money and the other insurer is the same.

Would contacting Citizens Advice help at this stage? Or should she offer to settle the cost of the hire car with them?

Ectophile

Flachi10 said:

Update on this, mum signed the witness agreement but now Stocalfe have stated that they've been unable to settle out of court and now want mum to attend a court hearing. This worries me because I don't know why the court hearing will entail and nobody in this situation has her back, Stocalfe don't care about her just their money and the other insurer is the same.

Would contacting Citizens Advice help at this stage? Or should she offer to settle the cost of the hire car with them?

Is the prospect of being a witness in court so bad that she's willing to pay £2500 to avoid it?