How long after settlement can an insurance company counter su

Help_me_pls2025

A friend was in an accident while drunk driving, which he deeply regrets. He pled guilty at court and has served his ban. The insurance was invalidated.

The passenger who insisted he drive him home was injured and sued my friend & the insurance company. It got settled out of court by the insurance company but the insurance company never notified him and so we don't even know the amount. We only found out when the passengers solicitors wrote to say it wasn't going to court now. 

Reading online it seems insurance companies wait to the last allowed time to come after the driver and they have 6 years to pursue the money.

Does anyone know if this is right & is it from date of settlement or the accident pls? 

Hoenir

Help_me_pls2025 said:

Does anyone know if this is right & is it from date of settlement or the accident pls? 

Date of settlement.  Insurance companies are obligatated to settle claims. They will therefore often look to minmise thier losses. 

XRS200

Help_me_pls2025 said:

A friend was in an accident while drunk driving, which he deeply regrets. He pled guilty at court and has served his ban. The insurance was invalidated.

The passenger who insisted he drive him home was injured and sued my friend & the insurance company. It got settled out of court by the insurance company but the insurance company never notified him and so we don't even know the amount. We only found out when the passengers solicitors wrote to say it wasn't going to court now. 

Reading online it seems insurance companies wait to the last allowed time to come after the driver and they have 6 years to pursue the money.

Does anyone know if this is right & is it from date of settlement or the accident pls? 

No reason for them to wait.  Probably come after him as soon as final costs are known.

Help_me_pls2025

Hoenir said:

Help_me_pls2025 said:

Does anyone know if this is right & is it from date of settlement or the accident pls? 

Date of settlement.  Insurance companies are obligatated to settle claims. They will therefore often look to minmise thier losses. 

Not if they have been sued. They wait until the last moment, so that people have moved forward with their lives, bought a new car etc. So they have the best chance of recuperating their money. 

Help_me_pls2025

Hoenir said:

Help_me_pls2025 said:

Does anyone know if this is right & is it from date of settlement or the accident pls? 

Date of settlement.  Insurance companies are obligatated to settle claims. They will therefore often look to minmise thier losses. 

Yes, they wait till the last moment when people have rebuilt their assets, so they have something to have to sell to recupe.

DullGreyGuy

Help_me_pls2025 said:

Hoenir said:

Help_me_pls2025 said:

Does anyone know if this is right & is it from date of settlement or the accident pls? 

Date of settlement.  Insurance companies are obligatated to settle claims. They will therefore often look to minmise thier losses. 

Not if they have been sued. They wait until the last moment, so that people have moved forward with their lives, bought a new car etc. So they have the best chance of recuperating their money. 

No, have recovered outlays, one being in 6 figures, from an insureds dozens of times where we had to act as RTA Insurer. We dont wait for them to "recuperate their money", for a start they haven't lost any money beyond the damage to their car. 

mr_stripey

Help_me_pls2025 said:

Hoenir said:

Help_me_pls2025 said:

Does anyone know if this is right & is it from date of settlement or the accident pls? 

Date of settlement.  Insurance companies are obligatated to settle claims. They will therefore often look to minmise thier losses. 

Yes, they wait till the last moment when people have rebuilt their assets, so they have something to have to sell to recupe.

I'd be amazed if insurance companies could organise themselves to delibrately "leave it to the last minute". And there's no more likelehood that someone has rebuilt their assets in that time. Anything could happen in six years (if that's the figure) including the "target" leaving the country or dying in some cases. So would not be logical to leave it purposely.

Help_me_pls2025

DullGreyGuy said:

Help_me_pls2025 said:

Hoenir said:

Help_me_pls2025 said:

Does anyone know if this is right & is it from date of settlement or the accident pls? 

Date of settlement.  Insurance companies are obligatated to settle claims. They will therefore often look to minmise thier losses. 

Not if they have been sued. They wait until the last moment, so that people have moved forward with their lives, bought a new car etc. So they have the best chance of recuperating their money. 

No, have recovered outlays, one being in 6 figures, from an insureds dozens of times where we had to act as RTA Insurer. We dont wait for them to "recuperate their money", for a start they haven't lost any money beyond the damage to their car. 

My understanding is when a driver is caught Drink Driving their insurance is invalidated but the insurer still has to cover 3rd party damages, in this case an out of court settlement with the passenger. 

They would then seek to recoup the outlay from the driver. At the moment, there has been no communication from the insurers even to state the amount given to the passenger. 

I got the 6 years from other cases where Admiral followed this process of waiting, with a driver contacted before 6 years had passed. If this is wrong then great but my friend needs to move on with his life 4 years after his stupid mistake. 

DullGreyGuy

Help_me_pls2025 said:

DullGreyGuy said:

Help_me_pls2025 said:

Hoenir said:

Help_me_pls2025 said:

Does anyone know if this is right & is it from date of settlement or the accident pls? 

Date of settlement.  Insurance companies are obligatated to settle claims. They will therefore often look to minmise thier losses. 

Not if they have been sued. They wait until the last moment, so that people have moved forward with their lives, bought a new car etc. So they have the best chance of recuperating their money. 

No, have recovered outlays, one being in 6 figures, from an insureds dozens of times where we had to act as RTA Insurer. We dont wait for them to "recuperate their money", for a start they haven't lost any money beyond the damage to their car. 

My understanding is when a driver is caught Drink Driving their insurance is invalidated but the insurer still has to cover 3rd party damages, in this case an out of court settlement with the passenger. 

They would then seek to recoup the outlay from the driver. At the moment, there has been no communication from the insurers even to state the amount given to the passenger. 

I got the 6 years from other cases where Admiral followed this process of waiting, with a driver contacted before 6 years had passed. If this is wrong then great but my friend needs to move on with his life 4 years after his stupid mistake. 

That would depend on the terms of the policy but yes, a considerable number invalidate the insurance in the case of drink driving. Broadly irrespective of why a policy is invalidated the Road Traffic Act requires the insurer to still respond to the third party's losses but it, and typically the contract, allow them the right to recover their losses from the driver and potentially the policyholder (if not the same person).

Whilst they may have settled the third party's own claim, depending on the sorts of monies involved it can take more time after to agree what monies their solicitors should be paid; though this really only applies to multi-track cases where fees arent fixed or proportional. 

What did they actually hit to cause the damage? 
Were ambulances called?
They'll want all losses known before starting to chase repayment

Depending on how much is owed can dictate the path taken. If it's a couple of grand then its a simple letter and basic chasing. Tens of thousands and it's worth doing some homework on how to progress such as seeing if they own their home address, more details on their work etc. 

Help_me_pls2025

DullGreyGuy said:

Help_me_pls2025 said:

DullGreyGuy said:

Help_me_pls2025 said:

Hoenir said:

Help_me_pls2025 said:

Does anyone know if this is right & is it from date of settlement or the accident pls? 

Date of settlement.  Insurance companies are obligatated to settle claims. They will therefore often look to minmise thier losses. 

Not if they have been sued. They wait until the last moment, so that people have moved forward with their lives, bought a new car etc. So they have the best chance of recuperating their money. 

No, have recovered outlays, one being in 6 figures, from an insureds dozens of times where we had to act as RTA Insurer. We dont wait for them to "recuperate their money", for a start they haven't lost any money beyond the damage to their car. 

My understanding is when a driver is caught Drink Driving their insurance is invalidated but the insurer still has to cover 3rd party damages, in this case an out of court settlement with the passenger. 

They would then seek to recoup the outlay from the driver. At the moment, there has been no communication from the insurers even to state the amount given to the passenger. 

I got the 6 years from other cases where Admiral followed this process of waiting, with a driver contacted before 6 years had passed. If this is wrong then great but my friend needs to move on with his life 4 years after his stupid mistake. 

That would depend on the terms of the policy but yes, a considerable number invalidate the insurance in the case of drink driving. Broadly irrespective of why a policy is invalidated the Road Traffic Act requires the insurer to still respond to the third party's losses but it, and typically the contract, allow them the right to recover their losses from the driver and potentially the policyholder (if not the same person).

Whilst they may have settled the third party's own claim, depending on the sorts of monies involved it can take more time after to agree what monies their solicitors should be paid; though this really only applies to multi-track cases where fees arent fixed or proportional. 

What did they actually hit to cause the damage? 
Were ambulances called?
They'll want all losses known before starting to chase repayment

Depending on how much is owed can dictate the path taken. If it's a couple of grand then its a simple letter and basic chasing. Tens of thousands and it's worth doing some homework on how to progress such as seeing if they own their home address, more details on their work etc. 

Thank you. Yes, was going to multi-track but settled outside of court. Had previously declined £25k and expectation was settled at £40k. 

My friend is 23 yrs old, just finished uni with £50k debts, lives at home and no assets to his name, hence trying to clarify if there is a timescale.