bike insurance: problem with claim (advice required)

Obi_G

morning, i hope someone can help... i'm after some advice and guidance if possible...

i've recently been involved in an accident that required a claim to be made on the insurance. it was 100% the other driver's fault (according to insurance people) but my bike has been written off.

the insurance people (NU) said in numerous letters that they'd tried to contact me, that their engineer tried to contact me, and that they valued the bike at £2050. i wrote a letter to complain explaining that there was no record of them contacting me and that the value of the bike was nearer £3000 (it was 5 days old to me, perfect condition, and had around 5000 miles on it).

having looked at parkers, they value the bike at around £2300 for a private sale in good condition.

anyway, i got the cheque yesterday for £1875 (which is, i am assuming less my excess).

suffice to say, i'm not happy with this. i've sent them reciepts, and also proof that the bike is worth more, and it would cost more to replace it in the same conditions that i purcahsed it before.

i'd appreciate it if someone could advise me on whether i should just take the money or try and argue the point that i insured it for more, so why give me this stupid amount.

sorry for ranting, and thanks in advance for any help

G

[Deleted User]

Obi G

I should be able to see what correspondance has been recieved and investigate exactly what has happened if you can send me an email with policy/claim number to [EMAIL="rebecca.sibley@norwich-union.co.uk"]rebecca.sibley@norwich-union.co.uk[/EMAIL]

Becca

Quentin

Don't pay the cheque in - it could be seen as your acceptance of the offer.

Definitely argue your case. Write back, reject the offer and return the cheque.You say the bike was only 5 days old - send them the copies of the receipt along with the parkers guide and any adverts you can find for the same bike.

Tight_Old_Git

having looked at parkers, they value the bike at around £2300 for a private sale in good condition.

anyway, i got the cheque yesterday for £1875 (which is, i am assuming less my excess).

If the accident was 100% fault of the third party then you shouldn't have been deducted an excess, which according to your figures is £425 which seems very high.

What about compo for any injuries?

I recommend you use an insurer who look after bikers eg Bennetts, I have had two no fault bike accidents and they have solicitors straight on the case and get you a hefty payout:beer: :beer: :beer:

Quentin

Why wouldn't he have to pay his excess?

That is an uninsured loss.

wooders

Quentin is right.

its an uninsured loss, the 1800 you got from NU is from them, they,you or your solicitor will presumably be suing the othe side for all costs and uninsured losses

eg Excess, medical expenses, recovery expenses, prescription costs, travel costs, caring cost (looking after you), and any other related costs to YOU.
These are all uninsured losses and need to be claimed from the other side. Keep all receipts etc There are plenty of sols out there who will take up your case no fee.

hope this helps:beer:

Tight_Old_Git

Quentin wrote: »

Why wouldn't he have to pay his excess?

That is an uninsured loss.

100% third party liability admitted, the excess should have been claimed from the party at fault. Like I said the OP needs to go to a better insurance company in future, one that specialises in bike insurance.

raskazz

Tight_Old_Git wrote: »

100% third party liability admitted, the excess should have been claimed from the party at fault. Like I said the OP needs to go to a better insurance company in future, one that specialises in bike insurance.

Nowhere in the OP's post does it state that liability has been admitted. It states:

"it was 100% the other driver's fault (according to insurance people)"

This does not necessarily mean that liability is not in dispute, merely that the OP's insurer is looking to recover all their outlay as they are of the opinion that the third party was 100% at fault.

Quentin

Tight_Old_Git wrote: »

100% third party liability admitted, the excess should have been claimed from the party at fault.

Yes, the excess should be claimed off the third party, just as all the other uninsured losses should be.

You wrongly posted that the insurer was wrong to deduct the excess from the payout.

You don't get that service provided by your insurer - it's up to the injured party to reclaim their uninsured losses.

The firm you are suggesting doesn't pay claims without deducting the excess - it does, though, promote legal expenses insurance as a comparitively expensive add on (£26):

Whatever level of insurance cover, Third Party Only, Third Party Fire & Theft or Comprehensive, you will need protection against potential uninsured losses that can result from even a minor accident. You might have to pay an excess on your policy.................

mattymoo

If Parkers (who tend to over estimate anyway) are saying the bike is worth £2,300, just 5 days after you paid £3,000 it might suggest you paid over the odds for the bike in the first place.

Tight_Old_Git

The firm you are suggesting doesn't pay claims without deducting the excess - it does, though, promote legal expenses insurance as a comparitively expensive add on (£26):


Quote:
Whatever level of insurance cover, Third Party Only, Third Party Fire & Theft or Comprehensive, you will need protection against potential uninsured losses that can result from even a minor accident. You might have to pay an excess on your policy.................

As someone who has had two claims running into £ '000s settled by Bennetts using their solicitors, I think I am in a better position to comment on what they do or don't claim to do than a person who read something on a website. They provided a hire bike and persued personal injury claim without having either comprehensive cover or legal expenses insurance. The way the OP has been treated by NU is disgraceful but until we hear back from him/her, I have nothing to add.