Your browser isn't supported
It looks like you're using an old web browser. To get the most out of the site and to ensure guides display correctly, we suggest upgrading your browser now. Download the latest:

Welcome to the MSE Forums

We're home to a fantastic community of MoneySavers but anyone can post. Please exercise caution & report spam, illegal, offensive or libellous posts/messages: click "report" or email forumteam@. Skimlinks & other affiliated links are turned on

Search
  • FIRST POST
    • MallorcaMike
    • By MallorcaMike 15th Sep 18, 6:42 PM
    • 3Posts
    • 2Thanks
    MallorcaMike
    Insurers default stance - it's your fault
    • #1
    • 15th Sep 18, 6:42 PM
    Insurers default stance - it's your fault 15th Sep 18 at 6:42 PM
    A few weeks ago, late at night, an arsonist started 3 separate fires in Husbands Bosworth. The first was at a care home, the second involved a van parked in the street, and the last a residential complex, where a young family had a narrow escape and their flat was heavily damaged.

    During this last fire, two cars belonging to my daughter and son-in-law were completely destroyed, along with their contents. A suspect was later arrested and charged with arson with intent to endanger life.

    One of the vehicle insurers has taken the stance that my family is at fault because there is no proof to the contrary (there is plenty, if they could be bothered about their customer). As a result, any new insurance arrangements are harder to arrange and are much more expensive.

    Insurance claims are never much fun and usually leave us feeling short changed, but this is beyond ridiculous. Anyone else had a similar experience and can anything be done?
Page 1
    • Car 54
    • By Car 54 15th Sep 18, 6:54 PM
    • 3,288 Posts
    • 2,047 Thanks
    Car 54
    • #2
    • 15th Sep 18, 6:54 PM
    • #2
    • 15th Sep 18, 6:54 PM
    They are probably working on the basis that in this country we still have the principle that someone "arrested and charged with arson with intent to endanger life" is presumed innocent until found guilty.
    • facade
    • By facade 15th Sep 18, 6:55 PM
    • 3,437 Posts
    • 1,804 Thanks
    facade
    • #3
    • 15th Sep 18, 6:55 PM
    • #3
    • 15th Sep 18, 6:55 PM
    It is probably an "At fault" claim as the insurance company cannot recover their payout from the culprit.
    Contact the insurer and find out if this is the case, and how it will change when the alleged culprit is convicted.




    "At fault" doesn't necessarily mean your fault, insurers are like Lewis Carrol's Humpty Dumpty.
    I want to go back to The Olden Days, when every single thing that I can think of was better.....

    (except air quality and Medical Science )
    • James2k
    • By James2k 15th Sep 18, 7:15 PM
    • 71 Posts
    • 21 Thanks
    James2k
    • #4
    • 15th Sep 18, 7:15 PM
    • #4
    • 15th Sep 18, 7:15 PM
    They are probably working on the basis that in this country we still have the principle that someone "arrested and charged with arson with intent to endanger life" is presumed innocent until found guilty.
    Originally posted by Car 54
    yeah i'm sure you would adopt that attitude if your own car was set on fire. then you got an insurance hike.

    The sanctimony in this forum
    • prowla
    • By prowla 15th Sep 18, 7:17 PM
    • 10,067 Posts
    • 8,284 Thanks
    prowla
    • #5
    • 15th Sep 18, 7:17 PM
    • #5
    • 15th Sep 18, 7:17 PM
    Did you have a crime reference number?
    • prowla
    • By prowla 15th Sep 18, 7:19 PM
    • 10,067 Posts
    • 8,284 Thanks
    prowla
    • #6
    • 15th Sep 18, 7:19 PM
    • #6
    • 15th Sep 18, 7:19 PM
    They are probably working on the basis that in this country we still have the principle that someone "arrested and charged with arson with intent to endanger life" is presumed innocent until found guilty.
    Originally posted by Car 54
    Well, the crime was committed, regardless whether they've got the right person and they are convicted.


    Presumably the insurance is against the crime, not any sentence which may or may not be handed out...
    • prowla
    • By prowla 15th Sep 18, 7:20 PM
    • 10,067 Posts
    • 8,284 Thanks
    prowla
    • #7
    • 15th Sep 18, 7:20 PM
    • #7
    • 15th Sep 18, 7:20 PM
    It is probably an "At fault" claim as the insurance company cannot recover their payout from the culprit.
    Contact the insurer and find out if this is the case, and how it will change when the alleged culprit is convicted.

    "At fault" doesn't necessarily mean your fault, insurers are like Lewis Carrol's Humpty Dumpty.
    Originally posted by facade
    That would be stretching the definition of "at fault", unless the "fault" is that you own a car at all...
    • Herzlos
    • By Herzlos 15th Sep 18, 7:25 PM
    • 7,826 Posts
    • 7,180 Thanks
    Herzlos
    • #8
    • 15th Sep 18, 7:25 PM
    • #8
    • 15th Sep 18, 7:25 PM
    That would be stretching the definition of "at fault", unless the "fault" is that you own a car at all...
    Originally posted by prowla
    In terms of insurance, at fault means they costs aren't recovered thus the buck stops with the insured.
    • custardy
    • By custardy 15th Sep 18, 7:33 PM
    • 34,000 Posts
    • 28,894 Thanks
    custardy
    • #9
    • 15th Sep 18, 7:33 PM
    • #9
    • 15th Sep 18, 7:33 PM
    In terms of insurance, at fault means they costs aren't recovered thus the buck stops with the insured.
    Originally posted by Herzlos
    Exactly. Come out and someones smashed into your car and driven off.
    You are deemed 'at fault' as there is nobody to claim against.

    @James2k

    Wind your neck in son.
    • Quentin
    • By Quentin 15th Sep 18, 7:35 PM
    • 37,252 Posts
    • 21,405 Thanks
    Quentin

    Insurance claims are never much fun and usually leave us feeling short changed, but this is beyond ridiculous. Anyone else had a similar experience and can anything be done?
    Originally posted by MallorcaMike
    As advised already, you are mistaken

    They won't have said that this is " your fault" at all.

    They have so far been unable to get reimbursed their outlay and thus your claim is a "fault" claim. Nothing to do with "blame"

    If the insurer does get reimbursed by the arsonist (probably unlikely) then the claim will be marked as non fault. Any lost NCD will be restored.

    Till then you must disclose the claim to other insurers you approach for quotes as a fault claim
    • James2k
    • By James2k 15th Sep 18, 7:37 PM
    • 71 Posts
    • 21 Thanks
    James2k
    @James2k

    Wind your neck in son.
    Originally posted by custardy
    haha, get over yourself.
    • AdrianC
    • By AdrianC 15th Sep 18, 8:59 PM
    • 18,343 Posts
    • 16,583 Thanks
    AdrianC
    yeah i'm sure you would adopt that attitude if your own car was set on fire. then you got an insurance hike.

    The sanctimony in this forum
    Originally posted by James2k
    Woah, calm down! He simply pointed out that - until a court has found this person guilty - he is legally innocent. That's not exactly a radical suggestion...

    Anyway, insurer "fault" is simply - who paid? If they pay out because they had your business, it's your "fault". If somebody else covers the costs, it's "no-fault".
    • Norman Castle
    • By Norman Castle 16th Sep 18, 8:16 AM
    • 7,402 Posts
    • 6,163 Thanks
    Norman Castle
    View NCB as a no cost bonus. If you cost them money it will affect your ncb.
    Don't harass a hippie. You'll get bad karma.

    Never trust a newbie with a rtb tale.
Welcome to our new Forum!

Our aim is to save you money quickly and easily. We hope you like it!

Forum Team Contact us

Live Stats

3,960Posts Today

9,146Users online

Martin's Twitter
  • RT @Dora_Haf: @MartinSLewis So many people on here saying they're great until you get your PROPER job. What if Your proper job Is ON zero?

  • RT @hslt88: @MartinSLewis I?m a trustee for a youth charity. We only have a limited pool of funds for flexible youth workers for holiday sc?

  • RT @Dan_i_elle_88: @MartinSLewis Loved working zero hour agency care work. Never out of work and I loved having the flexibility! Only left?

  • Follow Martin