Tweet
On the 6/08/22 I was involved in a very minor accident; the third party was very apologetic and we exchanged details. I informed my insurance company and was told that somebody would contact me to take the details. On 24/08/22 my insurance company who told me that they had been contacted by the third party’s insurer and that they had made the decision that “we” were liable and that I needed to agree so that they could process the claim. I explained that I was absolutely not at fault and that they hadn’t taken any details of the accident or the witness. The woman argued that there was no question regarding liability and that I need to accept the fact. I was told that if I made a claim they would probably right the vehicle off due to its age and would be unlikely to get much money for it. To cut a very long story short, my insurer were extremely obstructive at every turn and I had to spend a lot of time and money proving that I wasn’t liable and also that my vehicle was damaged as a result of the accident. My insurer has now conceded both of these points but says it’s up to me to claim back my excess and out of pocket expenses from the third party (I do not have legal protection). While I understand the uninsured loss argument, there wouldn’t have been any of these additional costs if my insurer had agreed to inspect the vehicle instead of denying it was damaged in the accident. Also, there website says quire clearly that my excess will be returned if I’m not at fault but they say It’s my contribution towards the claim regardless of blame and it will not be returned. How can I claim back my out of pocket expenses from the third party when they are as a result of my insurers incompetence?
Loading...
-
Tags: None -
You write to the third party asking them to pay your uninsured losses of £xxxx made up of the excess and your costs.
Advise them that they should either pay you directly by dd.mm.yy, or confirm to you that they have advised their third party insurers of your claim.
In the latter case they should tell you the name of their insurers and the policy number.
As an aside can you post a link to the website that "says quire clearly that my excess will be returned if I’m not at fault"
-
Thank you Des,
I think you're effectively saying that the 3rd Party Insurer is unlikely to challenge the uninsured loss even though they were unnecessary had the situation been handled differently. Here is a link to the page https://www.admiral.com/magazine/gui...s-myths-busted about a fifth of the way down the page the statement: "If it's proven the accident was the other person's fault and we recover the full cost from their insurer, the excess is refunded, so you don't lose out. If a claim settles 50/50, the third party insurers will repay 50% of your excess."Comment
-
The important words in that policy are "... and we recover the full cost from their insurer, the excess is refunded,"
Although belatedly admitting you were not the cause of the accident your insurers might not have recovered the full amount paid by them in settlement of the loss. For commercial reasons insurers often agree to pay for their own insured's losses regardless of blameComment
-
Thank you Des, Yes, I've come to realise that insurance companies are just a dishonest racket. I spoke to some injury lawyers (no win no fee ) in the period when they were still trying to force me to admit liability. They told me that paying the claim was a purely commercial decision even though it would cost me my no claims and excess, and even though the third party was at fault, it would be the cheapest option for my insurer.Comment
-
Not really dishonest, just misunderstood.
You have a contract with the insurer which means he takes on the risk.
Your vehicle is damaged ... he pays.
Your vehicle was damaged..... he paid (after a tussle!)
It is for the insurer to decide if it is worth pursuing the third party for reimbursement.
Sometimes (even as we point out on this forum) it is not always cost effective to pursue a claim against a third party as the costs can outweigh any wins.
Your NCB is only a discretionary discount, and the excess part of your contractComment
-
Thanks Des, maybe dishonest is the wrong word but the odds are certainly stacked in their favour! They haven’t paid anything yet but after 11 weeks of trying to persuade me not to make a claim and to accept liability + lose my NCB and excess, they are starting to accept that they must!
Comment
-
Just my thoughts. I am driving say along a Motorway and as an exercise, I count in a short space say half a mile, three hundred vehicles, insurance paid at approx £500 a vehicle. Hm thoughts.Comment
-
They are therefore driving with insurance thats the law whats your point?Comment
-
Thoughts? you aren't concentrating on your driving
If you are commenting on insurers income (my full comp, agreed value , unlimited mileage policy is less than £100 p.a.) you can find details of the market underwriting figures for 2005 to 2018 here: https://www.statista.com/topics/4560...__outerWrapper
Comment
-
Morning. My point was if Insurance has a nice income why does NIT PICKING over this claim?Originally posted by wales01man View PostComment
-
I have written to the third party's legal representative requesting that they convey my uninsured losses to their clients insurer for payment. We'll see what they say. Admiral have told me that they are going to write my vehicle off which (based on the repair cost estimates I have provided them) tells me that we're a long way apart on the vehicle value. Let's see what they come up with for a settlement; I have a feeling this is going to be a very long and drawn out battle (even more so than it already is). :O(Comment
-
Just an update on this case:- I eventually won, Admiral paid me back my excess, reinstated my no claims and refunded me the additional money they bundled on my renewal. It was a long fight that Admiral resisted all of the way but it all worked out after nearly 18 months.Comment
-
congratulations and I admire you staying the course
Thanks for the updateComment
Comment