Serious car insurance claim woes

Forums › Travel (planes, train, cruise) › Serious car insurance claim woes

1 | 2 | 3

2523 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 953

Lifetime subscriber

#1962183 22-Feb-2018 12:24

cadman:

I'm not sure why you're worried. If they're not attending, don't bother either, unless you want to try and claim your excess back from the other party (although presumably there was some fault apportioned to you because otherwise there would be no excess deducted since clearly the other party was identified).

There are no lawyers at the Disputes Tribunal either.

Oooh, that could be some extremely bad advice.

The insurance policy almost certainly has a clause stating you have to assist your insurer and if you don't you risk having your cover voided. I wouldn't put it past Youi aiming for this outcome.

So whatever you do, turn up. Failure to do so could be very expensive.

cadman

1014 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 557
Inactive user

#1962204 22-Feb-2018 13:10

kryptonjohn:

cadman:

I'm not sure why you're worried. If they're not attending, don't bother either, unless you want to try and claim your excess back from the other party (although presumably there was some fault apportioned to you because otherwise there would be no excess deducted since clearly the other party was identified).

There are no lawyers at the Disputes Tribunal either.

Oooh, that could be some extremely bad advice.

The insurance policy almost certainly has a clause stating you have to assist your insurer and if you don't you risk having your cover voided. I wouldn't put it past Youi aiming for this outcome.

So whatever you do, turn up. Failure to do so could be very expensive.

You're probably right. Given this company's dodgy tactics to void claims in the past it may be just the 'out' they're looking for. However, I would contend that the notion of "assist us" requires the other party to be participating or at least attending at the same time.

From their policy wording (updated this month)

Edited: "Their" changed to "they're". Hoisted by my own petard! Oh well - at least I actually know the difference and can spot it.

kryptonjohn

2523 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 953

Lifetime subscriber

#1962213 22-Feb-2018 13:15

Yeah strange that they wouldn't assist themselves, isn't it? Definitely fishy.

MrTomato

151 posts

Master Geek
+1 received by user: 37

Lifetime subscriber

#1962327 22-Feb-2018 16:29

Thanks for everyone's responses...

On Monday I'll have time to chase up the insurer with full force, even if it takes all day. Hopefully then, one way or another, I'll find out what's going on in their heads. After that it'll be just over a week until the tribunal itself.

I'll keep this thread updated!

Lycopersicon lycopersicum

cadman

1014 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 557
Inactive user

#1962361 22-Feb-2018 17:30

I forgot to ask. Do you prefer Mr tuh-mey-toh or Mr tuh-mah-toh? I'd hate to offend...

MrTomato

151 posts

Master Geek
+1 received by user: 37

Lifetime subscriber

#1962390 22-Feb-2018 18:24

cadman:

I forgot to ask. Do you prefer Mr tuh-mey-toh or Mr tuh-mah-toh? I'd hate to offend...

Mister Toh-mah-tow, of course, like a proper person.

Lycopersicon lycopersicum

Lenovo

Shop now for Lenovo laptops and other devices (affiliate link).

dejadeadnz

2394 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2287
Inactive user

#1963160 23-Feb-2018 19:31

cadman:

You're probably right. Given this company's dodgy tactics to void claims in the past it may be just the 'out' they're looking for. However, I would contend that the notion of "assist us" requires the other party to be participating or at least attending at the same time.

From their policy wording (updated this month)

Edited: "Their" changed to "they're". Hoisted by my own petard! Oh well - at least I actually know the difference and can spot it.

I can guarantee you that your interpretation is 100% wrong. Legal proceedings can occur even if one party isn't participating.

cadman

1014 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 557
Inactive user

#1963171 23-Feb-2018 19:44

dejadeadnz:

cadman:

You're probably right. Given this company's dodgy tactics to void claims in the past it may be just the 'out' they're looking for. However, I would contend that the notion of "assist us" requires the other party to be participating or at least attending at the same time.

From their policy wording (updated this month)

Edited: "Their" changed to "they're". Hoisted by my own petard! Oh well - at least I actually know the difference and can spot it.

I can guarantee you that your interpretation is 100% wrong. Legal proceedings can occur even if one party isn't participating.

Fair enough - you're the law-talking guy.

However, I consider not to be assisting someone if they simply leave it to me.

networkn

Networkn
33024 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 15610

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1963234 23-Feb-2018 23:56

I am wondering how badly this could end. If you turn up and lose, would youi then try and blame you and say you didn't "help" them and then refuse your cover?

I'd probably make a call to the consumer people if you are a member. Also potentially a call to the insurance ombudsmen office and see if you can see if you can get their perspective on it.

MrTomato

151 posts

Master Geek
+1 received by user: 37

Lifetime subscriber

#1965163 27-Feb-2018 15:17

For those who are keeping up with this thread, I finally got to have a proper conversation with the insurance company today.

The good news: I won't be on my own - they've got a representative they're sending along, so that's slightly better than expected.

The bad news: I've finally found out what the third party's argument is, and it's an outright lie. Given the lack of evidence on either side (witnesses drove off, no CCTV), it's going to be a he-said-she-said situation at the hearing.

I'm going to start researching front and rear dashcams tonight! I never want to find myself in this situation again.

Edit: Hearing is next week.

Lycopersicon lycopersicum

kryptonjohn

2523 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 953

Lifetime subscriber

#1965188 27-Feb-2018 15:44

It will only go to DT if the other party is uninsured. If they were insured the two insurance companies would each wear their own customer's bill under the 'knock for knock' agreement among all the insurers.

So the other guy already looks a bit suspect for not having insurance. If you have other factors such as they hit the left side of your car etc it could well go your way.

But the worst outcome is you wear the excess - not the end of the world (or that was the case with me - as AMI seemingly don't drop your NCB unless you have multiple claims).

I agree we all should think about dashcams.

Apple TV

Stream your favourite shows now on Apple TV (affiliate link).

MrTomato

151 posts

Master Geek
+1 received by user: 37

Lifetime subscriber

#1965204 27-Feb-2018 15:50

kryptonjohn:

It will only go to DT if the other party is uninsured. If they were insured the two insurance companies would each wear their own customer's bill under the 'knock for knock' agreement among all the insurers.

Sorry, I should have mentioned in my update. The other party is insured, albeit by a company I've never heard of.

Lycopersicon lycopersicum

kryptonjohn

2523 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 953

Lifetime subscriber

#1965206 27-Feb-2018 15:53

MrTomato:

kryptonjohn:

It will only go to DT if the other party is uninsured. If they were insured the two insurance companies would each wear their own customer's bill under the 'knock for knock' agreement among all the insurers.

Sorry, I should have mentioned in my update. The other party is insured, albeit by a company I've never heard of.

Very strange then that this has gone to DT... unless things have changed in the industry. But then again, it's Youi and some never heard of company, so maybe they don't play like the big boys.

Is it possible they just said to you that they are insured, but lied?

networkn

Networkn
33024 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 15610

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#1965209 27-Feb-2018 15:55

kryptonjohn:

MrTomato:

kryptonjohn:

It will only go to DT if the other party is uninsured. If they were insured the two insurance companies would each wear their own customer's bill under the 'knock for knock' agreement among all the insurers.

Sorry, I should have mentioned in my update. The other party is insured, albeit by a company I've never heard of.

Very strange then that this has gone to DT... unless things have changed in the industry. But then again, it's Youi and some never heard of company, so maybe they don't play like the big boys.

Is it possible they just said to you that they are insured, but lied?

Yeah, something is going on. All insurers are bound by the same rules I thought and the knock for knock still applies as recently as November as I heard it talked about in another context.

tripper1000

1648 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1176

#1965211 27-Feb-2018 15:56

kryptonjohn:

It will only go to DT if the other party is uninsured.

I was wondering why anyone insured would bother lying, but that would explain it.

My brother and ex G.F. have been in the exact same boat. Weirdly both times the other driver lost their ability to speak English between the crash and Small Claims and a husband/father had to speak on their behalves. Dash-cam's would definitely have helped in both cases.

1 | 2 | 3