Insurance voided from inception - Am I up the creek?
Discussion
Does who I'm insured with have much of an influence on the likely outcome? I can see why the TP insurer might, but less clear on mine (apologies if I'm missing the obvious).
Your comment/observation with regards to awkwardness is possibly fair, although from what I am told the TP insurer aren't exactly falling over themselves to resolve this.
Thanks for the link/info looking into it now....
Your comment/observation with regards to awkwardness is possibly fair, although from what I am told the TP insurer aren't exactly falling over themselves to resolve this.
Thanks for the link/info looking into it now....
I'm interested more than anything else in the insurer. Who they are wont affect the outcome. It's not a big claim. 3 damaged cars isn't a big one by any stretch.
Your insurer should be keeping you informed. There's nothing you can do. Is the concern over your NCD? If so your insurer should honour it and waive the excess ideally as its a no brainer non fault.
Your insurer should be keeping you informed. There's nothing you can do. Is the concern over your NCD? If so your insurer should honour it and waive the excess ideally as its a no brainer non fault.
My insurers are Groupama and KGM and after some reading no, it's definitely not a big one!
It is 100% non fault, I was completely unaware until the Police woke me with the news. I'm concerned about NCD, premiums and to some extent justice.
After 6 months it just feels like everytime I get an update there is a new twist that leaves me confused as to likely outcomes... this is just the latest. I suspect I will just need to get used to the fact that is probably not going to be sorted in the next 6 months either
It is 100% non fault, I was completely unaware until the Police woke me with the news. I'm concerned about NCD, premiums and to some extent justice.
After 6 months it just feels like everytime I get an update there is a new twist that leaves me confused as to likely outcomes... this is just the latest. I suspect I will just need to get used to the fact that is probably not going to be sorted in the next 6 months either
The wheels of justice turn slowly and sadly so do some claims. It's easy for me to say that as I'm not involved but do have a lot of sympathy.
What you'll probably find is the the named driver was the main driver and too high a risk for their insurer to take on. Much like the Bissmire case.
It will get resolved in your favour though.
What you'll probably find is the the named driver was the main driver and too high a risk for their insurer to take on. Much like the Bissmire case.
It will get resolved in your favour though.
Have your cars been fixed yet? Or a settlement reached?
The exact specifics of whom pays for what are irrelevant. The car that damaged yours has an insurance policy that should pay out for damage to 3rd parties. What the company that issued that policy do to recover the money is not your concern.
The exact specifics of whom pays for what are irrelevant. The car that damaged yours has an insurance policy that should pay out for damage to 3rd parties. What the company that issued that policy do to recover the money is not your concern.
Edited by User33678888 on Wednesday 3rd April 19:54
User33678888 said:
Have your cars been fixed yet? Or a settlement reached?
The exact specifics of whom pays for what are irrelevant. The car that damaged yours has an insurance policy that should pay out for damage to 3rd parties. What the company that issued that policy do to recover the money is not your concern.
Seriously? After everything I've posted you still feel your incorrect information is worth posting?The exact specifics of whom pays for what are irrelevant. The car that damaged yours has an insurance policy that should pay out for damage to 3rd parties. What the company that issued that policy do to recover the money is not your concern.
Classic example of Breadvan's "man in the pubbisms"
LoonR1 said:
User33678888 said:
Have your cars been fixed yet? Or a settlement reached?
The exact specifics of whom pays for what are irrelevant. The car that damaged yours has an insurance policy that should pay out for damage to 3rd parties. What the company that issued that policy do to recover the money is not your concern.
Seriously? After everything I've posted you still feel your incorrect information is worth posting?The exact specifics of whom pays for what are irrelevant. The car that damaged yours has an insurance policy that should pay out for damage to 3rd parties. What the company that issued that policy do to recover the money is not your concern.
Classic example of Breadvan's "man in the pubbisms"
LoonR1 said:
Simply speaking if its voided from inception then the Insurer still remains liable unless this is a really serious one in which case the MIB will deal. You won't lose out but it will take time.
I'm not a lawyer and may have miss-phrased something, but I was attempting to agree with you!User33678888 said:
LoonR1 said:
User33678888 said:
Have your cars been fixed yet? Or a settlement reached?
The exact specifics of whom pays for what are irrelevant. The car that damaged yours has an insurance policy that should pay out for damage to 3rd parties. What the company that issued that policy do to recover the money is not your concern.
Seriously? After everything I've posted you still feel your incorrect information is worth posting?The exact specifics of whom pays for what are irrelevant. The car that damaged yours has an insurance policy that should pay out for damage to 3rd parties. What the company that issued that policy do to recover the money is not your concern.
Classic example of Breadvan's "man in the pubbisms"
LoonR1 said:
Simply speaking if its voided from inception then the Insurer still remains liable unless this is a really serious one in which case the MIB will deal. You won't lose out but it will take time.
I'm not a lawyer and may have miss-phrased something, but I was attempting to agree with you!It will be resolved in the OP's favour in time, whether that is with the TP insurance or the MIB, or the OP's own insurance (including the loss of NCD and excess) is yet to be seen.
There are a plethora of rules surrounding indemnity, but an insurer can cancel a policy from inception if the policy were taken out under false pretences by the proposer failing to declare sufficient relevant (and now asked for) material facts that it would not normally have offered cover.
Then we've got the hassle over whether it's a uninsured loss, as the OP has fully comp cover in place. Then there's the issue over their minimum excess of £500.
Basically there's all sorts of stuff going on, but simply stating the below is seriously flawed in tihs case. it may be true of by far the majority of normal cases, bu not his one by a long way.
User33678888 said:
The exact specifics of whom pays for what are irrelevant. The car that damaged yours has an insurance policy that should pay out for damage to 3rd parties. What the company that issued that policy do to recover the money is not your concern.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff