3rd party refusing hire costs?
Discussion
pork911 said:
b
hstewie said:
hstewie said: £120 a day for a hire car - what the hell was it?
Probably something basic 
OP take a look at this thread http://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=10&...
bhstewie said:
hstewie said:pork911 said:
bhstewie said:
hstewie said: £120 a day for a hire car - what the hell was it?
Probably something basic OP take a look at this thread http://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=10&...
Didn't think twice about it tbh. Thought I'd be sent whatever the cheapest they had in at such short notice.
FWIW, I can rent the exact same car myself for £60 a day.
but not on credit with the view to someone else paying, hence the industry. There's all sorts of reasons why what you did is likely unreasonable. Although led along, it's you that credit hired and you who will be the Claimant asking that the Court orders the other side to pay your debt. You may well have a wink and a nod, comfort letter or side policy from the hire company covering you but of course that's something you will be very strongly discouraged (with the threat of paying the hire yourself) from revealing since it would openly expose the fraud the other side are well aware of, but ignore and play at the fringes. However not revealing it is a matter for your conscience and pocket.
pork911 said:
but not on credit with the view to someone else paying, hence the industry. There's all sorts of reasons why what you did is likely unreasonable. Although led along, it's you that credit hired and you who will be the Claimant asking that the Court orders the other side to pay your debt. You may well have a wink and a nod, comfort letter or side policy from the hire company covering you but of course that's something you will be very strongly discouraged (with the threat of paying the hire yourself) from revealing since it would openly expose the fraud the other side are well aware of, but ignore and play at the fringes. However not revealing it is a matter for your conscience and pocket.
Talk to the MC and tell them that will be paying any amount the other side won't because you have been misled and ripped off with the car hire. If they mess about, do the same with your insurer.Do not, contrary to the above, even think about hiding anything material from the court if you have to claim. It will be discovered and you will be in serious trouble.
pork911 said:
but not on credit with the view to someone else paying, hence the industry. There's all sorts of reasons why what you did is likely unreasonable. Although led along, it's you that credit hired and you who will be the Claimant asking that the Court orders the other side to pay your debt. You may well have a wink and a nod, comfort letter or side policy from the hire company covering you but of course that's something you will be very strongly discouraged (with the threat of paying the hire yourself) from revealing since it would openly expose the fraud the other side are well aware of, but ignore and play at the fringes. However not revealing it is a matter for your conscience and pocket.
So this 'insurance' I've got against paying the costs does what exactly? fk all?It's a bit of a grey area. Technically, you can only claim costs from the third party if you are liable for them ie repairs, storage, recovery etc. You have to be liable for the cost of the hire car before you can claim it from the third party otherwise there would be nothing to claim. The insurance seems to obviate this as it leaves you in a position whereby you don't have to pay what isn't recovered.
If the matter drags on, the other side's solicitors will be asking for all sorts of things to be disclosed. Bank statements, wage slips, details of savings, credit cards and loans all to prove that you may have had the financial ability to pay the hire yourself at lower standard rates and then claims it back...
If the matter drags on, the other side's solicitors will be asking for all sorts of things to be disclosed. Bank statements, wage slips, details of savings, credit cards and loans all to prove that you may have had the financial ability to pay the hire yourself at lower standard rates and then claims it back...
ORD said:
Talk to the MC and tell them that will be paying any amount the other side won't because you have been misled and ripped off with the car hire. If they mess about, do the same with your insurer.
Do not, contrary to the above, even think about hiding anything material from the court if you have to claim. It will be discovered and you will be in serious trouble.
I was not suggesting the OP hide anything.Do not, contrary to the above, even think about hiding anything material from the court if you have to claim. It will be discovered and you will be in serious trouble.
justanother5tar said:
So this 'insurance' I've got against paying the costs does what exactly? fk all?
Would have to see it but likely it covers you for all. However that is the key problem with credit hire. Your claim will be based on your liability to pay under the contract but not mentioning the side policy covering you for that. Everyone involved knows all about it but avoid it and argue about minor issues. It's a horrendous industry.k all?pork911 said:
Although led along, it's you that credit hired and you who will be the Claimant
So, for the purposes of helping others who are involved in accidents where liability may rest partly with themselves, what course of action should be followed?- I have fully comp
- I have paid for car hire if I have an accident
- I report accident to ins company, and they nominate a company to sort it.
At this point, could I just say no, I want you to supply the car from xyz ltd instead?
Could I just say: no, get me the cheapest hire car in the land, as I don't want to be stuck with excess costs?
Can the insurers just say no, this is our policy: take it or leave it?
When my wife wrote my car off last year the whole process was very vague, and full of assumptions made by ins co. that were untested, ie that our car was driveable, so we didn't need a replacement quickly (it wasn't) and also recall very few times when we were asked to choose any particular course of action.
So I do feel for op in this case as it does seem he has been steered down a path deliberately that maximises profit for ins co. group but puts him at greater financial risk.
Before Loon gets on my case for maligning the insurance industry, I think ins. co. had a duty to make it clear to OP what this course of action was doing.
(unless they did, in which case OP needs to take a life lesson about understanding what you are signing. Gone are the days of it being "make your mark here")
Ian Geary said:
Before Loon gets on my case for maligning the insurance industry, I think ins. co. had a duty to make it clear to OP what this course of action was doing.
(unless they did, in which case OP needs to take a life lesson about understanding what you are signing. Gone are the days of it being "make your mark here")
Kind of sums up my thoughts tbh and I'd also like to understand what you should do as a "non-expert customer" in such a situation.(unless they did, in which case OP needs to take a life lesson about understanding what you are signing. Gone are the days of it being "make your mark here")
justanother5tar said:
Right, now I understand what you mean.
The documents I signed say that I have an insurance policy included that covers me against any charges they can't recover.
If you have the above dont worry you will not have to pay anything and the insurance companies will sort it out between then.The documents I signed say that I have an insurance policy included that covers me against any charges they can't recover.
Before I decided to use the third parties insurance I spoke with my insurances accident management company and they also said that the credit agreement for the hire car includes a free insurance policy that covers me against any charges they cannot recover.They also wanted me to take out another free insurance policy to cover me if the third party rejects my car repair bill.
I was not happy with both these stipulations so I rang my insurance company and said I am not having a hire car on a credit agreement and not taking a policy if the third party do not pay for my repairs.I insured my car with you,the accident was not my fault,dont want to lose my NCB and all I want is my car repaired and a hire car until my car is returned to me so I will use the third parties insurance.
They said that fine no problem do you want me to ring them,I said no its ok I have their number and sorted it out myself with then.
I had an interesting conversation with them and they told me that if I used a credit hire management company that my insurance company use it would be likely that the hire car charges could be refused,their maximun hire car charges are £170 plus VAT a day and they are often more than that for a medium range car,their admin charges are very high and they reject 120k of hire car charges a WEEK and these companies cost the car insurance industry over £200 million a YEAR.
It seams to me that the insurance companies are screwing each other and would have thought they would be keen to work together to keep the costs reasonable.
btcc123 said:
If you have the above dont worry you will not have to pay anything and the insurance companies will sort it out between then.
They will not. His car insurer will have nothing to do with it. They have earnt their referral fee. He will be the Claimant since it's his 'loss'. Sure this side policy will cover him if he co-operates by giving incomplete and misleading evidence to the Court. Not something I'd want to do. btcc123 said:
It seams to me that the insurance companies are screwing each other and would have thought they would be keen to work together to keep the costs reasonable.
That's the bit I don't get about all this. I asked our resident industry spokesman in a recent previous thread and he basically said he does it because everyone else does it to him.pork911 said:
btcc123 said:
If you have the above dont worry you will not have to pay anything and the insurance companies will sort it out between then.
They will not. His car insurer will have nothing to do with it. They have earnt their referral fee. He will be the Claimant since it's his 'loss'. Sure this side policy will cover him if he co-operates by giving incomplete and misleading evidence to the Court. Not something I'd want to do. The documents I signed say that I have an insurance policy included that covers me against any charges they can't recover.
So 3 things may happen:
1.The third party will acccept the claim in full so no costs to the OP.
2.If the third party insurance company reject some of the claim the OP will be protected by his insurance policy against any charges the management company fail to recover.
3.The management company may decide to sue in court the third party insurance company to recover their losses.The OP may have to attend court just to explain what happened regarding the details of the accident.That is all and will then be free to leave.He will not be liable for any costs whether they are court or insurance costs.
There is a lot of information regarding this on the internet and I would encourage the OP to read about it,to speak to the management company and the third party insurers.
I've had a look around on the web, and I'm still none the wiser as to wether this 'insurance' is actually worth anything. As I'm getting here, half the information says it'll cover me, and half says it'll do nothing.
Ins co. didn't say anything anout what was happening, just that my details have been passed on to the company we use that handle our claims.
AMC didn't explain to me when I rang them what was happening, and I believed I was getting my courtesy car I had paid for with my policy. I assumed they had been in contact with 3rd party and agreed it.
With Ins Co saying it was 'the company who deal with our claims' I assumed that's what it was doing.
I feel like an idiot, and I probably have been one. I certainly won't be using the insurer (a widely recommended broker!) again. And should I unfortunately have another crash again, I'll ring the 3rd party myself.
This has all been far too much hassle for a car that just needed to get me work for a week or so.
Ins co. didn't say anything anout what was happening, just that my details have been passed on to the company we use that handle our claims.
AMC didn't explain to me when I rang them what was happening, and I believed I was getting my courtesy car I had paid for with my policy. I assumed they had been in contact with 3rd party and agreed it.
With Ins Co saying it was 'the company who deal with our claims' I assumed that's what it was doing.
I feel like an idiot, and I probably have been one. I certainly won't be using the insurer (a widely recommended broker!) again. And should I unfortunately have another crash again, I'll ring the 3rd party myself.
This has all been far too much hassle for a car that just needed to get me work for a week or so.
At the beginning of this thread you said "The problem now is that I've received a letter from AM co. stating that 3rd party aren't fully settling! I was made aware that this may happen in a thread I started a few weeks ago, but was hoping it wouldn't".
Have they told you how much they think that your are liable for and if not I would ring or E-mail them and say that you will not be paying as the documents you signed say that you have an insurance policy included that covers me against any charges they can't recover or you could tell them to sue the third party insurance for full payment.
I would also ring your insurance company to remind them that as they accepted your premium they are acting in your best interest.As you had a no fault accident and the third party admitted liability then you should have your car repaired and a hire car at no cost to you.I would also state that as they use a accident management company that uses credit hire for car hire and in the past if any of your policy holders have become liable for charges then you should have advised me to use the third parties insurance.
I still think at the end of the day you will not have to pay any money .
Have they told you how much they think that your are liable for and if not I would ring or E-mail them and say that you will not be paying as the documents you signed say that you have an insurance policy included that covers me against any charges they can't recover or you could tell them to sue the third party insurance for full payment.
I would also ring your insurance company to remind them that as they accepted your premium they are acting in your best interest.As you had a no fault accident and the third party admitted liability then you should have your car repaired and a hire car at no cost to you.I would also state that as they use a accident management company that uses credit hire for car hire and in the past if any of your policy holders have become liable for charges then you should have advised me to use the third parties insurance.
I still think at the end of the day you will not have to pay any money .
pork911 said:
Courtesy cars, hire cars and credit hire cars are all different things.
They might be, but not having ever had to involve my insurance in anything my point was that I'd probably assume they were acting in my best interests (which I'd assume would hopefully be theirs) rather than simply pushing me off elsewhere.I know people always say "read the small print" and that there are three sides to every story, but I can see how, having been in an accident, you might just assume all the paperwork your insurer sends you is just routine stuff.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff