Car hit by Hertz rental. Can I deal directly with Hertz?
Discussion
Zigster said:
Sheepshanks said:
I was just going to post almost the same - except I let our insurance company deal with the whole thing after someone ran into the back of Mrs R's car.
To my mind, this is what having "fully comp" insurance is all about. s
t happens - you call your insurer and they sort it out.
Ditto. A few years ago, someone ran into the back of me while I was stationary at lights. We exchanged details, I called my insurer and they dealt with it from then on. Minimised the hassle for me.To my mind, this is what having "fully comp" insurance is all about. s
t happens - you call your insurer and they sort it out.mikeveal said:
No, you're not making a claim. The third party are claiming from their policy to pay for your repair.
Yes, you are making a claim, against the third party, who in turn refer your claim to their insurers. The third party is also making a claim, in asking their insurers to deal with the damage they've caused.Creative use of the English language does not change things.
I can understand the reasons for telling the insurance company about an accident even if they're not involved, obviously it's a requirement; but also you are indeed paying them to do this stuff for you.
It's difficult to get your head around the fact that even if you don't make a claim on your insurance, the fact that you've been involved in an accident means the insurance company see you as a higher risk and may (or may not, but probably may) put your premium up.
People are wary of declaring things like this because every little thing does seem to put up the price of your insurance so there's a them / us relationship rather than customer / service provider.
For example, I moved from Islington to Harrow, from on street parking to gated underground car park and I had a charge to pay.
After some debate I managed to elicit the information that most of this was an admin charge rather than an increased premium: £35 (IIRC) to pay with 6 wks left on the policy pro-rata was a big hike.
It does seem though that no matter what, your premium goes up. And there will always be a reason.
In my case "there may be more accidents in that area"
Fine, but there's zero to no chance of parking dings or someone walking / driving past the car and damaging the it like there was at my previous address.
I recently hired a car in Dublin. Right at the last minute I was told there's a €30 charge if I'm taking the car into NI (God knows why). I spent most of the trip in a part of NI where that's right on the border. But I also spent an evening / night in Belfast.
At some point the car was damaged and I lost my excess (€1600) which I'm claiming back from insurance4carhire.com
I will tell my own insurer about this despite the fact that it wasn't my car, it wasn't my insurance policy, it wasn't my fault, it wasn't even in the same country. I expect an increase in my premium.
It's difficult to get your head around the fact that even if you don't make a claim on your insurance, the fact that you've been involved in an accident means the insurance company see you as a higher risk and may (or may not, but probably may) put your premium up.
People are wary of declaring things like this because every little thing does seem to put up the price of your insurance so there's a them / us relationship rather than customer / service provider.
For example, I moved from Islington to Harrow, from on street parking to gated underground car park and I had a charge to pay.
After some debate I managed to elicit the information that most of this was an admin charge rather than an increased premium: £35 (IIRC) to pay with 6 wks left on the policy pro-rata was a big hike.
It does seem though that no matter what, your premium goes up. And there will always be a reason.
In my case "there may be more accidents in that area"
Fine, but there's zero to no chance of parking dings or someone walking / driving past the car and damaging the it like there was at my previous address.
I recently hired a car in Dublin. Right at the last minute I was told there's a €30 charge if I'm taking the car into NI (God knows why). I spent most of the trip in a part of NI where that's right on the border. But I also spent an evening / night in Belfast.
At some point the car was damaged and I lost my excess (€1600) which I'm claiming back from insurance4carhire.com
I will tell my own insurer about this despite the fact that it wasn't my car, it wasn't my insurance policy, it wasn't my fault, it wasn't even in the same country. I expect an increase in my premium.
From my experience both recent (2 accidents in two days 
) and over the years...
Yes do tell your insurance regardless of if you go through them, the 3rd party insurance or settle it between you and the 3rd party directly.
Yes it can increase your renewal premium, but if its no fault then it will be only by a few quid, unless you are already a high risk driver (young, bad driving record, bad post code etc..)
Watch out for accident management companies and hire cars when using your own insurance. Often you are liable for hire charges until the claim is settled. The 3rd party might frown on 4 weeks hire costs of a luxury SUV whilst your 1L micra gets a bumper painted. Using the 3rd parties insurance means no risk to you, and keeps the cost down but then check the repair is via an approved repair place with a long warranty.
And remember every time you crash into a sooter and hopefully write it off, god saves a kitten.
) and over the years...Yes do tell your insurance regardless of if you go through them, the 3rd party insurance or settle it between you and the 3rd party directly.
Yes it can increase your renewal premium, but if its no fault then it will be only by a few quid, unless you are already a high risk driver (young, bad driving record, bad post code etc..)
Watch out for accident management companies and hire cars when using your own insurance. Often you are liable for hire charges until the claim is settled. The 3rd party might frown on 4 weeks hire costs of a luxury SUV whilst your 1L micra gets a bumper painted. Using the 3rd parties insurance means no risk to you, and keeps the cost down but then check the repair is via an approved repair place with a long warranty.
And remember every time you crash into a sooter and hopefully write it off, god saves a kitten.
TwigtheWonderkid said:
mikeveal said:
No, you're not making a claim. The third party are claiming from their policy to pay for your repair.
Yes, you are making a claim, against the third party, who in turn refer your claim to their insurers. The third party is also making a claim, in asking their insurers to deal with the damage they've caused.Creative use of the English language does not change things.
If the third party is liable for damage to your vehicle, then you could pursue them through the courts to get them to pay for a repair. Yeah, that's a court "claim". Unlikely to get anywhere near a court room if you're going down this route.
The third party ask their insurers to pay you on their behalf. They make a "claim" against their insurance policy.
You have not made a claim against an insurance company. You've threatened to bring a claim against the third party (and probably haven't had to). Where the third party get the money to pay for the repair is irrelevant to you.
mikeveal said:
Oh, I see what you did there, now that's pedantry!
If the third party is liable for damage to your vehicle, then you could pursue them through the courts to get them to pay for a repair. Yeah, that's a court "claim". Unlikely to get anywhere near a court room if you're going down this route.
The third party ask their insurers to pay you on their behalf. They make a "claim" against their insurance policy.
You have not made a claim against an insurance company. You've threatened to bring a claim against the third party (and probably haven't had to). Where the third party get the money to pay for the repair is irrelevant to you.
You state "You have not made a claim against an insurance company.". But the question doesn't ask if you've made a claim against an insurance company, it just askes for details of any claims. You should still disclose a claim where the tp paid you directly without involving their insurer.If the third party is liable for damage to your vehicle, then you could pursue them through the courts to get them to pay for a repair. Yeah, that's a court "claim". Unlikely to get anywhere near a court room if you're going down this route.
The third party ask their insurers to pay you on their behalf. They make a "claim" against their insurance policy.
You have not made a claim against an insurance company. You've threatened to bring a claim against the third party (and probably haven't had to). Where the third party get the money to pay for the repair is irrelevant to you.
You can juggle with the language all you like, but it should be disclosed.
TwigtheWonderkid said:
mikeveal said:
Oh, I see what you did there, now that's pedantry!
If the third party is liable for damage to your vehicle, then you could pursue them through the courts to get them to pay for a repair. Yeah, that's a court "claim". Unlikely to get anywhere near a court room if you're going down this route.
The third party ask their insurers to pay you on their behalf. They make a "claim" against their insurance policy.
You have not made a claim against an insurance company. You've threatened to bring a claim against the third party (and probably haven't had to). Where the third party get the money to pay for the repair is irrelevant to you.
You state "You have not made a claim against an insurance company.". But the question doesn't ask if you've made a claim against an insurance company, it just askes for details of any claims. You should still disclose a claim where the tp paid you directly without involving their insurer.If the third party is liable for damage to your vehicle, then you could pursue them through the courts to get them to pay for a repair. Yeah, that's a court "claim". Unlikely to get anywhere near a court room if you're going down this route.
The third party ask their insurers to pay you on their behalf. They make a "claim" against their insurance policy.
You have not made a claim against an insurance company. You've threatened to bring a claim against the third party (and probably haven't had to). Where the third party get the money to pay for the repair is irrelevant to you.
You can juggle with the language all you like, but it should be disclosed.
It is not juggling with the language. Its a basic fact.
But it does need to be disclosed as an accident or incident, that's why the question "Have you made any claims, or had any accidents or incidents in the past 12 months?" is so worded.
jjr1 said:
GC8 said:
Yes you can deal with them directly and no, you do not have to involve your wife's insurers (although it may be prudent in some cases and arguably required in most).
/unsanctimonious post
Would this still require my wife to tell her insurers on renewal and if so what is the benefit, if any, in dealing with it yourself?/unsanctimonious post
PH is full of bell-ends who only want to argue and make belittling, sanctimonious and self-righteous posts - you have to decide which path to take, but try not to be swayed by the 'forum' types too much.
Cheers guys for all the replies and I have decided to sort the matter out myself directly with Hertz insurers.
They require two estimates and if they decide I am not taking the piss they will pay directly one of those bodyshops.
All I will ask for is a courtesy car whilst the wife's is in the bodyshop and since they are a rental company I shouldn't think that would be a problem.
They require two estimates and if they decide I am not taking the piss they will pay directly one of those bodyshops.
All I will ask for is a courtesy car whilst the wife's is in the bodyshop and since they are a rental company I shouldn't think that would be a problem.
jjr1 said:
All I will ask for is a courtesy car whilst the wife's is in the bodyshop and since they are a rental company I shouldn't think that would be a problem.
Don't count on it, I claimed off a rental company and surprisingly the hire car came from a different firm! I presume that they had an insurer on the case who didn't care where they hired from...GC8 said:
You have to answer their questions honestly, but Loon R1 has suggested on other posts that a direct resolution is unlikely to ever be heard of again, and its his job...
PH is full of bell-ends who only want to argue and make belittling, sanctimonious and self-righteous posts - you have to decide which path to take, but try not to be swayed by the 'forum' types too much.
Instead by that suggestion too. If people don't want to listen, then fine, but there will be no adverse comeback in reality for letting a TP insurer deal with it. PH is full of bell-ends who only want to argue and make belittling, sanctimonious and self-righteous posts - you have to decide which path to take, but try not to be swayed by the 'forum' types too much.
Alfa numeric said:
In 2008 my car was hit by a van in a carpark. The van driver didn't stop and I didn't get the registration. I rang the insurance company who directed me to their local authorised repairer- they had a look at it and quoted me a price that was less than my excess, so I borrowed a car for a few days, paid for the repair and didn't make a claim.
The following year my insurer told me that because I'd had an accident in the year my premium was going up. I can't remember exactly how much it went up by but I do remember that it was in the hundreds of pounds. So it does happen.
How many times do I have to say the same thing?The following year my insurer told me that because I'd had an accident in the year my premium was going up. I can't remember exactly how much it went up by but I do remember that it was in the hundreds of pounds. So it does happen.
I have NOT said that premiums will never rise. I've said that all premiums do NOT automatically rise. Some go up, some stay the same amd some go down, despite this statement people seem incapable of understanding it.
LoonR1 said:
GC8 said:
You have to answer their questions honestly, but Loon R1 has suggested on other posts that a direct resolution is unlikely to ever be heard of again, and its his job...
PH is full of bell-ends who only want to argue and make belittling, sanctimonious and self-righteous posts - you have to decide which path to take, but try not to be swayed by the 'forum' types too much.
Instead by that suggestion too. If people don't want to listen, then fine, but there will be no adverse comeback in reality for letting a TP insurer deal with it. PH is full of bell-ends who only want to argue and make belittling, sanctimonious and self-righteous posts - you have to decide which path to take, but try not to be swayed by the 'forum' types too much.
Alfa numeric said:
In 2008 my car was hit by a van in a carpark. The van driver didn't stop and I didn't get the registration. I rang the insurance company who directed me to their local authorised repairer- they had a look at it and quoted me a price that was less than my excess, so I borrowed a car for a few days, paid for the repair and didn't make a claim.
The following year my insurer told me that because I'd had an accident in the year my premium was going up. I can't remember exactly how much it went up by but I do remember that it was in the hundreds of pounds. So it does happen.
How many times do I have to say the same thing?The following year my insurer told me that because I'd had an accident in the year my premium was going up. I can't remember exactly how much it went up by but I do remember that it was in the hundreds of pounds. So it does happen.
I have NOT said that premiums will never rise. I've said that all premiums do NOT automatically rise. Some go up, some stay the same amd some go down, despite this statement people seem incapable of understanding it.
If my car is damaged by another driver who then admits full responsibility for the claim, I can then make a claim through my own insurer (who will be recompensed by the other driver's insurer) and I probably won't see an increase in my premium next year unless the general cost of insurance has risen for everyone or my details/vehicle/risk have otherwise changed?
Rubin215 said:
LoonR1 said:
GC8 said:
You have to answer their questions honestly, but Loon R1 has suggested on other posts that a direct resolution is unlikely to ever be heard of again, and its his job...
PH is full of bell-ends who only want to argue and make belittling, sanctimonious and self-righteous posts - you have to decide which path to take, but try not to be swayed by the 'forum' types too much.
Instead by that suggestion too. If people don't want to listen, then fine, but there will be no adverse comeback in reality for letting a TP insurer deal with it. PH is full of bell-ends who only want to argue and make belittling, sanctimonious and self-righteous posts - you have to decide which path to take, but try not to be swayed by the 'forum' types too much.
Alfa numeric said:
In 2008 my car was hit by a van in a carpark. The van driver didn't stop and I didn't get the registration. I rang the insurance company who directed me to their local authorised repairer- they had a look at it and quoted me a price that was less than my excess, so I borrowed a car for a few days, paid for the repair and didn't make a claim.
The following year my insurer told me that because I'd had an accident in the year my premium was going up. I can't remember exactly how much it went up by but I do remember that it was in the hundreds of pounds. So it does happen.
How many times do I have to say the same thing?The following year my insurer told me that because I'd had an accident in the year my premium was going up. I can't remember exactly how much it went up by but I do remember that it was in the hundreds of pounds. So it does happen.
I have NOT said that premiums will never rise. I've said that all premiums do NOT automatically rise. Some go up, some stay the same and some go down, despite this statement people seem incapable of understanding it.
If my car is damaged by another driver who then admits full responsibility for the claim, I can then make a claim through my own insurer (who will be recompensed by the other driver's insurer) and I probably won't see an increase in my premium next year unless the general cost of insurance has risen for everyone or my details/vehicle/risk have otherwise changed?
I highlighted a bit in bold for you, as you clearly have the comprehension ability of an amoeba. the but in bold has been confirmed by posters on this thread already.
Let's try an example that might be a bit closer to home for you. I had an accidental fire in my garden today, but I put it out on my own. Therefore all fires are
1. In my garden
2. Accidental
3. Able to be put out by me
Is my logic correct or fundamentally flawed?
Edited by LoonR1 on Wednesday 2nd September 20:17
This is what boils my piss about insurance companies, they want you to pony up information like this, as it gives them an excuse to charge you more!
Your car gets hit while it's parked up - why should you have to declare that to your insurer? Ditto for it being involved in an accident while in the car of a trade professional (be it mechanic or valeter).
Neither of these incidents should need declaring to your insurer, because the risk to them doesn't change - your driving is what is the risk they are covering, and that of your car if it had a mechanical problem (i.e. handbrake failure).
Really gets to me that does...
Your car gets hit while it's parked up - why should you have to declare that to your insurer? Ditto for it being involved in an accident while in the car of a trade professional (be it mechanic or valeter).
Neither of these incidents should need declaring to your insurer, because the risk to them doesn't change - your driving is what is the risk they are covering, and that of your car if it had a mechanical problem (i.e. handbrake failure).
Really gets to me that does...
Cyberprog said:
This is what boils my piss about insurance companies, they want you to pony up information like this, as it gives them an excuse to charge you more!
Your car gets hit while it's parked up - why should you have to declare that to your insurer? Ditto for it being involved in an accident while in the car of a trade professional (be it mechanic or valeter).
Neither of these incidents should need declaring to your insurer, because the risk to them doesn't change - your driving is what is the risk they are covering, and that of your car if it had a mechanical problem (i.e. handbrake failure).
Really gets to me that does...
Seriously?Your car gets hit while it's parked up - why should you have to declare that to your insurer? Ditto for it being involved in an accident while in the car of a trade professional (be it mechanic or valeter).
Neither of these incidents should need declaring to your insurer, because the risk to them doesn't change - your driving is what is the risk they are covering, and that of your car if it had a mechanical problem (i.e. handbrake failure).
Really gets to me that does...
What happens when 30 days into your new policy your car gets hit while parked up and nobody owns up to it. Who would be paying for the repairs?
Ditto on the valeter who doesn't have any cover and stuffs it into a wall whilst in his care. Who pays for the repairs?
In practice you don't need to declare if the claim was covered exclusively by the other insurer without any involvement of your own insurer.
LoonR1 said:
Rubin215 said:
LoonR1 said:
GC8 said:
You have to answer their questions honestly, but Loon R1 has suggested on other posts that a direct resolution is unlikely to ever be heard of again, and its his job...
PH is full of bell-ends who only want to argue and make belittling, sanctimonious and self-righteous posts - you have to decide which path to take, but try not to be swayed by the 'forum' types too much.
Instead by that suggestion too. If people don't want to listen, then fine, but there will be no adverse comeback in reality for letting a TP insurer deal with it. PH is full of bell-ends who only want to argue and make belittling, sanctimonious and self-righteous posts - you have to decide which path to take, but try not to be swayed by the 'forum' types too much.
Alfa numeric said:
In 2008 my car was hit by a van in a carpark. The van driver didn't stop and I didn't get the registration. I rang the insurance company who directed me to their local authorised repairer- they had a look at it and quoted me a price that was less than my excess, so I borrowed a car for a few days, paid for the repair and didn't make a claim.
The following year my insurer told me that because I'd had an accident in the year my premium was going up. I can't remember exactly how much it went up by but I do remember that it was in the hundreds of pounds. So it does happen.
How many times do I have to say the same thing?The following year my insurer told me that because I'd had an accident in the year my premium was going up. I can't remember exactly how much it went up by but I do remember that it was in the hundreds of pounds. So it does happen.
I have NOT said that premiums will never rise. I've said that all premiums do NOT automatically rise. Some go up, some stay the same and some go down, despite this statement people seem incapable of understanding it.
If my car is damaged by another driver who then admits full responsibility for the claim, I can then make a claim through my own insurer (who will be recompensed by the other driver's insurer) and I probably won't see an increase in my premium next year unless the general cost of insurance has risen for everyone or my details/vehicle/risk have otherwise changed?
I highlighted a bit in bold for you, as you clearly have the comprehension ability of an amoeba. the but in bold has been confirmed by posters on this thread already.
Let's try an example that might be a bit closer to home for you. I had an accidental fire in my garden today, but I put it out on my own. Therefore all fires are
1. In my garden
2. Accidental
3. Able to be put out by me
Is my logic correct or fundamentally flawed?
Edited by LoonR1 on Wednesday 2nd September 20:17
You're a bit touchy!
For once I was actually trying to help you out here and put it in terms other people might understand and appreciate; pardon me if I don't do it again!
Rubin215 said:
Wow!
You're a bit touchy!
For once I was actually trying to help you out here and put it in terms other people might understand and appreciate; pardon me if I don't do it again!
The thing is that what you wrote wasn't correct. I'm not touchy, although this thread has definitely got me questioning my sanity. You're a bit touchy!
For once I was actually trying to help you out here and put it in terms other people might understand and appreciate; pardon me if I don't do it again!
LoonR1 said:
Rubin215 said:
Wow!
You're a bit touchy!
For once I was actually trying to help you out here and put it in terms other people might understand and appreciate; pardon me if I don't do it again!
The thing is that what you wrote wasn't correct. I'm not touchy, although this thread has definitely got me questioning my sanity. You're a bit touchy!
For once I was actually trying to help you out here and put it in terms other people might understand and appreciate; pardon me if I don't do it again!
LoonR1 said:
Unbelievable
I highlighted a bit in bold for you, as you clearly have the comprehension ability of an amoeba. the but in bold has been confirmed by posters on this thread already.
Let's try an example that might be a bit closer to home for you. I had an accidental fire in my garden today, but I put it out on my own. Therefore all fires are
1. In my garden
2. Accidental
3. Able to be put out by me
Is my logic correct or fundamentally flawed?
I'm sorry you had a fire in your garden - BBQ was it??I highlighted a bit in bold for you, as you clearly have the comprehension ability of an amoeba. the but in bold has been confirmed by posters on this thread already.
Let's try an example that might be a bit closer to home for you. I had an accidental fire in my garden today, but I put it out on my own. Therefore all fires are
1. In my garden
2. Accidental
3. Able to be put out by me
Is my logic correct or fundamentally flawed?
Edited by LoonR1 on Wednesday 2nd September 20:17
But in fairness, we're not talking about fires in your garden here, It's does your insurance go up now you have had a fire?
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff