Car Accident & Subsequent (Lengthy) Claim
Discussion
A long one, I'm sorry...
I was involved in a car accident (other driver at fault) that resulted in a 13 month long attempt to repair my car before it was declared a total loss.
During this time I had hire car provided by my insurance, I had specifically selected this as an addition to the policy.
Understandably, to a degree, the 3rd party insurance are disputing the claim costs. I imagine 13 months of hire car charges is a sizeable sum of money!
Getting to the point. The claims handling company, apparently acting on my behalf, has sent several letters over the last 12 months with questionnaires for me to complete - mostly asking whether I could've afforded a hire car myself. Reluctantly, I have returned these completed pointing out it was not my duty to pay for a hire car. Further insults such as asking: could I have afforded to replace the car myself and could I have borrowed money from family to pay for a hire car have been directed at me.
A subsequent letter has arrived today. The claims handling company now request copies of my bank and credit card statements to use as evidence in the dispute.
Now, I'm not powerfully built nor a director in shape or form but I earn a good salary. In a court of law, a good solicitor could easily argue I was able to pay for it myself. Besides the point I feel having selected and paid for a hire car on my insurance policy.
I'm damned if I'm going to give out bank statements or account details to a random claims company.
Has anyone been in such a situation or have any advice to offer to me?
TL;DR: Car insurance claim. Hire car provided. Claims handler requesting evidence of income to determine whether it could've been funded privately. Where do I stand?
I was involved in a car accident (other driver at fault) that resulted in a 13 month long attempt to repair my car before it was declared a total loss.
During this time I had hire car provided by my insurance, I had specifically selected this as an addition to the policy.
Understandably, to a degree, the 3rd party insurance are disputing the claim costs. I imagine 13 months of hire car charges is a sizeable sum of money!
Getting to the point. The claims handling company, apparently acting on my behalf, has sent several letters over the last 12 months with questionnaires for me to complete - mostly asking whether I could've afforded a hire car myself. Reluctantly, I have returned these completed pointing out it was not my duty to pay for a hire car. Further insults such as asking: could I have afforded to replace the car myself and could I have borrowed money from family to pay for a hire car have been directed at me.
A subsequent letter has arrived today. The claims handling company now request copies of my bank and credit card statements to use as evidence in the dispute.
Now, I'm not powerfully built nor a director in shape or form but I earn a good salary. In a court of law, a good solicitor could easily argue I was able to pay for it myself. Besides the point I feel having selected and paid for a hire car on my insurance policy.
I'm damned if I'm going to give out bank statements or account details to a random claims company.
Has anyone been in such a situation or have any advice to offer to me?
TL;DR: Car insurance claim. Hire car provided. Claims handler requesting evidence of income to determine whether it could've been funded privately. Where do I stand?
DuncB7 said:
During this time I had hire car provided by my insurance
Provided by your insurer, or by a credit-hire company?DuncB7 said:
Reluctantly, I have returned these completed pointing out it was not my duty to pay for a hire car.
The angle they're taking is that you could have taken reasonable steps to mitigate the costs.HTF did it take 13mo to decide your car was toast, though?
TooMany2cvs said:
DuncB7 said:
During this time I had hire car provided by my insurance
Provided by your insurer, or by a credit-hire company?DuncB7 said:
Reluctantly, I have returned these completed pointing out it was not my duty to pay for a hire car.
The angle they're taking is that you could have taken reasonable steps to mitigate the costs.HTF did it take 13mo to decide your car was toast, though?
Long old story re length of claim. Mainly due to repairer incompetence and availability of parts.
DuncB7 said:
TooMany2cvs said:
DuncB7 said:
During this time I had hire car provided by my insurance
Provided by your insurer, or by a credit-hire company?DuncB7 said:
Reluctantly, I have returned these completed pointing out it was not my duty to pay for a hire car.
The angle they're taking is that you could have taken reasonable steps to mitigate the costs.HTF did it take 13mo to decide your car was toast, though?
Long old story re length of claim. Mainly due to repairer incompetence and availability of parts.
Who selected the repairer that turned out to be incompetent?
TooMany2cvs said:
Credit-hire is the old accident-management company scam, at massively higher daily rates than normal. Even more fun, though, is that as part of the agreement you agree to pay them if they don't reclaim them from the other insurer... You need to dig the paperwork out...
Who selected the repairer that turned out to be incompetent?
Jesus wept. 13 months of hire car charges I could be liable for Who selected the repairer that turned out to be incompetent?
I have just been reading about credit-hire agreements. Very concerned now. Paperwork for that insurance policy is long gone.My insurance selected the repairer in this instance. I hope that stands me in a more favourable place.
Edited by DuncB7 on Friday 20th January 17:20
At a price of £100 a day for the credit hire (Which is easily achieved) the cost of the hire of the vehicle could easily hit £40k.
You really need to read the contract you signed for the Credit Hire Vehicle, it will make you agree to assist them when they pursue the third party for the money.
You really need to read the contract you signed for the Credit Hire Vehicle, it will make you agree to assist them when they pursue the third party for the money.
(Plenty of threads on this)
There are courtesy cars, hire cars and credit hire cars.
Your's very much appears to have been a credit hire.
You will be the Claimant at Court since you hired the car and are seeking to recoup the hire charges you are liable for under the contract you entered.
The hir company / claims company will require you to co-operate in seeking to recoup as much as those charges as the Court orders the other driver/ their insurer to pay in your place. If you don't co-operate they will threaten you with the bill.
They will likely reassure you (verbally, in writing or via a separate policy) that there's nothing to worry about since as long as you co-operate they will not ask you for any shortfall.
However you will be dissuaded from mentioning such reassurance in your evidence to the Court.
Your financial information is required to show whether you could have funded it cheaper (cash or access to credit). Just one if several minor issues they kick around with you in the middle, rather than dealing with the core scam of which you are required to play along with.
.....unless of course you deny hiring the car? What did you think was happening? Magic money tree paying for it all? Etc
There are courtesy cars, hire cars and credit hire cars.
Your's very much appears to have been a credit hire.
You will be the Claimant at Court since you hired the car and are seeking to recoup the hire charges you are liable for under the contract you entered.
The hir company / claims company will require you to co-operate in seeking to recoup as much as those charges as the Court orders the other driver/ their insurer to pay in your place. If you don't co-operate they will threaten you with the bill.
They will likely reassure you (verbally, in writing or via a separate policy) that there's nothing to worry about since as long as you co-operate they will not ask you for any shortfall.
However you will be dissuaded from mentioning such reassurance in your evidence to the Court.
Your financial information is required to show whether you could have funded it cheaper (cash or access to credit). Just one if several minor issues they kick around with you in the middle, rather than dealing with the core scam of which you are required to play along with.
.....unless of course you deny hiring the car? What did you think was happening? Magic money tree paying for it all? Etc
It would have been better if the TPs Insurer was responsible for the repair. They wouldn't then be able to complain about the length of time it took.
It can be relevant if you could have afforded to hire a car yourself, as you have a duty to mitigate costs. It doesn't sound like your Insurer provided the car, they passed you over to an accident management company.
Legally, you can be compelled to prove that you couldn't afford a hire car yourself.
Tim
It can be relevant if you could have afforded to hire a car yourself, as you have a duty to mitigate costs. It doesn't sound like your Insurer provided the car, they passed you over to an accident management company.
Legally, you can be compelled to prove that you couldn't afford a hire car yourself.
Tim
Perhaps naively, I felt that having paid for a hire car on my insurance I was entitled to one FOC whilst my car was repaired. I was not aware of the credit-hire arrangement and subsequent implications of such agreements.
Again, naively, as it may turn out, I assumed the charges were all taken care of behind the scenes given the accident wasn't my fault. I thought the fault was the main driver it in all. After all, had he not driven carelessly, there would've been no need for any hire car.
From what you guys have kindly pointed out, it seems very much in my own interest to cooperate with their requests.
In theory then, I could be on the hook for a serious amount of money. I shall pour myself a large whisky.
Again, naively, as it may turn out, I assumed the charges were all taken care of behind the scenes given the accident wasn't my fault. I thought the fault was the main driver it in all. After all, had he not driven carelessly, there would've been no need for any hire car.
From what you guys have kindly pointed out, it seems very much in my own interest to cooperate with their requests.
In theory then, I could be on the hook for a serious amount of money. I shall pour myself a large whisky.
DuncB7 said:
Perhaps naively, I felt that having paid for a hire car on my insurance I was entitled to one FOC whilst my car was repaired. I was not aware of the credit-hire arrangement and subsequent implications of such agreements.
Again, naively, as it may turn out, I assumed the charges were all taken care of behind the scenes given the accident wasn't my fault. I thought the fault was the main driver it in all. After all, had he not driven carelessly, there would've been no need for any hire car.
From what you guys have kindly pointed out, it seems very much in my own interest to cooperate with their requests.
In theory then, I could be on the hook for a serious amount of money. I shall pour myself a large whisky.
You are on the hook for the money if you intentionally miss led them into giving you a hire car if you lied about how the accident happened. But you're not on the hook if you did not miss lead them and assist them claiming the money back.Again, naively, as it may turn out, I assumed the charges were all taken care of behind the scenes given the accident wasn't my fault. I thought the fault was the main driver it in all. After all, had he not driven carelessly, there would've been no need for any hire car.
From what you guys have kindly pointed out, it seems very much in my own interest to cooperate with their requests.
In theory then, I could be on the hook for a serious amount of money. I shall pour myself a large whisky.
These things are generally settled betweem Insurer and credit hire company before it reaches court
DuncB7 said:
Perhaps naively, I felt that having paid for a hire car on my insurance I was entitled to one FOC whilst my car was repaired. I was not aware of the credit-hire arrangement and subsequent implications of such agreements.
Again, naively, as it may turn out, I assumed the charges were all taken care of behind the scenes given the accident wasn't my fault. I thought the fault was the main driver it in all. After all, had he not driven carelessly, there would've been no need for any hire car.
From what you guys have kindly pointed out, it seems very much in my own interest to cooperate with their requests.
In theory then, I could be on the hook for a serious amount of money. I shall pour myself a large whisky.
Was there a time limit on the courtesy car provision from your own insurance company. If not then, it seems to me, your own insurance company must pay for whatever they can't get out of the third party. I'd have been asking questions after a month.Again, naively, as it may turn out, I assumed the charges were all taken care of behind the scenes given the accident wasn't my fault. I thought the fault was the main driver it in all. After all, had he not driven carelessly, there would've been no need for any hire car.
From what you guys have kindly pointed out, it seems very much in my own interest to cooperate with their requests.
In theory then, I could be on the hook for a serious amount of money. I shall pour myself a large whisky.
DuncB7 said:
Perhaps naively, I felt that having paid for a hire car on my insurance I was entitled to one FOC whilst my car was repaired. I was not aware of the credit-hire arrangement and subsequent implications of such agreements.
Again, naively, as it may turn out, I assumed the charges were all taken care of behind the scenes given the accident wasn't my fault. I thought the fault was the main driver it in all. After all, had he not driven carelessly, there would've been no need for any hire car.
From what you guys have kindly pointed out, it seems very much in my own interest to cooperate with their requests.
In theory then, I could be on the hook for a serious amount of money. I shall pour myself a large whisky.
You are on the hook for the money if you intentionally miss led them into giving you a hire car if you lied about how the accident happened. But you're not on the hook if you did not miss lead them and assist them claiming the money back.Again, naively, as it may turn out, I assumed the charges were all taken care of behind the scenes given the accident wasn't my fault. I thought the fault was the main driver it in all. After all, had he not driven carelessly, there would've been no need for any hire car.
From what you guys have kindly pointed out, it seems very much in my own interest to cooperate with their requests.
In theory then, I could be on the hook for a serious amount of money. I shall pour myself a large whisky.
These things are generally settled betweem Insurer and credit hire company before it reaches court
herewego said:
Was there a time limit on the courtesy car provision from your own insurance company. If not then, it seems to me, your own insurance company must pay for whatever they can't get out of the third party. I'd have been asking questions after a month.
I was not made aware of any time restriction.I can assure you I was asking questions. I was left to expedite the repair schedule entirely on my own; often helping source parts and suppliers to speed the process.
dacouch said:
You are on the hook for the money if you intentionally miss led them into giving you a hire car if you lied about how the accident happened. But you're not on the hook if you did not miss lead them and assist them claiming the money back.
These things are generally settled betweem Insurer and credit hire company before it reaches court
Reassuring advice, thank you. Absolutely did not mislead anyone at any stage during the process.These things are generally settled betweem Insurer and credit hire company before it reaches court
DuncB7 said:
Jesus wept. 13 months of hire car charges I could be liable for I have just been reading about credit-hire agreements. Very concerned now. Paperwork for that insurance policy is long gone.
My insurance selected the repairer in this instance. I hope that stands me in a more favourable place.
Not really helpful to yourself to dispose of important papers during the process. You should ask for copies from the insurance company. I have just been reading about credit-hire agreements. Very concerned now. Paperwork for that insurance policy is long gone.My insurance selected the repairer in this instance. I hope that stands me in a more favourable place.
Edited by DuncB7 on Friday 20th January 17:20
KevinCamaroSS said:
Not really helpful to yourself to dispose of important papers during the process. You should ask for copies from the insurance company.
Obviously, I have to agree with you. For a claim which I assumed was closed in 2014, one could be forgiven for disposing of paperwork.DuncB7 said:
I'm royally f
ked here. I unwittingly accepted the 'like-for-like' replacement which was a 4x4 vehicle at times.
Unfortunately, it seems I've fallen for a massive scam and could potentially be on the hook for a 5 figure sum of money.
Potentially you could be, but it is seriously unlikely that it will come to that, even if the hire car company fail to secure payment.ked here. I unwittingly accepted the 'like-for-like' replacement which was a 4x4 vehicle at times.Unfortunately, it seems I've fallen for a massive scam and could potentially be on the hook for a 5 figure sum of money.
edit: you say you paid for hire car cover on your policy. Is this correct?
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff