Crash and hire car - other party wont pay hire fees
Discussion
KungFuPanda said:
My company has a contract with Enterprise: Focus sized car £22 day guaranteedPro Bono said:
KungFuPanda said:
In the scheme of things a £2k credit hire bill is nothing. Even if they issue proceedings, it’ll be allocated to the small claims track where nobody can recover costs so they’ll settle.
I guarantee you, this won’t go to Court if the hire bill is under £2k. It’s not worth it. It’ll be some claims handler working for the third party insurer digging their heels in. When it gets passed to solicitors or someone more senior, they’ll take a more pragmatic approach and settle.
If you’re bored, have a look at some of the hire rates in the link for tastier motors. Fast Audi/Merc/BMW commands a daily rate of circa £270 a day...
These rates are actually not that unreasonable, but I suspect what's happened in this case is that the OP's solicitors have claimed that the OP is `impecunious'. If so, then it unlocks a treasure chest for the claims management company, as they can then charge truly extortionate hire rates.I guarantee you, this won’t go to Court if the hire bill is under £2k. It’s not worth it. It’ll be some claims handler working for the third party insurer digging their heels in. When it gets passed to solicitors or someone more senior, they’ll take a more pragmatic approach and settle.
If you’re bored, have a look at some of the hire rates in the link for tastier motors. Fast Audi/Merc/BMW commands a daily rate of circa £270 a day...
To get some idea of these this is an extract from a judgment given in 2018 in Cardiff County Court, EUI Ltd -v Charles. The full judgment can be read here - https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/Misc/2018/B7.html
Paragraph 5 sets out the claims, and the amounts are truly eye-watering!
The credit hire claims asserted in the individual cases can be summarised as follows:-
CHARLES: £8608.08 claimed for 52 days credit hire to replace a Honda PCX 125 motorcycle.
CZYRKIEWICZ: £11,915 claimed for 52 days credit hire to replace a Suzuki GSR 750 motorcycle.
MIRZA: £3145 claimed for 13 days credit hire to replace a Kawasaki Z1000 motorcycle.
VRINCIANU £28,030 claimed for 42 days hire to replace a Mercedes E220.
WILSON £37,819 claimed for 45 days credit hire to replace a Mercedes C63 AMG.
ALI £13,628 for 102 days credit hire to replace a Hyundai I20.
FELLOWS £11,203.20 for 40 days credit hire to replace a Mercedes B180.
The rates for motor bikes are just staggering - £229 a day for a Suzuki 750! You can buy one of the bloody things new for less than £7k, yet they’re charging £12k for a hire period of less than 8 weeks!
For cars, the rates work out at £666 a day for an E-Class Merc, and £280 a day for a humble B-Class. Even a pov car like a Hyundai i20 is charged out at £134 a day! That compares with the daily rate of £37.45 allowed for the same car under the GTA rates, i.e. it’s getting on for 4 times the normal credit hire rate.
On that basis, the OP’s bill for an 8 week hire period could be in the region of £6,500.
This `impecunious credit hire’ industry is an outrageous scam, and I’ve never understood how the claims firms can get away with it.
However, it would explain why they’re now asking for details of the OP’s finances. They may want to establish that he’s impecunious in order to try and claim these extortionate rates.
A question to the OP – how much is the actual hire bill? If it’s only a couple of thousand then the impecuniosity aspect won’t be relevant, but I felt that other readers should be aware of this scam anyway.
Not sure where they’re going with the impecunious argument. Surely anybody availing themselves of the services of an AMC to obtain a credit hire vehicle are impecunious otherwise they would have hired a vehicle and paid the charges up front. Anyway the impecuniosity argument doesn’t have much legs as I recall a premiership football player still managed to recover credit hire fees despite his financial situation.
Nephew got hit as he waited to turn right in an ancient Polo (Value £450 max and that's being very generous) by a lorry who had a driver not paying attention (no fault accident AFIWC)
Car was a write off - tailgate rear wings bumper and floorpan damage.
Car was collected by insurance company and he entered into a credit hire agreement to get himself mobile.
Circumstances: Under 20 (couldn't self hire) - Apprentice (so low pay) - No credit card (or credit history)
He had it about a month and racked up over £2K of hire fees before I realised what was going on and stepped in to save later pain.
I had a car (another Polo) sitting on the drive doing nothing so got it MOT'd and lent him that.
To be honest I really regretted getting involved - as shortly after this the other parties insurance company realised they were on the hook for a £450 car write off and over £2K of hire fees.
They did all the usual letters asking for bank statements - proof of earnings - asking him why he couldn't self hire etc and then when he told them he'd borrowed a car from his uncle they came after me asking why I couldn't have provided the car earlier.
At which point I wrote a very short and ill-tempered letter telling them I was unaware of the circumstances of the hire and only became aware after a second visit by my nephew after 4 weeks when he was still swanning around in a brand new Astra - At which point I did everything I could to limit their liability and to be honest they can FRO because without my intervention they would have been looking at £5K hire fees.
They did settle in the end but I can absolutely understand why insurance companies don't like this arrangement
Car was a write off - tailgate rear wings bumper and floorpan damage.
Car was collected by insurance company and he entered into a credit hire agreement to get himself mobile.
Circumstances: Under 20 (couldn't self hire) - Apprentice (so low pay) - No credit card (or credit history)
He had it about a month and racked up over £2K of hire fees before I realised what was going on and stepped in to save later pain.
I had a car (another Polo) sitting on the drive doing nothing so got it MOT'd and lent him that.
To be honest I really regretted getting involved - as shortly after this the other parties insurance company realised they were on the hook for a £450 car write off and over £2K of hire fees.
They did all the usual letters asking for bank statements - proof of earnings - asking him why he couldn't self hire etc and then when he told them he'd borrowed a car from his uncle they came after me asking why I couldn't have provided the car earlier.
At which point I wrote a very short and ill-tempered letter telling them I was unaware of the circumstances of the hire and only became aware after a second visit by my nephew after 4 weeks when he was still swanning around in a brand new Astra - At which point I did everything I could to limit their liability and to be honest they can FRO because without my intervention they would have been looking at £5K hire fees.
They did settle in the end but I can absolutely understand why insurance companies don't like this arrangement
loskie said:
KungFuPanda said:
My company has a contract with Enterprise: Focus sized car £22 day guaranteedKungFuPanda said:
Direct Accident Management! As I recall, it was started by by a barrister based in Liverpool or the Wirral. Nothing good ever comes from Merseyside. Anyway, very dodgy practices and I’m sure the barrister used to present the claims himself in Court.
Not sure where they’re going with the impecunious argument. Surely anybody availing themselves of the services of an AMC to obtain a credit hire vehicle are impecunious otherwise they would have hired a vehicle and paid the charges up front. Anyway the impecuniosity argument doesn’t have much legs as I recall a premiership football player still managed to recover credit hire fees despite his financial situation.
Not necessarily, I worked for an AMC for about 4 years, and the common argument is that although they may be able to afford it, why should they pay for it when its not their fault, the same as the people that argue that because they drive a 20 year old BMW, they should be entitled to a replacement BMW, or that their 15 year old 3 series is a classic, and they have put aftermarket wheels on it, aftermarket DRL's and other stuff, so the car is now worth 10k.Not sure where they’re going with the impecunious argument. Surely anybody availing themselves of the services of an AMC to obtain a credit hire vehicle are impecunious otherwise they would have hired a vehicle and paid the charges up front. Anyway the impecuniosity argument doesn’t have much legs as I recall a premiership football player still managed to recover credit hire fees despite his financial situation.
When it comes to car accidents, people are rarely logical, and they see the 2 options of a courtesy car, or something of an equivalent standard as their own, and most will want the car similar to their own.
RedAndy said:
Insurance company arranged a hire car with a hire car company
...
Apparently insurance company didnt hire the car... WE DID. SO the contract is with us and insurance company want's nowt to do with it. Solicitors are all very nice about it but want loads of info about our personal finances to see if we coiuld have afforded the hire car if insurance hadn't paid. What's that go to do with anything?
It is absolutely unbelievable that you were given a hire car without being given the documents setting out the details of the rental and that you were not asked to sign anything agreeing to those terms....
Apparently insurance company didnt hire the car... WE DID. SO the contract is with us and insurance company want's nowt to do with it. Solicitors are all very nice about it but want loads of info about our personal finances to see if we coiuld have afforded the hire car if insurance hadn't paid. What's that go to do with anything?
Absolutely unbelievable.
Smurfsarepeopletoo said:
Not necessarily, I worked for an AMC for about 4 years, and the common argument is that although they may be able to afford it, why should they pay for it when its not their fault, the same as the people that argue that because they drive a 20 year old BMW, they should be entitled to a replacement BMW, or that their 15 year old 3 series is a classic, and they have put aftermarket wheels on it, aftermarket DRL's and other stuff, so the car is now worth 10k.
When it comes to car accidents, people are rarely logical, and they see the 2 options of a courtesy car, or something of an equivalent standard as their own, and most will want the car similar to their own.
They're not "the same as", though are they. The first one seems absolutely reasonable to me, if you have an accident that is not your fault why should you have to put your hand in your pocket. Especially as you are already lumbered with a lot of hassle and wasted time through no fault of your own. However, the other 2 examples, I agree, are taking the piss and I would definitely side with the AMC and/or insurance co. in those cases.When it comes to car accidents, people are rarely logical, and they see the 2 options of a courtesy car, or something of an equivalent standard as their own, and most will want the car similar to their own.
KungFuPanda said:
B'stard Child said:
They did settle in the end but I can absolutely understand why insurance companies don't like this arrangement
Insurance companies don't like it yet they are the first to pass their policyholders onto an accident management company for a nice kick back. B'stard Child said:
Nephew got hit as he waited to turn right in an ancient Polo (Value £450 max and that's being very generous) by a lorry who had a driver not paying attention (no fault accident AFIWC)
Car was a write off - tailgate rear wings bumper and floorpan damage.
Car was collected by insurance company and he entered into a credit hire agreement to get himself mobile.
Circumstances: Under 20 (couldn't self hire) - Apprentice (so low pay) - No credit card (or credit history)
He had it about a month and racked up over £2K of hire fees before I realised what was going on and stepped in to save later pain.
I had a car (another Polo) sitting on the drive doing nothing so got it MOT'd and lent him that.
To be honest I really regretted getting involved - as shortly after this the other parties insurance company realised they were on the hook for a £450 car write off and over £2K of hire fees.
They did all the usual letters asking for bank statements - proof of earnings - asking him why he couldn't self hire etc and then when he told them he'd borrowed a car from his uncle they came after me asking why I couldn't have provided the car earlier.
At which point I wrote a very short and ill-tempered letter telling them I was unaware of the circumstances of the hire and only became aware after a second visit by my nephew after 4 weeks when he was still swanning around in a brand new Astra - At which point I did everything I could to limit their liability and to be honest they can FRO because without my intervention they would have been looking at £5K hire fees.
They did settle in the end but I can absolutely understand why insurance companies don't like this arrangement
Sounds like the insurance company dragged their feet - when daughter's car was rear-ended it was taken to a repair centre, written off and then got a call saying a cheque was in the post and they'd be collecting the rental car 4 day later. The whole thing took about a week from start to finish.Car was a write off - tailgate rear wings bumper and floorpan damage.
Car was collected by insurance company and he entered into a credit hire agreement to get himself mobile.
Circumstances: Under 20 (couldn't self hire) - Apprentice (so low pay) - No credit card (or credit history)
He had it about a month and racked up over £2K of hire fees before I realised what was going on and stepped in to save later pain.
I had a car (another Polo) sitting on the drive doing nothing so got it MOT'd and lent him that.
To be honest I really regretted getting involved - as shortly after this the other parties insurance company realised they were on the hook for a £450 car write off and over £2K of hire fees.
They did all the usual letters asking for bank statements - proof of earnings - asking him why he couldn't self hire etc and then when he told them he'd borrowed a car from his uncle they came after me asking why I couldn't have provided the car earlier.
At which point I wrote a very short and ill-tempered letter telling them I was unaware of the circumstances of the hire and only became aware after a second visit by my nephew after 4 weeks when he was still swanning around in a brand new Astra - At which point I did everything I could to limit their liability and to be honest they can FRO because without my intervention they would have been looking at £5K hire fees.
They did settle in the end but I can absolutely understand why insurance companies don't like this arrangement
Something we hadn't thought about before, but not having spare cars kicking around in the family it was a right pain having to find another car in a few days.
Sheepshanks said:
B'stard Child said:
Nephew got hit as he waited to turn right in an ancient Polo (Value £450 max and that's being very generous) by a lorry who had a driver not paying attention (no fault accident AFIWC)
Car was a write off - tailgate rear wings bumper and floorpan damage.
Car was collected by insurance company and he entered into a credit hire agreement to get himself mobile.
Circumstances: Under 20 (couldn't self hire) - Apprentice (so low pay) - No credit card (or credit history)
He had it about a month and racked up over £2K of hire fees before I realised what was going on and stepped in to save later pain.
I had a car (another Polo) sitting on the drive doing nothing so got it MOT'd and lent him that.
To be honest I really regretted getting involved - as shortly after this the other parties insurance company realised they were on the hook for a £450 car write off and over £2K of hire fees.
They did all the usual letters asking for bank statements - proof of earnings - asking him why he couldn't self hire etc and then when he told them he'd borrowed a car from his uncle they came after me asking why I couldn't have provided the car earlier.
At which point I wrote a very short and ill-tempered letter telling them I was unaware of the circumstances of the hire and only became aware after a second visit by my nephew after 4 weeks when he was still swanning around in a brand new Astra - At which point I did everything I could to limit their liability and to be honest they can FRO because without my intervention they would have been looking at £5K hire fees.
They did settle in the end but I can absolutely understand why insurance companies don't like this arrangement
Sounds like the insurance company dragged their feet - when daughter's car was rear-ended it was taken to a repair centre, written off and then got a call saying a cheque was in the post and they'd be collecting the rental car 4 day later. The whole thing took about a week from start to finish.Car was a write off - tailgate rear wings bumper and floorpan damage.
Car was collected by insurance company and he entered into a credit hire agreement to get himself mobile.
Circumstances: Under 20 (couldn't self hire) - Apprentice (so low pay) - No credit card (or credit history)
He had it about a month and racked up over £2K of hire fees before I realised what was going on and stepped in to save later pain.
I had a car (another Polo) sitting on the drive doing nothing so got it MOT'd and lent him that.
To be honest I really regretted getting involved - as shortly after this the other parties insurance company realised they were on the hook for a £450 car write off and over £2K of hire fees.
They did all the usual letters asking for bank statements - proof of earnings - asking him why he couldn't self hire etc and then when he told them he'd borrowed a car from his uncle they came after me asking why I couldn't have provided the car earlier.
At which point I wrote a very short and ill-tempered letter telling them I was unaware of the circumstances of the hire and only became aware after a second visit by my nephew after 4 weeks when he was still swanning around in a brand new Astra - At which point I did everything I could to limit their liability and to be honest they can FRO because without my intervention they would have been looking at £5K hire fees.
They did settle in the end but I can absolutely understand why insurance companies don't like this arrangement
It all ended up going to court in the end but 30 mins from the court case going forward the other insurer withdrew the case - I think the other driver may well have had an epiphany regarding the circumstances
Sheepshanks said:
Something we hadn't thought about before, but not having spare cars kicking around in the family it was a right pain having to find another car in a few days.
It wasn't really a "spare" car - it was just one that I needed to sell when I got round to it having bought a newer model and I'm a bit tardy when it comes to selling cars but I'm quite good at buying them 
Friend of mine had an AM Rapide back in 2013 and it got rear ended in a petrol station whilst he was stationary - insurance co asked him if he had another car to which he said yes but why did that matter and he was given a list of ‘hire’ cars to choose from and he picked a Ferrari California but then swapped it to a Bentley of some description when he and the family were going away somewhere for a week or so. My memory is a little sketchy but there was a delay to the repair of the Rapide (parts shortage rings a bell) and he ended up with the loaner for about 3 months all in all.
He had to go to court on the day I laid my wife to rest, regarding the bill of about £75k, which meant he missed the funeral. Pretty sure he never heard anything more about it as the dispute was between the hire company and the third party’s insurer (I think). There’s every possibility that he was a little ‘generous’ with the total amount when recount g the story, but I can well believe it must have been something near that.
He had to go to court on the day I laid my wife to rest, regarding the bill of about £75k, which meant he missed the funeral. Pretty sure he never heard anything more about it as the dispute was between the hire company and the third party’s insurer (I think). There’s every possibility that he was a little ‘generous’ with the total amount when recount g the story, but I can well believe it must have been something near that.
Edited by pincher on Sunday 21st March 17:49
Credit hire companies are scummers but they wouldn’t exist without a healthy market of customers involved in accidents who have no qualms about exploiting the situation to bum around in a fancy car for as long as they can, on the other insurer’s coin.
This isn’t what happened in the OP’s case but it sounds like collateral damage to me.
Tangentially related but I was involved in an accident just over a year ago, and ever since then I’ve been plagued with calls asking me about it, by companies who know the particulars of the accident - the date, the vehicles involved, etc, trying to convince me that I have a claim for personal injury etc (I wasn’t injured and neither was the other party). Either my insurer told them about the details of this accident, or the other third party insurer did.
Whole industry is rotten to the core.
This isn’t what happened in the OP’s case but it sounds like collateral damage to me.
Tangentially related but I was involved in an accident just over a year ago, and ever since then I’ve been plagued with calls asking me about it, by companies who know the particulars of the accident - the date, the vehicles involved, etc, trying to convince me that I have a claim for personal injury etc (I wasn’t injured and neither was the other party). Either my insurer told them about the details of this accident, or the other third party insurer did.
Whole industry is rotten to the core.
My old next door neighbour worked at a company called drive assist, it's gone now but basically an AMC that survived and made money on lending you a car.
When the wife's got hit in a Leon cupra she got a B180 from them, it was filthy and full of dents, she refused to take it and they tried to charge £480 wasted journey and 1 days rental. We never paid or had another car just waited on the garage fixing it.
Glad they went under, not for the loss of people's jobs though
When the wife's got hit in a Leon cupra she got a B180 from them, it was filthy and full of dents, she refused to take it and they tried to charge £480 wasted journey and 1 days rental. We never paid or had another car just waited on the garage fixing it.
Glad they went under, not for the loss of people's jobs though
Durzel said:
Credit hire companies are scummers but they wouldn’t exist without a healthy market of customers involved in accidents who have no qualms about exploiting the situation to bum around in a fancy car for as long as they can, on the other insurer’s coin.
This isn’t what happened in the OP’s case but it sounds like collateral damage to me.
Tangentially related but I was involved in an accident just over a year ago, and ever since then I’ve been plagued with calls asking me about it, by companies who know the particulars of the accident - the date, the vehicles involved, etc, trying to convince me that I have a claim for personal injury etc (I wasn’t injured and neither was the other party). Either my insurer told them about the details of this accident, or the other third party insurer did.
Whole industry is rotten to the core.
Your assumption is largely incorrect here, there are people that just want to get something for nothing, but the large majority of people that use the services of AMC's are people who dont have thousands of pounds sitting around ina bank account just in case they need to hire a car, or cant deal with a Courtesy car because it is too small for their needs, either they have a family that wont fit in the courtesy car, or they use a car for business and it doesnt meet the image needed.This isn’t what happened in the OP’s case but it sounds like collateral damage to me.
Tangentially related but I was involved in an accident just over a year ago, and ever since then I’ve been plagued with calls asking me about it, by companies who know the particulars of the accident - the date, the vehicles involved, etc, trying to convince me that I have a claim for personal injury etc (I wasn’t injured and neither was the other party). Either my insurer told them about the details of this accident, or the other third party insurer did.
Whole industry is rotten to the core.
And AMC's really have to justify every hire they put out to the Third party Insurers, if they subscribe to the ABI GTA, they have a set amount that they can charge the TPI, they have to chase every other day to make sure there are no delays with the repairs, they have to get the customer out of the hire asap when the repairs are complete, they have to get the customer out of the hire asap if the vehicle is written off, and the TPI have paid more than 50% of the total loss value.
Its really not just a bunch of people, sitting around figuring out how to screw as much money as possible out of the TPI, yes, there are some out there that are dodgy, and will just try and screw people, but there are those companies in all industries.
Smurfsarepeopletoo said:
Durzel said:
Credit hire companies are scummers but they wouldn’t exist without a healthy market of customers involved in accidents who have no qualms about exploiting the situation to bum around in a fancy car for as long as they can, on the other insurer’s coin.
This isn’t what happened in the OP’s case but it sounds like collateral damage to me.
Tangentially related but I was involved in an accident just over a year ago, and ever since then I’ve been plagued with calls asking me about it, by companies who know the particulars of the accident - the date, the vehicles involved, etc, trying to convince me that I have a claim for personal injury etc (I wasn’t injured and neither was the other party). Either my insurer told them about the details of this accident, or the other third party insurer did.
Whole industry is rotten to the core.
Your assumption is largely incorrect here, there are people that just want to get something for nothing, but the large majority of people that use the services of AMC's are people who dont have thousands of pounds sitting around ina bank account just in case they need to hire a car, or cant deal with a Courtesy car because it is too small for their needs, either they have a family that wont fit in the courtesy car, or they use a car for business and it doesnt meet the image needed.This isn’t what happened in the OP’s case but it sounds like collateral damage to me.
Tangentially related but I was involved in an accident just over a year ago, and ever since then I’ve been plagued with calls asking me about it, by companies who know the particulars of the accident - the date, the vehicles involved, etc, trying to convince me that I have a claim for personal injury etc (I wasn’t injured and neither was the other party). Either my insurer told them about the details of this accident, or the other third party insurer did.
Whole industry is rotten to the core.
And AMC's really have to justify every hire they put out to the Third party Insurers, if they subscribe to the ABI GTA, they have a set amount that they can charge the TPI, they have to chase every other day to make sure there are no delays with the repairs, they have to get the customer out of the hire asap when the repairs are complete, they have to get the customer out of the hire asap if the vehicle is written off, and the TPI have paid more than 50% of the total loss value.
Its really not just a bunch of people, sitting around figuring out how to screw as much money as possible out of the TPI, yes, there are some out there that are dodgy, and will just try and screw people, but there are those companies in all industries.
B'stard Child said:
Nephew got hit as he waited to turn right in an ancient Polo (Value £450 max and that's being very generous) by a lorry who had a driver not paying attention (no fault accident AFIWC)
Car was a write off - tailgate rear wings bumper and floorpan damage.
Car was collected by insurance company and he entered into a credit hire agreement to get himself mobile.
Circumstances: Under 20 (couldn't self hire) - Apprentice (so low pay) - No credit card (or credit history)
He had it about a month and racked up over £2K of hire fees before I realised what was going on and stepped in to save later pain.
I had a car (another Polo) sitting on the drive doing nothing so got it MOT'd and lent him that.
To be honest I really regretted getting involved - as shortly after this the other parties insurance company realised they were on the hook for a £450 car write off and over £2K of hire fees.
They did all the usual letters asking for bank statements - proof of earnings - asking him why he couldn't self hire etc and then when he told them he'd borrowed a car from his uncle they came after me asking why I couldn't have provided the car earlier.
At which point I wrote a very short and ill-tempered letter telling them I was unaware of the circumstances of the hire and only became aware after a second visit by my nephew after 4 weeks when he was still swanning around in a brand new Astra - At which point I did everything I could to limit their liability and to be honest they can FRO because without my intervention they would have been looking at £5K hire fees.
They did settle in the end but I can absolutely understand why insurance companies don't like this arrangement
I don't understand this at all.Car was a write off - tailgate rear wings bumper and floorpan damage.
Car was collected by insurance company and he entered into a credit hire agreement to get himself mobile.
Circumstances: Under 20 (couldn't self hire) - Apprentice (so low pay) - No credit card (or credit history)
He had it about a month and racked up over £2K of hire fees before I realised what was going on and stepped in to save later pain.
I had a car (another Polo) sitting on the drive doing nothing so got it MOT'd and lent him that.
To be honest I really regretted getting involved - as shortly after this the other parties insurance company realised they were on the hook for a £450 car write off and over £2K of hire fees.
They did all the usual letters asking for bank statements - proof of earnings - asking him why he couldn't self hire etc and then when he told them he'd borrowed a car from his uncle they came after me asking why I couldn't have provided the car earlier.
At which point I wrote a very short and ill-tempered letter telling them I was unaware of the circumstances of the hire and only became aware after a second visit by my nephew after 4 weeks when he was still swanning around in a brand new Astra - At which point I did everything I could to limit their liability and to be honest they can FRO because without my intervention they would have been looking at £5K hire fees.
They did settle in the end but I can absolutely understand why insurance companies don't like this arrangement
£450 car. Why did the insurance company just not send a cheque for £450 within 7 days, that end the liability?
kestral said:
B'stard Child said:
<snip>
I don't understand this at all.£450 car. Why did the insurance company just not send a cheque for £450 within 7 days, that end the liability?
The OP insurance then disputed the fault (and liability for any costs incurred) - all the way to 30 mins before court
B'stard Child said:
It was a few years ago - from memory I think the other driver changed his story - it went from being a non fault to a disputed case - so the insurance company didn't want to settle. My nephew was TPF&T so no incentive for his own insurer to do anything.
It all ended up going to court in the end but 30 mins from the court case going forward the other insurer withdrew the case - I think the other driver may well have had an epiphany regarding the circumstances
I guess that could easily have happened in daughter's case - she did it all through her own insurer, who didn't handle it as well as I hoped. We initially thought the car would be repairable.It all ended up going to court in the end but 30 mins from the court case going forward the other insurer withdrew the case - I think the other driver may well have had an epiphany regarding the circumstances
However the Argos van drivers insurance refused to respond and months later she was asked to sign legal documents as her insurer prepared to take legal action. She never heard any more after that.
B'stard Child said:
That's exactly what I would have expected to happen - except for the other driver (originally at the scene) saying he didn't realise my nephew was stationary and indicating to turn right. He changed his story on the statement to his insurance company to my nephew was "doing a U turn without indication and without warning just in front of him"
The OP insurance then disputed the fault (and liability for any costs incurred) - all the way to 30 mins before court
I had a similar happen.The OP insurance then disputed the fault (and liability for any costs incurred) - all the way to 30 mins before court
To be fair the young lad owned up and contacted his insurance company.
I got a call from them asking if I needed another car. As I had other transport (a van) I just said no. It might not have cost me anything but everyone pays in the end.
I would have only had it an few days anyway as an assessor came out, looked at my car and pronounced it a write off (Fiat Panda worth about a grand on a good day). I believe as soon as the money is in the bank the hire car needs to go back so again it wasn’t worth the hastle.
In other circumstances the hire car might be a necessity so you can’t really generalise but it’s everyones duty to minimise unnecessary expense whether it directly affects you or not.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff