Non fault claim - affecting my insurance premiums
Discussion
itcaptainslow said:
If it's just a door ding, won't a paintless dent repair man be able to sort it for £50 or so? Far easier and cheaper than involving insurance companies.
Yes, you're probably right, although I think it will still cost more than £50 (the insurance claims bloke out today reckoned more like £100)It's just frustrating that my car, 12 year old Mercedes ML500 that doesn't have ANY marks onthe bodywork (rare on one of these), gets a stupid ding that I have to pay for even though the girl fully accepted liability.
Mandat said:
ikarl said:
this is my first non-fault claim but I have also made a fault claim within the last year.
Doesn't this statement support the insurer's assumption (however correct or incorrect that might be) that someone making a claim is likely to make a second claim within a year?The fact that I crashed a car avoiding a motorbike, did not make it more likely that some stupid bint would throw her door open damaging my car.
She didn't apologise, although at the scene she admitted full liability and said she would prefer to deal with it out with the insurance. She then contacted Direct Line the next day and started the claim. She told me at the scene her excess was £400 so I found it strange when I got the call the next day from her insurers
ikarl said:
Mandat said:
ikarl said:
this is my first non-fault claim but I have also made a fault claim within the last year.
Doesn't this statement support the insurer's assumption (however correct or incorrect that might be) that someone making a claim is likely to make a second claim within a year?The fact that I crashed a car avoiding a motorbike, did not make it more likely that some stupid bint would throw her door open damaging my car.
She didn't apologise, although at the scene she admitted full liability and said she would prefer to deal with it out with the insurance. She then contacted Direct Line the next day and started the claim. She told me at the scene her excess was £400 so I found it strange when I got the call the next day from her insurers
She has no excess to pay on a TP claim. This gets covered many, many times in here as well.
ikarl said:
Mandat said:
ikarl said:
this is my first non-fault claim but I have also made a fault claim within the last year.
Doesn't this statement support the insurer's assumption (however correct or incorrect that might be) that someone making a claim is likely to make a second claim within a year?The fact that I crashed a car avoiding a motorbike, did not make it more likely that some stupid bint would throw her door open damaging my car.
She didn't apologise, although at the scene she admitted full liability and said she would prefer to deal with it out with the insurance. She then contacted Direct Line the next day and started the claim. She told me at the scene her excess was £400 so I found it strange when I got the call the next day from her insurers
LoonR1 said:
The fault accident is a nice bit of extra info to throw in at this stage.
She has no excess to pay on a TP claim. This gets covered many, many times in here as well.
Sorry Loon, you'll need to help me with this....I don't have your knowledge of these things.She has no excess to pay on a TP claim. This gets covered many, many times in here as well.
Yes, I have had an accident, however, that was my fault and I fully expect to be penalised for that come renewal time, I should've hit the motorbike rider instead of off-roading my car trying to avoid him. Ho-hum my choice I guess!
My issue is that I'll be financially disadvantaged because someone hit my car because of their stupidity in this incident. So, even if I take away the fact that I've claimed off my insurance, I would still be penalised due to a non fault claim.
So why is that a nice bit of extra info?
Again, you know these things better than I do, so if you say she won't pay any excess, ok.... I didn't know that.
herewego said:
ikarl said:
Mandat said:
ikarl said:
this is my first non-fault claim but I have also made a fault claim within the last year.
Doesn't this statement support the insurer's assumption (however correct or incorrect that might be) that someone making a claim is likely to make a second claim within a year?The fact that I crashed a car avoiding a motorbike, did not make it more likely that some stupid bint would throw her door open damaging my car.
She didn't apologise, although at the scene she admitted full liability and said she would prefer to deal with it out with the insurance. She then contacted Direct Line the next day and started the claim. She told me at the scene her excess was £400 so I found it strange when I got the call the next day from her insurers
herewego said:
Can you call her again and tell her you can get it done for 100 and see if she will cancel the claim and settle it herself. She may have gone through insurance because she could be expecting a rip off bill due to the make.
That won't change the fact that he's had an accident which is now in the system. At renewal, he'll have to say that he's had a non-fault accident.Tim
ikarl said:
Ok, so if I just suck it up and repair the car myself (looking likely) and I just ignore any further correspondence from Direct Line, would I have to disclose anything? I've not claimed anything and DL aren't out of pocket....basically just deny anything.
Too late as the incident is already logged in the system. Even without proceeding with the claim, you will need to disclose the incident to future insurers for the next 5 years. Some may load the premium as a result and some may not.ikarl said:
Sorry Loon, you'll need to help me with this....I don't have your knowledge of these things.
Yes, I have had an accident, however, that was my fault and I fully expect to be penalised for that come renewal time, I should've hit the motorbike rider instead of off-roading my car trying to avoid him. Ho-hum my choice I guess!
My issue is that I'll be financially disadvantaged because someone hit my car because of their stupidity in this incident. So, even if I take away the fact that I've claimed off my insurance, I would still be penalised due to a non fault claim.
So why is that a nice bit of extra info?
Again, you know these things better than I do, so if you say she won't pay any excess, ok.... I didn't know that.
It's extra info, because you haven't mentioned it before and it makes a huge difference. One claim on your record may make a difference if non-fault. It will if it's fault. Two claims irrespective of fault will make difference with quite a few insurers. Yes, I have had an accident, however, that was my fault and I fully expect to be penalised for that come renewal time, I should've hit the motorbike rider instead of off-roading my car trying to avoid him. Ho-hum my choice I guess!
My issue is that I'll be financially disadvantaged because someone hit my car because of their stupidity in this incident. So, even if I take away the fact that I've claimed off my insurance, I would still be penalised due to a non fault claim.
So why is that a nice bit of extra info?
Again, you know these things better than I do, so if you say she won't pay any excess, ok.... I didn't know that.
You can't claim it back. Just as you couldn't claim for the lottery win you didn't have, as the accident prevented you from buying your ticket that day.
itcaptainslow said:
If it's just a door ding, won't a paintless dent repair man be able to sort it for £50 or so? Far easier and cheaper than involving insurance companies.
I had a quote yesterday for a smart repair for a small ding in my door !! he would't do it cos ,he said , the whole door would need re-spraying .My wife's car with a ding in it but also a swage ??? line through it he could do cos its only half a panel !!! £275 + vat !!!
£50 ? dream on.
This is crazy. Someone has hit my car, admitted liability, I decide not to claim but I'm going to be financially impacted because they contact their insurance co.
Surely that's not right?!
I may as well go through an accident management company, get an ML63 for a few days, get the car repaired by a merc approved insurer etc....cost a couple of £k and it's still the same impact to me.
Absolutely ridiculous.
Surely that's not right?!
I may as well go through an accident management company, get an ML63 for a few days, get the car repaired by a merc approved insurer etc....cost a couple of £k and it's still the same impact to me.
Absolutely ridiculous.
ikarl said:
This is crazy. Someone has hit my car, admitted liability, I decide not to claim but I'm going to be financially impacted because they contact their insurance co.
Surely that's not right?!
I may as well go through an accident management company, get an ML63 for a few days, get the car repaired by a merc approved insurer etc....cost a couple of £k and it's still the same impact to me.
Absolutely ridiculous.
Get an ML63 and enjoy the bill that's coming your way. You can't get like for likening a prestige car over 6 years old unless you've got a very, very good reason. Oh and an AMC can't successfully chase for your increased premium either. Surely that's not right?!
I may as well go through an accident management company, get an ML63 for a few days, get the car repaired by a merc approved insurer etc....cost a couple of £k and it's still the same impact to me.
Absolutely ridiculous.
I know you don't want to hear it, but shouting louder won't change the facts.
LoonR1 said:
Get an ML63 and enjoy the bill that's coming your way. You can't get like for likening a prestige car over 6 years old unless you've got a very, very good reason. Oh and an AMC can't successfully chase for your increased premium either.
I know you don't want to hear it, but shouting louder won't change the facts.
You're right, I don't want to hear it, but thank you for your words... I know you're right!I know you don't want to hear it, but shouting louder won't change the facts.
I will need an equivalent vehicle that has a low range as I do visit site and require decent'ish off-road capabilities, a crv won't cut it.
It's just a bit of an ass that the insurance industry works like this. Its forcing me to claim for something I don't want too.
johnS2000 said:
itcaptainslow said:
If it's just a door ding, won't a paintless dent repair man be able to sort it for £50 or so? Far easier and cheaper than involving insurance companies.
I had a quote yesterday for a smart repair for a small ding in my door !! he would't do it cos ,he said , the whole door would need re-spraying .My wife's car with a ding in it but also a swage ??? line through it he could do cos its only half a panel !!! £275 + vat !!!
£50 ? dream on.
ikarl said:
You're right, I don't want to hear it, but thank you for your words... I know you're right!
I will need an equivalent vehicle that has a low range as I do visit site and require decent'ish off-road capabilities, a crv won't cut it.
It's just a bit of an ass that the insurance industry works like this. Its forcing me to claim for something I don't want too.
Similar is fine, but you will not be able to justify am ML63 by saying you need it for off-road work. I will need an equivalent vehicle that has a low range as I do visit site and require decent'ish off-road capabilities, a crv won't cut it.
It's just a bit of an ass that the insurance industry works like this. Its forcing me to claim for something I don't want too.
itcaptainslow said:
The dent repair bloke I use is absolutely brilliant-he's taken massive dents out of panels that I never thought possible, including one with a swage line in it on my Focus ST170. Granted that particular repair was more than £50 (which is what I'd expect to pay for a straightforward door dink, which is what the OP's post kind of suggested, however without pics it's impossible to tell), but I don't remember it being any more than about £150. If anyone is local to Luton I can thoroughly recommend him.
I'd Be interested ! I have 2 cars that need de-dinging .Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff