Insurance claim denied - possible going to court
Discussion
Just after a small bit of advice, or opinions of the likely outcome.
About 3 months ago, I was parked on a reesidential street. Whilst I was away, some old guy parked infront of my car, left his handbrake off. His car then rolled back into mine and damaged my front bumper. I returned to my car with his vehicle against the front. I backed up to look for damage, and his car, due to the gradient, rolled back into mine for a second time.
I went knocking on doors, and found the owner. He came out, put his handbrake on, no apology, didnt want to give me his insurance details due to "your car still drives fine"
I knew his adress, and registration, so called my insurance company to make the claim. My car got repaired beautifully, there was a 4 inch gauge out of my plastic bumper, from the weight of his car, pushing my metal number plate back into my car. Repair came to £900ish, as they had to re-pair and re-spray the whole front bumper to make the damage good again.
His insurance company denaied his car ever being anywhere near mine, and it must all be made up. I had pictures of it, and a video showing it free wheeling without its handbrake on. They have now come back saying I must have crashed into him. My insurance are taking it to court. The third party are arguing that the repair cost is excessive for the damage, that they did not cause.
Anyone have any clue what the outcome may be?
TL:DR Man left handbrake off. I have videos pictures showing his vehicle and damaged caused to mine, as well as an independant witness. May be going to court.
About 3 months ago, I was parked on a reesidential street. Whilst I was away, some old guy parked infront of my car, left his handbrake off. His car then rolled back into mine and damaged my front bumper. I returned to my car with his vehicle against the front. I backed up to look for damage, and his car, due to the gradient, rolled back into mine for a second time.
I went knocking on doors, and found the owner. He came out, put his handbrake on, no apology, didnt want to give me his insurance details due to "your car still drives fine"
I knew his adress, and registration, so called my insurance company to make the claim. My car got repaired beautifully, there was a 4 inch gauge out of my plastic bumper, from the weight of his car, pushing my metal number plate back into my car. Repair came to £900ish, as they had to re-pair and re-spray the whole front bumper to make the damage good again.
His insurance company denaied his car ever being anywhere near mine, and it must all be made up. I had pictures of it, and a video showing it free wheeling without its handbrake on. They have now come back saying I must have crashed into him. My insurance are taking it to court. The third party are arguing that the repair cost is excessive for the damage, that they did not cause.
Anyone have any clue what the outcome may be?
TL:DR Man left handbrake off. I have videos pictures showing his vehicle and damaged caused to mine, as well as an independant witness. May be going to court.
I've had the calls.
Originally they wanted to just put a new bumper on due to the damage, as the cheaper option. they could not source one, so due to me wanting my car back asap. They striped the front end down, repaired and resprayed the whole lot. They eneded up doing all the grills, fog covers, and other such things to make sure there wasnt a paint match issue.
Originally they wanted to just put a new bumper on due to the damage, as the cheaper option. they could not source one, so due to me wanting my car back asap. They striped the front end down, repaired and resprayed the whole lot. They eneded up doing all the grills, fog covers, and other such things to make sure there wasnt a paint match issue.
Tje said:
His insurance company denaied his car ever being anywhere near mine, and it must all be made up. I had pictures of it, and a video showing it free wheeling without its handbrake on. They have now come back saying I must have crashed into him.
Anyone have any clue what the outcome may be?
The other insurance company is playing poker.Anyone have any clue what the outcome may be?
If they really defend that claim then they are likely going to be picking up the whole legal costs.
Have you submitted the video to your insurance company, and have they sent it to the other insurers?
Magic919 said:
Seems odd that they want to argue about quantum whilst denying liability.
Do they realise he didn't apply the handbrake or do they believe it failed in some way?
Not really happens a lot. Do they realise he didn't apply the handbrake or do they believe it failed in some way?
Quantum is a waste of time arguing after Coles, bar exceptionally high labour charges.
Liability is quite bizarre (taking the OP's post at face value) and I just can't see any reason why an insurer would try to defend this, unless they're completely stupid / in an administrative nightmare / ridiculously pathetic when it comes to enforcing subrogation rights with customers.
EDIT: I know I'm a suspicious sod, but the OP sure has had some grief with his front bumper in his time
http://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&a...
Then in the thread preceding this he said they'd exchanged insurance and no mention of the hassles doing so that he explains on this thread.
http://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&a...
Edited by LoonR1 on Thursday 3rd September 17:13
Magic919 said:
Q for R1Loon
Are they likely to just pay out if they think the handbrake just failed?
Yep if the OP has sent them the video that he claims to have of it freewheeling down the road then they would. I'm not sure how he made it though without causing further damage to his or another car. Are they likely to just pay out if they think the handbrake just failed?
An insurer is unlikely to argue the toss over whether it's a design fault etc. if it was a claim that was going to cost £millions eg a car rolls onto a railway and derails a Virgin Express train killing / injuring hundreds then they might investigate further. On a claim of £900 no chance.
I doubt any insurer would argue a claim of £900 unless their customer is adamant they weren't there, or not at fault. Neither of those seems likely here given the video the OP claims to have.
Handbrakes rarely fail, despite what drivers claim to be the case. Drivers forgetting to put it on is far more frequent and that is the definition of negligence.
It seems the £900 claim might have been to cover fixing the previous stone chip damage and bodged number plate screw holes that were there prior to the damage from the car rolling into it.
But i suspect the other insurance company will stay pay this before it goes to court as it'll be cheaper for them in the long run than try to dispute it in court.
But i suspect the other insurance company will stay pay this before it goes to court as it'll be cheaper for them in the long run than try to dispute it in court.
LoonR1 said:
I doubt any insurer would argue a claim of £900 unless their customer is adamant they weren't there, or not at fault. Neither of those seems likely here given the video the OP claims to have.
I think here lies the key. It is not unusual for one party to say that black was white at the outset of the claim. When investigations prove that black was in fact black the insurer is left in the invidious position of having to call their own client a liar. So backtracking takes some time.I wish in such cases the insurers would be a bit more forceful and pursue their clients for costs, but I don't think that will happen as it would be too troublesome to prove real intent in most cases.
desolate said:
I think here lies the key. It is not unusual for one party to say that black was white at the outset of the claim. When investigations prove that black was in fact black the insurer is left in the invidious position of having to call their own client a liar. So backtracking takes some time.
I wish in such cases the insurers would be a bit more forceful and pursue their clients for costs, but I don't think that will happen as it would be too troublesome to prove real intent in most cases.
Insurers can't win with their approach. Take a tough stance with their customer and they're on here complaining of poor service and just rolling over and so on. Take a weak stance and then people are on here suggesting they toughen up I wish in such cases the insurers would be a bit more forceful and pursue their clients for costs, but I don't think that will happen as it would be too troublesome to prove real intent in most cases.
LoonR1 said:
Insurers can't win with their approach. Take a tough stance with their customer and they're on here complaining of poor service and just rolling over and so on. Take a weak stance and then people are on here suggesting they toughen up
I agree.They are all b
ds though, let's not pretend otherwise.smiley f
king face winking thing.LoonR1 said:
Yep if the OP has sent them the video that he claims to have of it freewheeling down the road then they would. I'm not sure how he made it though without causing further damage to his or another car.
An insurer is unlikely to argue the toss over whether it's a design fault etc. if it was a claim that was going to cost £millions eg a car rolls onto a railway and derails a Virgin Express train killing / injuring hundreds then they might investigate further. On a claim of £900 no chance.
I doubt any insurer would argue a claim of £900 unless their customer is adamant they weren't there, or not at fault. Neither of those seems likely here given the video the OP claims to have.
Handbrakes rarely fail, despite what drivers claim to be the case. Drivers forgetting to put it on is far more frequent and that is the definition of negligence.
I pushed it off the front of my car. And then the neighbour of the guy who's car it was held it off my car whilst I went and knocked on his door to get him to come out and secure it. An insurer is unlikely to argue the toss over whether it's a design fault etc. if it was a claim that was going to cost £millions eg a car rolls onto a railway and derails a Virgin Express train killing / injuring hundreds then they might investigate further. On a claim of £900 no chance.
I doubt any insurer would argue a claim of £900 unless their customer is adamant they weren't there, or not at fault. Neither of those seems likely here given the video the OP claims to have.
Handbrakes rarely fail, despite what drivers claim to be the case. Drivers forgetting to put it on is far more frequent and that is the definition of negligence.
Edit: I questioned the high value of the work they did. As I had a private quote of £600 to get the front bumper looking like new, prior to fiether damage. They said due to needing to respray the whole thing, all damage including previous needing fixing to make the repair acceptable in their eyes.
I've also had the doors dinged lots and a bit key down the rear quarter panel. Not just the front that has bad luck. Including someone has bumped the rear bumper. Not knowing who caused the damage kind of negated making a post to ask for advice when I knew it was just something I would have to live with.
Edited by Tje on Thursday 3rd September 19:05
ash73 said:
Tje said:
I backed up to look for damage, and his car, due to the gradient, rolled back into mine for a second time.
Sounds a bit like Wile Coyote running off a cliff...There was a bang, a scream, a second bang and the line went dead. Concerned, my mate rang back and the third time he tried he got through.
It transpired that in slow rolling traffic she failed to notice the car in front had stopped, and drove into the back of it.
That was the first bang. The second bang was that her reactions were so slow, not only did she knock the poor sods in front forward with a jolt, she kept her foot on the gas and bashed them forward a second time.
It brings a smile to my face even today wondering what the poor sods in front where thinking when they looked back to see a dozy girl repeatedly drive into them.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff