insurance woes
Discussion
Bit of a long story but i'll keep it a brief as poss, I am in the motor trade and have fully comp traders cover, this summer I put a classic car into a small one man band operator for restoration, ( He has done 3 cars in the past for me )
The car was ready for paint with all the hard work done , the painter had gone away on holiday, while he was away his workshop went up in flames, with my car in in totally gone, my policy covers me for 3rd party use only while driving a car over 25 yrs old by the way, I did not enter the car in the MID as it was not roadworthy so it wont be covered, he tells me that he may be covered for my loss and gave me his details, it turns out that its the same company that I am with, I want to know if this will make any difference to me ( TRYING) making the claim or not,
I wrote to them with the details of the loss and they advised me to hand it to my insurers, to be honest I don't think he has enough cover but it comes to a few quid so will have to try ,
any advice welcome, cheers
greenflash said:
Bit of a long story but i'll keep it a brief as poss, I am in the motor trade and have fully comp traders cover, this summer I put a classic car into a small one man band operator for restoration, ( He has done 3 cars in the past for me )
The car was ready for paint with all the hard work done , the painter had gone away on holiday, while he was away his workshop went up in flames, with my car in in totally gone, my policy covers me for 3rd party use only while driving a car over 25 yrs old by the way, I did not enter the car in the MID as it was not roadworthy so it wont be covered, he tells me that he may be covered for my loss and gave me his details, it turns out that its the same company that I am with, I want to know if this will make any difference to me ( TRYING) making the claim or not,
I wrote to them with the details of the loss and they advised me to hand it to my insurers, to be honest I don't think he has enough cover but it comes to a few quid so will have to try ,
any advice welcome, cheers
Why is it "insurance woes"? You chose not to put the car on cover, you chose to hand it to someone to do some work without checking whether they had sufficient cover. The car was ready for paint with all the hard work done , the painter had gone away on holiday, while he was away his workshop went up in flames, with my car in in totally gone, my policy covers me for 3rd party use only while driving a car over 25 yrs old by the way, I did not enter the car in the MID as it was not roadworthy so it wont be covered, he tells me that he may be covered for my loss and gave me his details, it turns out that its the same company that I am with, I want to know if this will make any difference to me ( TRYING) making the claim or not,
I wrote to them with the details of the loss and they advised me to hand it to my insurers, to be honest I don't think he has enough cover but it comes to a few quid so will have to try ,
any advice welcome, cheers
It will make no difference at all around who he is insured with, you either have a valid claim on his policy, or you don't. It is that simple. You have no is users to hand your claim to, as you chose not to cover your car.
Thanks for the stating the obvious, hindsight is wonderful thing it seems, yes you are right I should not have assumed anything about his cover,its the usual wont happen to me thing .
The main question I am asking is will the insurance company fight that hard for my claim as we are both covered by the same company ? you are right its not woe just a bit of avoidable hassle and I have learnt the hard way.
The main question I am asking is will the insurance company fight that hard for my claim as we are both covered by the same company ? you are right its not woe just a bit of avoidable hassle and I have learnt the hard way.
greenflash said:
Thanks for the stating the obvious, hindsight is wonderful thing it seems, yes you are right I should not have assumed anything about his cover,its the usual wont happen to me thing .
The main question I am asking is will the insurance company fight that hard for my claim as we are both covered by the same company ? you are right its not woe just a bit of avoidable hassle and I have learnt the hard way.
Will which insurance company fight as hard for your claim? That makes no sense. You have no insurance I place for your loss. It's up to you to try to claim off his insurance policy. Whether you fight as hard is up to you, but there is no fight. You are covered on his insurance, or you're not. It is that simple. The main question I am asking is will the insurance company fight that hard for my claim as we are both covered by the same company ? you are right its not woe just a bit of avoidable hassle and I have learnt the hard way.
OP, the repairers Insurers will not care who the damaged car was "insured" with and will treat the claim against them exactly as they would do regardless of insurer. Though as Loon has pointed out, from your point of view the car is uninsured.
I had my tintop written off by an idiot driver last year, and while still at the scene of the accident was contacted by the TP's insurers (who happened to be the same as mine!) offering to recover the vehicle and provide a courtesy car. Better treatment than if I had claimed under my own policy!
I had my tintop written off by an idiot driver last year, and while still at the scene of the accident was contacted by the TP's insurers (who happened to be the same as mine!) offering to recover the vehicle and provide a courtesy car. Better treatment than if I had claimed under my own policy!
LoonR1 said:
Will which insurance company fight as hard for your claim? That makes no sense. You have no insurance I place for your loss. It's up to you to try to claim off his insurance policy. Whether you fight as hard is up to you, but there is no fight. You are covered on his insurance, or you're not. It is that simple.
Exactly right. Does his policy cover him for customers vehicles in his care, custody or control on an comprehensive basis, in which case you'll be fine, or does his policy only cover his legal liability to his customers, in which case you will have to show he was negligent, which I doubt he was, but it's possibledrdel said:
Why do you care about his insurance?
As a professional/business he owes you a duty of care. Its his problem - if his insurance covers all the costs - good for him. If 'it' doesn't cover all your loss you'll need to get the balance from him directly.
What makes you think he was negligent in that duty of care?As a professional/business he owes you a duty of care. Its his problem - if his insurance covers all the costs - good for him. If 'it' doesn't cover all your loss you'll need to get the balance from him directly.
Putting the car on the MID just satisfies the legal aspect for road risks cover doesn't it - unless things have changed in the few years since I have retired. The Damage Fire and theft element would still apply to Customers vehicles in your custody or control assuming your sum insured is sufficient. As you contracted with an external sprayer the vehicle isn't in your custody but is surely still in your control as you could decide to move it back to yours for other work or just take it away etc
The scenario where work is taken on by a main contractor with specialist works contracted out isn't unusual in the motor trade and I'd have thought the usual suspects policy wordings would take some account of these fairy common occurrences.
What does your broker say about the policy cover?
The scenario where work is taken on by a main contractor with specialist works contracted out isn't unusual in the motor trade and I'd have thought the usual suspects policy wordings would take some account of these fairy common occurrences.
What does your broker say about the policy cover?
drdel said:
Why do you care about his insurance?
As a professional/business he owes you a duty of care. Its his problem - if his insurance covers all the costs - good for him. If 'it' doesn't cover all your loss you'll need to get the balance from him directly.
His premises caught fire. If he chucked his cigarette on the floor before leaving for the day, you might have a point. But that's unlikely, and the overwhelming chances are he hasn't failed in his duty of care. As a professional/business he owes you a duty of care. Its his problem - if his insurance covers all the costs - good for him. If 'it' doesn't cover all your loss you'll need to get the balance from him directly.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff