Car insurance woes
Discussion
You/she apparently signed up to a credit hire agreement for the hire car. In the terms it will have said that you're liable for any costs they can't recover and agree to go to court on their behalf if necessary.
It will have also involved terms such as agreeing that you had no option but to use credit hire as you could (with documented evidence) not afford to hire a car by the normal route and claim the cost back later, as well as stating you have no access any other vehicles.
All things they can throw back at you later if it gets to court when the 3rd party insurer won't cover the credit hire,
It will have also involved terms such as agreeing that you had no option but to use credit hire as you could (with documented evidence) not afford to hire a car by the normal route and claim the cost back later, as well as stating you have no access any other vehicles.
All things they can throw back at you later if it gets to court when the 3rd party insurer won't cover the credit hire,
Ghs said:
I d add I also don t understand why my wife s insurance should be impacted if we took option 1 as this accident was found to be the 3 rd party fault who ran into the back of my wife s car , that was a couple of years ago .
I'd have thought because if the 3rd party won't pay the unreasonable hire charges, they're saying you should try your own insurer and get them to pay. If they did pay, that's a claim against your insurance, hence the impact.I can't imagine your own insurers would pay up anyway though?
PorkInsider said:
You/she apparently signed up to a credit hire agreement for the hire car. In the terms it will have said that you're liable for any costs they can't recover and agree to go to court on their behalf if necessary.
It will have also involved terms such as agreeing that you had no option but to use credit hire as you could (with documented evidence) not afford to hire a car by the normal route and claim the cost back later, as well as stating you have no access any other vehicles.
All things they can throw back at you later if it gets to court when the 3rd party insurer won't cover the credit hire,
It will have also involved terms such as agreeing that you had no option but to use credit hire as you could (with documented evidence) not afford to hire a car by the normal route and claim the cost back later, as well as stating you have no access any other vehicles.
All things they can throw back at you later if it gets to court when the 3rd party insurer won't cover the credit hire,
If we have signed upto pay for the hire car , I’ve no knowledge of that then wouldn’t the policy documents say that ?
Ghs said:
If we have signed upto pay for the hire car , I ve no knowledge of that then wouldn t the policy documents say that ?
That's the documents for your own policy(?) and unless I've completely misunderstood, you're being contacted/pursued by an AMC who provided a car - it's not your own insurer or the 3rd party insurer who actually provided it.Edit: I'm assuming that, as they knew the 3rd party was liable, your insurer set this hire up via an AMC, wheres the courtesy car benefit in your policy is for claims on your own insurance.
Further edit: have a look here for what might be going on: https://www.financial-ombudsman.org.uk/consumers/c...
Edited by PorkInsider on Friday 11th September 09:36
PorkInsider said:
That's the documents for your own policy(?) and unless I've completely misunderstood, you're being contacted/pursued by an AMC who provided a car - it's not your own insurer or the 3rd party insurer who actually provided it.
Edit: I'm assuming that, as they knew the 3rd party was liable, your insurer set this hire up via an AMC, wheres the courtesy car benefit in your policy is for claims on your own insurance.
Further edit: have a look here for what might be going on: https://www.financial-ombudsman.org.uk/consumers/c...
No they are the documents from when my wife was insured with this company , the hire company are asking for more details of the accident , I’m assuming toEdit: I'm assuming that, as they knew the 3rd party was liable, your insurer set this hire up via an AMC, wheres the courtesy car benefit in your policy is for claims on your own insurance.
Further edit: have a look here for what might be going on: https://www.financial-ombudsman.org.uk/consumers/c...
Edited by PorkInsider on Friday 11th September 09:36
Chase after the third party’s insurer for recompense for services provided , it was my wife’s ex insurer who said the hire company could take us to court , not the hire company .
Ghs said:
PorkInsider said:
That's the documents for your own policy(?) and unless I've completely misunderstood, you're being contacted/pursued by an AMC who provided a car - it's not your own insurer or the 3rd party insurer who actually provided it.
Edit: I'm assuming that, as they knew the 3rd party was liable, your insurer set this hire up via an AMC, wheres the courtesy car benefit in your policy is for claims on your own insurance.
Further edit: have a look here for what might be going on: https://www.financial-ombudsman.org.uk/consumers/c...
No they are the documents from when my wife was insured with this company , the hire company are asking for more details of the accident , I m assuming toEdit: I'm assuming that, as they knew the 3rd party was liable, your insurer set this hire up via an AMC, wheres the courtesy car benefit in your policy is for claims on your own insurance.
Further edit: have a look here for what might be going on: https://www.financial-ombudsman.org.uk/consumers/c...
Edited by PorkInsider on Friday 11th September 09:36
Chase after the third party s insurer for recompense for services provided , it was my wife s ex insurer who said the hire company could take us to court , not the hire company .
The hire company you're talking about will be an AMC which your wife's insurer pointed in her direction to arrange a car for her.
They haven't been able to recover their money from the third party and now they want your help to do so or, at worst, for her to cover the bill.
If you follow the ombudsman link I posted earlier, it explains some of the possible scenarios - look at the 'types of complaint we see' bit.
I'm expecting she's unwittingly got into a credit hire agreement for the hire car.
Sheepshanks said:
What did the original post say?
Thread isn't making sense.
Although deleting first posts and threads not making sense seems to be a bit of theme for the OP.
Paraphrasing: it was a letter from what appears to be an AMC chasing for payment for a hire car which OP's wife had when someone crashed into her a couple of years back.Thread isn't making sense.
Although deleting first posts and threads not making sense seems to be a bit of theme for the OP.
3rd party's liability not disputed, it's just the payment for the hire car.
(Original post was deleted as the photo of the letter had OP's address showing.)
Ghs said:
I d add I also don t understand why my wife s insurance should be impacted if we took option 1 as this accident was found to be the 3 rd party fault who ran into the back of my wife s car , that was a couple of years ago .
I believe your insurance premium can be affected by any claim whether or not you are at fault. ""Will a non-fault accident affect my car insurance?
Yes, even a non-fault claim is likely to increase your car insurance premiums. This is because it will be recorded on your claims history and insurers are likely to view you as at higher risk of an accident."
https://www.moneysupermarket.com/car-insurance/non...
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff