Strange ‘wrong insurer’ situation

[Foss62]

I’m a bit mystified by this one….Over a month ago my son, driving my wife’s car, clipped another car whilst reversing out of a parking space. He has had very little driving experience and (I believe) genuinely didn’t realise what he had done. I noticed some (additional!) scratches on the plastic bumper some time later but had no idea where or when it had happened. However, a CCTV camera had picked it up and my son was contacted a few days later, so it became fairly clear what had happened.
My son was driving the car on ‘Marmalade’ insurance - mileage limited and with a phone tracker. He rang them up, explained what had happened and gave his details to the owners of the other car.
We heard nothing more until today, when my wife received several e mails and a text message saying she hadn’t reported an incident and needed to fill in a form ASAP - all from a company that suggests it is working for her insurance company.
Clearly the car wasn’t covered by her insurers at the time of the incident - so I am loath to let her fill anything in. She hasn’t suffered any losses (other than a few extra scratches on plastic - that would disappear completely with a rattle can - and won’t be making any claims.
But why and how has this ended up with her, and for that matter why a month after the incident?
Does this suggest that Marmalade have refused a payout (claim was for too much maybe?), so the other party’s insurers are trying it on?
It’s a bit annoying that this has (seemingly) gone to my wife’s insurers because surely one of the reasons for separate insurance is to avoid this?

[Bendo]

Presumably MID shows the main insurance policy and as it was effectively a drive off, the other party's insurance have traced yours that way.

Phone them and explain it was being covered under a different policy at the time, until you do they know nothing.

[Foss62]

Bendo said:

Presumably MID shows the main insurance policy and as it was effectively a drive off, the other party's insurance have traced yours that way.

Phone them and explain it was being covered under a different policy at the time, until you do they know nothing.

I did think that - but I don’t get where the months delay comes in? Also wouldn’t the other policy associated with the car show up as well (so it would be clear that some minor detective work would be needed - i.e. just call the aggrieved party, who by then would have had my son’s details).

[Racing Newt]

Foss62 said:

I’m a bit mystified by this one….Over a month ago my son, driving my wife’s car, clipped another car whilst reversing out of a parking space. He has had very little driving experience and (I believe) genuinely didn’t realise what he had done. I noticed some (additional!) scratches on the plastic bumper some time later but had no idea where or when it had happened. However, a CCTV camera had picked it up and my son was contacted a few days later, so it became fairly clear what had happened.
My son was driving the car on ‘Marmalade’ insurance - mileage limited and with a phone tracker. He rang them up, explained what had happened and gave his details to the owners of the other car.
We heard nothing more until today, when my wife received several e mails and a text message saying she hadn’t reported an incident and needed to fill in a form ASAP - all from a company that suggests it is working for her insurance company.
Clearly the car wasn’t covered by her insurers at the time of the incident - so I am loath to let her fill anything in. She hasn’t suffered any losses (other than a few extra scratches on plastic - that would disappear completely with a rattle can - and won’t be making any claims.
But why and how has this ended up with her, and for that matter why a month after the incident?
Does this suggest that Marmalade have refused a payout (claim was for too much maybe?), so the other party’s
insurers are trying it on?
It’s a bit annoying that this has (seemingly) gone to my wife’s insurers because surely one of the reasons for separate insurance is to avoid this?

Why would you have two separate policies on one car?? it will involve both insurance companies to settle the claim.

[TGTiff]

I had avery similar experiance when I hit a parked car back in April whilst driving my daughters car on day insurance.
I contacted the day insurance provider with all the details, third parties insurance policy, third party infomed their insurer with my day cover insurance details etc.
Yet a month later my daughter is recieving phone calls asking why her insurance company were being informed from the third parties insurance that she was involved in an accident!
Cue lots of phone calls explaining what is to me anyway a simple matter to various insurers!
My daughter will have to wait and see if this affects her renewal quote........

[ThunderSpook]

I didn’t think you could have two insurance policies on one car. Who insures it when it’s parked up and someone crashes in to it? How do they decide, it’s just going to lead to them pushing it on to each other.

[sherbertdip]

You can have 2 policies, but it makes it complicated as shown above when a claim is made as to liability.

[Sheepshanks]

ThunderSpook said:

I didn’t think you could have two insurance policies on one car. Who insures it when it’s parked up and someone crashes in to it? How do they decide, it’s just going to lead to them pushing it on to each other.

There’s a common sense answer to that - it’s whoever was last driving the car, especially if it’s parked away from home. Perhaps get complicated when the car is back at home.


Not sure why the OP is getting into a tizzy - the sequence of events seems perfectly reasonable. I wonder if the injured party has engaged an accident management company - if so, expect the bill to be large.

[akirk]

Lots of specialist policies (mine included) allow you to drive any car fully comp on your own policy… therefore effectively every car in the country will have many more policies allowing it to be driven than the owner even knows about… so generally the insurance industry has no issue.

Many policies will list primacy to set who is liable in an incident, but not all do so it is possible in some instances to choose which to use - as long as all are aware of what happened they will sort it out

[Foss62]

Sheepshanks said:

There’s a common sense answer to that - it’s whoever was last driving the car, especially if it’s parked away from home. Perhaps get complicated when the car is back at home.


Not sure why the OP is getting into a tizzy - the sequence of events seems perfectly reasonable. I wonder if the injured party has engaged an accident management company - if so, expect the bill to be large.

I’m not in a particularly dramatic tizzy but my wife is not amused. Thinking about it I suppose although my son has exchanged details with the injured party, has their claim number and has informed his insurers, it is quite possible that a clerk at the injured party’s insurers just looked at the car reg. and put two and two together to make five.
The company my wife has been contacted by, is working for her insurers not an accident management company. They must outsource claims admin I suppose?
From the extent of the damage on my wife’s car (a small amount of paint lost from a plastic bumper but no damage at all to the plastic underneath) I would be amazed if the use of an accident management company could be justified by the injured party. I suppose my son will have an excess to pay, so if asked for the entire amount, is entitled to see the actual bill?
For those who commented about the impossibility of ‘double insurance’ I think it must be extremely common and there must be legal precedents to determine at what point responsibility reverts to the ‘main’ insurer.
I don’t know why, but I still sense some issues ahead with this. Once something is put in motion it becomes difficult for these companies to accept something might not be black and white.

[Sheepshanks]

Foss62 said:

I suppose my son will have an excess to pay,

Excess is for own damage so if he doesn't claim for that then there won't be anything to pay.

[Foss62]

Sheepshanks said:

Foss62 said:

I suppose my son will have an excess to pay,

Excess is for own damage so if he doesn't claim for that then there won't be anything to pay.

Thanks - that’s something I didn’t know. I always assumed the excess would have to be paid whichever direction the claim came from.

[AndrewT1275]

The above isn't correct.

It sounds as though your son is driving your wife's car under a 3rd party liability cover. There may still be an excess payable on the claim. The only way to know for sure is to check the policy wording.

[Sheepshanks]

AndrewT1275 said:

The above isn't correct.

It sounds as though your son is driving your wife's car under a 3rd party liability cover. There may still be an excess payable on the claim. The only way to know for sure is to check the policy wording.

Foss62 said:

My son was driving the car on ‘Marmalade’ insurance

[LastPoster]

My younger son is learning to drive in his brother's car under my supervision, he has a policy in his name specifically for this. The policy is dependent on the car being insured under it's own separate annual policy. The policy is only valid in connection with the activity of learning to drive, nothing else. At all other times the main policy is in effect

[Foss62]

Sheepshanks said:

AndrewT1275 said:

The above isn't correct.

It sounds as though your son is driving your wife's car under a 3rd party liability cover. There may still be an excess payable on the claim. The only way to know for sure is to check the policy wording.

Foss62 said:

My son was driving the car on ‘Marmalade’ insurance

Yes definitely fully comp, and looks like no excess anyway. I suppose it’s all built in to the price, taking into account the limited mileage, ‘black box’ (via phone app) etc.

[98elise]

ThunderSpook said:

I didn’t think you could have two insurance policies on one car. Who insures it when it’s parked up and someone crashes in to it? How do they decide, it’s just going to lead to them pushing it on to each other.

Some learner policies require another policy to be in place. They are aimed at learners using a parents car, but only as an additional driver.

[Foss62]

98elise said:

ThunderSpook said:

I didn’t think you could have two insurance policies on one car. Who insures it when it’s parked up and someone crashes in to it? How do they decide, it’s just going to lead to them pushing it on to each other.

Some learner policies require another policy to be in place. They are aimed at learners using a parents car, but only as an additional driver.

My son’s was just a follow on from his learner policy with the same company. Parent’s insured car, but unlike the learner policy it is monitored by a phone app that records mileage and driving ‘standards’ (using the accelerometer on the phone I suppose). The responsibility for non-driving incidents presumably follows the logic of the phone data and there would be little point anyway in exaggerating the mileage dependent use as it is relatively expensive.
Temporarily insuring another insured vehicle isn’t apparently that uncommon even outside the learner/new driver scenarios. You can, for example, insure a friend’s or relative’s vehicle for days or weeks if they are on holiday and you are house-sitting. I assume there are tried and tested ways of ascertaining the insurer when there are grey areas. Probably reverts to the main insurer if any doubt?

[Foss62]

TGTiff said:

I had avery similar experiance when I hit a parked car back in April whilst driving my daughters car on day insurance.
I contacted the day insurance provider with all the details, third parties insurance policy, third party infomed their insurer with my day cover insurance details etc.
Yet a month later my daughter is recieving phone calls asking why her insurance company were being informed from the third parties insurance that she was involved in an accident!
Cue lots of phone calls explaining what is to me anyway a simple matter to various insurers!
My daughter will have to wait and see if this affects her renewal quote........

Just noticed this. It is exactly what I am worried about. Three insurers (and some sort of claims admin company) all working at cross purposes.

[Foss62]

As an update, this is unfortunately progressing exactly as I expected. My wife has spent hours on the phone to the ‘claim handling’ company who on the one hand have sent her an e mail stating that they understand the situation and will let the third party insurers know that they have to go elsewhere, and on the other hand continue to send texts and e mails demanding that she files the details of her ‘claim’ or they will settle it ‘immediately’.
My son has again contacted the third party (via the intermediary - the gateman who found the cctv footage) but has heard nothing more from his insurers.
My wife thought about filling in the claim form attached to the threatening e mails but, I think rightly, decided not to. As even if she writes ‘nothing to do with me’ on it, she still might be said to have made a claim.
So at the moment we are potentially in the odd situation that if the claims company settle on behalf of her insurers she will have made no claims and suffered no losses when she next goes to get insurance and my son will just have a vague tale of a car park scrape to report - again no claims.
I somehow can’t believe that it will be that easy….