Insurance increase from non fault accidents

[cuprawill]

Hi guys,

New member here, but long time lurker!

7 years since I first got on the road, with totally incident-free driving until last month.

So the situation is that on the 5th April, someone drove into our private driveway (enclosed drive if it makes any difference), and reversed into my car. Approx £400 damage. I notified my insurer, and their's contacted me and settled the matter.

Just over a week later, on the 14th April, I was involved in a second incident. Travelling down a country lane, a van sped round the corner ahead. I came to a stop well before the van hit me, and their insurance admitted full liability. My car is still being repaired at the moment, but expected damage is approx £1600.


Now my insurance is up for renewal at the end on the month, and has gone up from last year (£700) to a staggering £1600, even with an extra year's NCD. Looking around on comparison sites is showing similar figures.

Whilst I totally appreciate that my insurers now have a better assessment of my risk, and have hence bumped up the premium, the difference between with and without these non fault claims is ridiculous. Is this much increase normal? And is there any way to claim this back from the third party's insurers, or is this entirely down to my risk? I'm not one who really agrees with the whole 'claim culture', but I fail to see how two incidents where my car has been stationary makes me more of a liability

Sorry if this has been covered on here before or this is the wrong section, I'm just trying to get my head round the absurdness of this situation.

[Mandat]

The general reasoning is that once you have made one claim, the insurers statistical data suggests that you are more likely to make a second claim in the future.

Unfortunately, you have proved this assumption to be correct by making two claims in short succession.

[Sheepshanks]

Are you sure this isn't because the 2nd claim is still open, in which case it's normal to reduce or remove NCD?

Indeed the first one may still show as open too as that was very recent.

[cuprawill]

The second one is potentially still open, because total costs are yet to be worked out, however the liability side of things has been closed.

The quotes on comparison sites also seem to change in a similar matter, and presumably they wouldn't know if the case is still open. I've read a couple of articles on how it's normal for an increase of 5-10% for non fault, and around 30% for two non faults, but mine's more than doubled.

The only good news is that the quotes i'm getting drop from 1700 to 1100 if I were to change the exhaust to a nice milltek one I've been eyeing up for a while - work that one out?!

[Driver101]

Where there is a claim, there's blame.

It is bad when you've played zero percent in the accident, yet it still costs you.

Sadly that's the way it works.

[aw51 121565]

Don't use comparison websites; pick up the phone, ring (at least) several insurance brokers and explain to a real person what's going on .

[campermanj]

Computer says no blooming way sonny... You unfortunately have become a high risk whether through your fault or not suck it up or..... Move to a cheaper postcode

[ging84]

Can I get a payout for everyone who's had a claim in the same model as me? They push up my premiums

[Grandad Gaz]

I was going to post something similar, so apologies for the slight hijack.

I can't decide whether to pursue a claim against a council, or not, due to a possible increase in insurance premiums.

My van suffered a bit of damage while on a council run landfill site in Cardiff a few days ago. A JCB was not looking where he was reversing. Result was a broken rear light and a fairly big dent. They have admitted liability, so no problem there and I also have a dash cam which would prove I was stationary at the time of impact.

I have had to buy a new rear light unit already so I didn't get nicked for having a white brake light. Cost £115 as I had to buy the whole unit.

Not sure what to do about the dent, though.To be honest, the van gets used and abused, it's only 4 years old but has done over 100k miles already and it does have a couple of other dings as well. What do you think?

[98elise]

The simple is that insurance companies will have evidence (statistics) that after one accident (even a non fault) you are more likely to have another which may be your fault. You have now moved into this higer risk category.

Unfortunately even if it was a totaly random accident and your motoring is normally very low risk you are now in this category.

Some moron will come along soon and say its all a scam and insurers are crooks, but thats not the case. They simply work on stats, and set their charges accordingly.

That said the jump seems very high.

[Jim1556]

This whole thing about non fault claims putting innocent driver's premiums up still annoys the fk out of me!

I had a blind tt of a German reverse into me in Germany in 2011, started a claim then stopped it as I didn't want any premium increase (slight dent in the front bumper).

Premiums went up anyway! Tossers!

Statistics my arse! I (like most people) have not had 15 accidents since, I am NOT a higher risk, but my premiums are a little more than they should be due to a non fault 'incident'... Somebody hitting me DOES NOT make me likely to claim!

Someone will be along soon to say 'Ah, but it does make you more likely to claim'. No, it fking doesn't!

I feel your pain OP, however, get the Miltek put on...

[Phatboy317]

98elise said:

The simple is that insurance companies will have evidence (statistics) that after one accident (even a non fault) you are more likely to have another which may be your fault. You have now moved into this higer risk category.

Unfortunately even if it was a totaly random accident and your motoring is normally very low risk you are now in this category.

Some moron will come along soon and say its all a scam and insurers are crooks, but thats not the case. They simply work on stats, and set their charges accordingly.

That said the jump seems very high.

That's the beauty of statistics - they say exactly what you want them to

[Speedracer329]

Mandat said:

The general reasoning is that once you have made one claim, the insurers statistical data suggests that you are more likely to make a second claim in the future.

Unfortunately, you have proved this assumption to be correct by making two claims in short succession.

I know that is the reason always given but I just don't buy it.

Eight years ago I was in a part of the country I had not been to before & will never go again. I was parked on a quiet residential street & was hit by a bus that was only on that road because of a diversion. They admitted liability & it was sorted quickly, & despite it not being my fault my premium increased. It doesn't add up that I am now an increased risk.
I haven't been involved in another bump since so that rather flies in the face of their reasoning.

To my mind if someone has held a driving license for over 25 years before they are involved in a claim, it is more likely they would go another 25 years before another claim, not more likely to claim.

[croyde]

This is the reason why I now go for the highest possible excess on the insurance policy. I was looking at one the other day that had a £2500 excess. Keeps your annual bill down but of course that doesn't help if the 3rd party insists on going through insurance.

Basically I would rather spend £1000 on repairs with my own money then claim and then get shafted for the next 3/5 years with my renewal quotes.

I learned this to my cost when a car drove into my parked car outside my house. I sorted the claim myself and personally dealt with her insurance company. It was a lot of hard work but they eventually paid the £600 repair bill.

Even though I had not bothered my insurance company I still got fleeced come renewal time as they knew that I had a non-fault claim. In hindsight it would have been a lot cheaper just to have paid for the repairs myself.

In my opinion insurance is just for big accidents and help when you have wiped out an entire bus queue and are looking at a bill for several million.

[TwigtheWonderkid]

Jim1556 said:

Statistics my arse! I (like most people) have not had 15 accidents since, I am NOT a higher risk, but my premiums are a little more than they should be due to a non fault 'incident'... Somebody hitting me DOES NOT make me likely to claim!

Someone will be along soon to say 'Ah, but it does make you more likely to claim'. No, it fking doesn't!

Ah, but it does make you more likely to claim.

This has been done to death on here and it has been demonstratively shown that it does increase risk. Not for all, but 1000 people who have had a non fault claim will have more future claims than 1000 people who have never claimed. Because within that group of 1000 non fault claimants will be a proportion of those who have been hit whilst parked in a dodgy place where they often go and the tp left a note. They will be there in the future and next time the tp might not leave a note. And a whole load of other similar situations.

It's pretty obvious when you think about it whilst being objective and not emotional.

[AClownsPocket]

TwigtheWonderkid said:

Ah, but it does make you more likely to claim.

This has been done to death on here and it has been demonstratively shown that it does increase risk. Not for all, but 1000 people who have had a non fault claim will have more future claims than 1000 people who have never claimed. Because within that group of 1000 non fault claimants will be a proportion of those who have been hit whilst parked in a dodgy place where they often go and the tp left a note. They will be there in the future and next time the tp might not leave a note. And a whole load of other similar situations.

It's pretty obvious when you think about it whilst being objective and not emotional.

That makes sense I guess. I got hit while waiting to go through a toll and statistically I am a higher risk as I drive it 10 times a week.

[bobtail4x4]

I got hit when I stopped at a traffic light, then 3 weeks later again when I stopped at the rear of a traffic queue,

I still stop,

[TwigtheWonderkid]

bobtail4x4 said:

I got hit when I stopped at a traffic light, then 3 weeks later again when I stopped at the rear of a traffic queue,

I still stop,

Proves the point. You haven't learnt your lesson.

[98elise]

Jim1556 said:

This whole thing about non fault claims putting innocent driver's premiums up still annoys the fk out of me!

I had a blind tt of a German reverse into me in Germany in 2011, started a claim then stopped it as I didn't want any premium increase (slight dent in the front bumper).

Premiums went up anyway! Tossers!

Statistics my arse! I (like most people) have not had 15 accidents since, I am NOT a higher risk, but my premiums are a little more than they should be due to a non fault 'incident'... Somebody hitting me DOES NOT make me likely to claim!

Someone will be along soon to say 'Ah, but it does make you more likely to claim'. No, it fking doesn't!

I feel your pain OP, however, get the Miltek put on...

If you had to put money on who was more likely to have an insurance claim next, would it be....

1. A person who has recently beein in an accident
2. A person who hasn't

My money would be on 1.

Regardless insurance companies base the risk on their data, and they will load the ones that are more likely to claim. If it wasn't the case then another insurance company would be offering cheap premiums for people who have been in an accident.

[KingNothing]

Claim whiplash from the second crash to get some cash back