Insurance Claim for Rear Impact
Discussion
A family member (new driver) rolled into the back of another car in stationary traffic a few months ago, at what must have been less than 2mph. Two small hatchbacks. Both parties agreed at the scene not to bother taking each others details, as there was no damage to either car. Photos were taken which show this.
I was later informed that the owner of the other car was making an accident claim, so provided the photos to our insurer and heard nothing more for a while. However, I have just learned that they paid out £9k for this claim.
£2k went on replacing the rear bumper, parking sensors, rear exhaust, and tailgate, despite photos showing absolutely no damage. The other £7k went on car hire with a company called Accident Exchange. How is it possible to pay out £7k for car hire, to replace a small hatchback for a few days?
The renewal quote for my family member is now about £3500 (from £900), meaning that they will not be back on the road come renewal time. Is there anything that can be done?
Of course, it was completely their fault for not concentrating on the road at that moment - it just seems quite an excessive level of punishment to take them off the road for it. Appreciate any advice.
I was later informed that the owner of the other car was making an accident claim, so provided the photos to our insurer and heard nothing more for a while. However, I have just learned that they paid out £9k for this claim.
£2k went on replacing the rear bumper, parking sensors, rear exhaust, and tailgate, despite photos showing absolutely no damage. The other £7k went on car hire with a company called Accident Exchange. How is it possible to pay out £7k for car hire, to replace a small hatchback for a few days?
The renewal quote for my family member is now about £3500 (from £900), meaning that they will not be back on the road come renewal time. Is there anything that can be done?
Of course, it was completely their fault for not concentrating on the road at that moment - it just seems quite an excessive level of punishment to take them off the road for it. Appreciate any advice.
The cost of the claim will have bugger all impact on the renewal quote, the fact they are a relatively new driver and crashed into someone will be what's loading their premium.
The person they hit has most likely gone through an accident management company hence the inflated hire car charge.
A low speed bumper impact can do damage to the crash structures etc which isn't immediately obvious, maybe the person your family member hit noticed something like the parking sensors not working or a rattle and got the car assessed, or maybe they just decided to get it checked to be cautious.
All your family member can do is shop around to try and reduce the premium and try to avoid driving into other people's cars.
The person they hit has most likely gone through an accident management company hence the inflated hire car charge.
A low speed bumper impact can do damage to the crash structures etc which isn't immediately obvious, maybe the person your family member hit noticed something like the parking sensors not working or a rattle and got the car assessed, or maybe they just decided to get it checked to be cautious.
All your family member can do is shop around to try and reduce the premium and try to avoid driving into other people's cars.
Edited by anonymous-user on Sunday 16th April 15:10
As above the size of the claim is unlikely to have a huge impact on her renewal premium. If you get quotes direct from insurers websites rather than via an aggregator (ie proce comparison site) then you'll find that many insurers don't even ask how much the claim was for. So arguing the toss over the size of the car hire bill probably wouldn't help much, even if it was likely to succeed.
All she can rellly do is shop around as much as possible, and try other ways of getting the premium down such as adding an older relative with a good driving record as named driver, or considering a policy that comes with a black box.
All she can rellly do is shop around as much as possible, and try other ways of getting the premium down such as adding an older relative with a good driving record as named driver, or considering a policy that comes with a black box.
Kev996 said:
The renewal quote for my family member is now about £3500 (from £900), meaning that they will not be back on the road come renewal time. Is there anything that can be done?
Don't bother to insure the car. I am not seriously suggesting you do this but it does give an indication as to why there are more and more uninsured vehicles on the road.
NGee said:
Don't bother to insure the car.
I am not seriously suggesting you do this but it does give an indication as to why there are more and more uninsured vehicles on the road.
It seems like you think it's unfair. The person getting a £3500 price is still paying a fraction of the amount that they've had a claim for. The other side have only done what everyone on here recommends when they didn't cause the crash and "take them for every penny you can"I am not seriously suggesting you do this but it does give an indication as to why there are more and more uninsured vehicles on the road.
Gavia said:
NGee said:
Don't bother to insure the car.
I am not seriously suggesting you do this but it does give an indication as to why there are more and more uninsured vehicles on the road.
It seems like you think it's unfair. The person getting a £3500 price is still paying a fraction of the amount that they've had a claim for. The other side have only done what everyone on here recommends when they didn't cause the crash and "take them for every penny you can"I am not seriously suggesting you do this but it does give an indication as to why there are more and more uninsured vehicles on the road.
I had similar years ago but the costs weren't as extreme.
£500 for a bumper respray despite HD video and images showing zero damage...
And £1000 hire car charges as well.
My insurance paid out despite no evidence of damage. I later spoke to someone who used to work in claims months later and they said it's cheaper for them to settle £1500 of "potentially fake" damage than several £££k of "potential fake" injury claims later down the line.
£500 for a bumper respray despite HD video and images showing zero damage...
And £1000 hire car charges as well.
My insurance paid out despite no evidence of damage. I later spoke to someone who used to work in claims months later and they said it's cheaper for them to settle £1500 of "potentially fake" damage than several £££k of "potential fake" injury claims later down the line.
NGee said:
Gavia said:
NGee said:
Don't bother to insure the car.
I am not seriously suggesting you do this but it does give an indication as to why there are more and more uninsured vehicles on the road.
It seems like you think it's unfair. The person getting a £3500 price is still paying a fraction of the amount that they've had a claim for. The other side have only done what everyone on here recommends when they didn't cause the crash and "take them for every penny you can"I am not seriously suggesting you do this but it does give an indication as to why there are more and more uninsured vehicles on the road.
Retroman said:
I had similar years ago but the costs weren't as extreme.
£500 for a bumper respray despite HD video and images showing zero damage...
And £1000 hire car charges as well.
My insurance paid out despite no evidence of damage. I later spoke to someone who used to work in claims months later and they said it's cheaper for them to settle £1500 of "potentially fake" damage than several £££k of "potential fake" injury claims later down the line.
That comment doesn't make any sense. A vehicle damage claim isn't mutually exclusive to a personal injury claim. Normally both claims are presented out of an accident anyway. Usually, it's the claim for damage and hire that is presented first as it's the easiest to quantify. A few months/years later the personal injury claim is presented once the claimant has recovered and/or has had their medical evidence quantified. £500 for a bumper respray despite HD video and images showing zero damage...
And £1000 hire car charges as well.
My insurance paid out despite no evidence of damage. I later spoke to someone who used to work in claims months later and they said it's cheaper for them to settle £1500 of "potentially fake" damage than several £££k of "potential fake" injury claims later down the line.
NGee said:
Gavia said:
NGee said:
Don't bother to insure the car.
I am not seriously suggesting you do this but it does give an indication as to why there are more and more uninsured vehicles on the road.
It seems like you think it's unfair. The person getting a £3500 price is still paying a fraction of the amount that they've had a claim for. The other side have only done what everyone on here recommends when they didn't cause the crash and "take them for every penny you can"I am not seriously suggesting you do this but it does give an indication as to why there are more and more uninsured vehicles on the road.
No you didn't. You might think you implied that but you certainly didn't make it clear.
I can't see what the issue is. Young driver causes his insurer to pay out and finds his premium increases. Why is that hard to accept?
REALIST123 said:
NGee said:
Gavia said:
NGee said:
Don't bother to insure the car.
I am not seriously suggesting you do this but it does give an indication as to why there are more and more uninsured vehicles on the road.
It seems like you think it's unfair. The person getting a £3500 price is still paying a fraction of the amount that they've had a claim for. The other side have only done what everyone on here recommends when they didn't cause the crash and "take them for every penny you can"I am not seriously suggesting you do this but it does give an indication as to why there are more and more uninsured vehicles on the road.
No you didn't. You might think you implied that but you certainly didn't make it clear.
I can't see what the issue is. Young driver causes his insurer to pay out and finds his premium increases. Why is that hard to accept?
It's a simple fact that if insurance costs become prohibitively expensive there is more chance of some people driving without insurance.
Why is that hard to accept?
You'll need to dispute the car hire, request invoices etc if you're defending yourself but otherwise your insurers should do it for you if you're fully comp.
There are agreed ABI rates (prices for daily hire) for car hire that credit hire companies such as the one you mentioned you will attempt to flaunt in an attempt for profit.
There are agreed ABI rates (prices for daily hire) for car hire that credit hire companies such as the one you mentioned you will attempt to flaunt in an attempt for profit.
KungFuPanda said:
That comment doesn't make any sense. A vehicle damage claim isn't mutually exclusive to a personal injury claim. Normally both claims are presented out of an accident anyway. Usually, it's the claim for damage and hire that is presented first as it's the easiest to quantify. A few months/years later the personal injury claim is presented once the claimant has recovered and/or has had their medical evidence quantified.
Well that was my understanding as well but i had advised my insurance company i was in an accident where no damage had occured to the other vehicle but i wanted to report it regardless because it was the "right thing to do"I had lots of HD video and about a dozen pictures with close ups showing not even the slightest scratch, blemish or distortion on the paintwork of the third party vehicle (new Octavia)
My insurance company thanked me for being honest and said if he calls to report a claim then they would request the evidence of no damage from me.
Come renewal time i discovered they had paid him £500 for a rear bumper respray and £1000 hire car charges. When i queried they said they had contacted him and encouraged him to get the car checked and come back to them with any quotes for damage.
I assume he got a friend with a garage to give him some fake quotes for non existant damage repairs.
When i pointed this out to my insurance company they said even if there was evidence of no damage i would be in a bad position to contest it as i had bumped into them and inferred it was in thier finanicial interests to settle claims quicker. (quicker resolution helps keeps quotes down, even if it's fake, yay!)
Thankfully it was 5 years ago coming up this August so perhaps a cheaper insurance premium next year.
Monty Python said:
This is why it's vital to either (a) take photographs of the damage or (b) get witnesses or both.
Didn't help me out at all with my insurer.It sounds like a very dodgy claim but to play a bit of devils advocate here.
I was involved in a similar accident. 3rd party went into the back of me at I'm guessing something classed as low speed....sub 10mph, but it did feel like a mighty thump when you're not expecting it. Pretty much no damage whatsoever it would appear had anyone taken photographs. But upon lifting the boot carpet the rear floor had been crumpled in like an old coke can. No paint damage on the bumper, no clips broken, The claim went through and it came to £1300 to fix the floor.
The point I'm making is, especially concerning modern cars. A photo showing no damage means squat.
I was involved in a similar accident. 3rd party went into the back of me at I'm guessing something classed as low speed....sub 10mph, but it did feel like a mighty thump when you're not expecting it. Pretty much no damage whatsoever it would appear had anyone taken photographs. But upon lifting the boot carpet the rear floor had been crumpled in like an old coke can. No paint damage on the bumper, no clips broken, The claim went through and it came to £1300 to fix the floor.
The point I'm making is, especially concerning modern cars. A photo showing no damage means squat.
barker22 said:
It sounds like a very dodgy claim but to play a bit of devils advocate here.
I was involved in a similar accident. 3rd party went into the back of me at I'm guessing something classed as low speed....sub 10mph, but it did feel like a mighty thump when you're not expecting it. Pretty much no damage whatsoever it would appear had anyone taken photographs. But upon lifting the boot carpet the rear floor had been crumpled in like an old coke can. No paint damage on the bumper, no clips broken, The claim went through and it came to £1300 to fix the floor.
The point I'm making is, especially concerning modern cars. A photo showing no damage means squat.
In my instance they claimed the bumper needed a £500 respray only and no damage was reported from behind it or underneath.I was involved in a similar accident. 3rd party went into the back of me at I'm guessing something classed as low speed....sub 10mph, but it did feel like a mighty thump when you're not expecting it. Pretty much no damage whatsoever it would appear had anyone taken photographs. But upon lifting the boot carpet the rear floor had been crumpled in like an old coke can. No paint damage on the bumper, no clips broken, The claim went through and it came to £1300 to fix the floor.
The point I'm making is, especially concerning modern cars. A photo showing no damage means squat.
Hence my annoyance as i spent a good 20 minutes taking videos and pics because there was clearly no visible damage.
Forums | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff