holding non fault accident against you?
Discussion
i am insured with Admiral and had an incident a few weeks ago.
Police attended and confirmed to me 'there was nothing i could have done to avoid the incident'
I was breathalyzed and it was fine, i wasn't speeding, my light was green, i wasn't on the phone or watching a film at the time etc etc
i have a witness that was at the side of the road they 100% confirm it was the other persons fault, police spoke to witness, confirmed statement, insurance have witness details too.
So insurance tell me they're investigating and 'as per procedure' they are going to strip me of my 17 years no claims until they can prove i didn't cause the accident.
I then get a text saying 'my policy has been updated' - the accident is added and my premium has gone up £300 a year, starting from NOW.
Already i am pretty frustrated - minding my own business and BANG - now all this crap.
Anyway, i ask for a time frame for conclusion they say couldn't tell you - i say, roughly? they say.... "can take up to 5 years in some cases"
So i ask, "so there is a possibility of me having to pay out of my own pocket full premium for the next five years while you reach a conclusion the police have already advised you of?"
Then i get the killer....
"well even if the investigation concludes you had no fault, it will still affect your premium ."
do all insurance companies operate this way?
frustrated is an understatement.
oh and you get a loan car while yours is in repair... they took in a 66 plate audi S3 - i get a 3 cylinder 1.2 Citroen D3.
Police attended and confirmed to me 'there was nothing i could have done to avoid the incident'
I was breathalyzed and it was fine, i wasn't speeding, my light was green, i wasn't on the phone or watching a film at the time etc etc
i have a witness that was at the side of the road they 100% confirm it was the other persons fault, police spoke to witness, confirmed statement, insurance have witness details too.
So insurance tell me they're investigating and 'as per procedure' they are going to strip me of my 17 years no claims until they can prove i didn't cause the accident.
I then get a text saying 'my policy has been updated' - the accident is added and my premium has gone up £300 a year, starting from NOW.
Already i am pretty frustrated - minding my own business and BANG - now all this crap.
Anyway, i ask for a time frame for conclusion they say couldn't tell you - i say, roughly? they say.... "can take up to 5 years in some cases"
So i ask, "so there is a possibility of me having to pay out of my own pocket full premium for the next five years while you reach a conclusion the police have already advised you of?"
Then i get the killer....
"well even if the investigation concludes you had no fault, it will still affect your premium ."
do all insurance companies operate this way?
frustrated is an understatement.
oh and you get a loan car while yours is in repair... they took in a 66 plate audi S3 - i get a 3 cylinder 1.2 Citroen D3.
You are talking about two separate elements that potentially affect premiums.
NCB is one.
You won't lose 17 years NCB for one accident, you lose some (where held liable - unless you've paid extra to protect your NCB in the event of a claim). It's also possible that you may lose some of this whilst a (what turns out to be non-fault) claim is dealt with & premiums increase in the meantime. But if it is settled as a non-fault & all monies recouped by insurer you should get the NCB & extra premiums back.
Collisions is the second.
Even if your NCB isn't affected (because it was a non-fault claim), you've still had an accident. The stats show that people who have an accident this year (even those who have a non fault accident this year) are more likely to have an accident next year than somebody who didn't have an accident this year.
Your risk profile therefore changes.
Therefore your premium may change following a non-fault accident.
You can get policies that guarantee a better hire car. But they are more expensive policies.
NCB is one.
You won't lose 17 years NCB for one accident, you lose some (where held liable - unless you've paid extra to protect your NCB in the event of a claim). It's also possible that you may lose some of this whilst a (what turns out to be non-fault) claim is dealt with & premiums increase in the meantime. But if it is settled as a non-fault & all monies recouped by insurer you should get the NCB & extra premiums back.
Collisions is the second.
Even if your NCB isn't affected (because it was a non-fault claim), you've still had an accident. The stats show that people who have an accident this year (even those who have a non fault accident this year) are more likely to have an accident next year than somebody who didn't have an accident this year.
Your risk profile therefore changes.
Therefore your premium may change following a non-fault accident.
You can get policies that guarantee a better hire car. But they are more expensive policies.
Is your renewal due now, just after the accident? If so, then they are right to reduce your bonus pending the outcome and you have to pay extra, which you will get back if it's all settled in your favour.
If you are in the middle of your policy, then any reduction in bonus or claims loading should not apply until next renewal.
If you are in the middle of your policy, then any reduction in bonus or claims loading should not apply until next renewal.
One thing to note on NCB is that you may have 17 years but many companies have a maximum of around 5 years and it's from that value they deduct NCB from if you have a claim. Typically you will lose 2 years for a claim which means even although you have 17 years you could end up with 3 years.
As said, if you have an accident, irrespective of fault you are seen as a higher risk and the insurance companies may increase the premium as a result.
As said, if you have an accident, irrespective of fault you are seen as a higher risk and the insurance companies may increase the premium as a result.
PixelpeepS3 said:
i am insured with Admiral
Not a great start...PixelpeepS3 said:
So insurance tell me they're investigating and 'as per procedure' they are going to strip me of my 17 years no claims until they can prove i didn't cause the accident.
No - until they get repaid by the other party's insurer. While they're out of pocket, you're "at fault". That's how "fault" is defined.BTW, you don't have "17yr" NCB, you have the maximum they'll recognise - which for most insurers is about 6yrs.
PixelpeepS3 said:
Anyway, i ask for a time frame for conclusion they say couldn't tell you - i say, roughly? they say.... "can take up to 5 years in some cases"
You're asking the wrong insurer. It's the other insurer you need to be asking when they'll pay up, because until they do, your insurer's out of pocket.PixelpeepS3 said:
"well even if the investigation concludes you had no fault, it will still affect your premium ."
do all insurance companies operate this way?
Yep. You know when you're asked if you've been involved in any collisions, losses or incidents, regardless of fault or if a claim was made? That bit there... If you've been hit more often than expected, it's probably because you're using roads with a higher risk of collision - so a higher risk of the insurer having to pay.do all insurance companies operate this way?
PixelpeepS3 said:
oh and you get a loan car while yours is in repair... they took in a 66 plate audi S3 - i get a 3 cylinder 1.2 Citroen D3.
It's getting you around, isn't it? Remember, the costs they pay out are covered by the premiums they take in...PixelpeepS3 said:
oh and you get a loan car while yours is in repair... they took in a 66 plate audi S3 - i get a 3 cylinder 1.2 Citroen D3.
Something odd here - normally Admiral pass non-fault claims to the their pet accident management company who will try and make the claim on the 3rd party as large as possible, starting with giving you a like-for-like courtesy car.Perhaps the position on who was at fault isn't as clear-cut as you think. Or the other driver has an insurance cover issue.
PixelpeepS3 said:
i am insured with Admiral
Lots of sensible advice on here already about it being a two stage thing.That said the quote above is where most of your nightmare started and will be the cause of the sleepless nights to follow.
Hateful company who I will never get involved with again if i can possibly avoid.
vonhosen said:
You are talking about two separate elements that potentially affect premiums.
NCB is one.
You won't lose 17 years NCB for one accident, you lose some (where held liable - unless you've paid extra to protect your NCB in the event of a claim). It's also possible that you may lose some of this whilst a (what turns out to be non-fault) claim is dealt with & premiums increase in the meantime. But if it is settled as a non-fault & all monies recouped by insurer you should get the NCB & extra premiums back.
Collisions is the second.
Even if your NCB isn't affected (because it was a non-fault claim), you've still had an accident. The stats show that people who have an accident this year (even those who have a non fault accident this year) are more likely to have an accident next year than somebody who didn't have an accident this year.
Your risk profile therefore changes.
Therefore your premium may change following a non-fault accident.
You can get policies that guarantee a better hire car. But they are more expensive policies.
I know thats what the insurance companies tell us and they are the experts after all. However personally I've not had an accident in 20 years but I've had some pretty close calls over the years, I'm well overdue for a biggie. Its not even me either, its all the other dNCB is one.
You won't lose 17 years NCB for one accident, you lose some (where held liable - unless you've paid extra to protect your NCB in the event of a claim). It's also possible that you may lose some of this whilst a (what turns out to be non-fault) claim is dealt with & premiums increase in the meantime. But if it is settled as a non-fault & all monies recouped by insurer you should get the NCB & extra premiums back.
Collisions is the second.
Even if your NCB isn't affected (because it was a non-fault claim), you've still had an accident. The stats show that people who have an accident this year (even those who have a non fault accident this year) are more likely to have an accident next year than somebody who didn't have an accident this year.
Your risk profile therefore changes.
Therefore your premium may change following a non-fault accident.
You can get policies that guarantee a better hire car. But they are more expensive policies.
heads on the road, quite how I've managed to dodge some of the pricks lately is beyond me, my luck is going to run out sooner or later. So I would argue that I'm the biggest risk for a no fault claim at the moment.mickmcpaddy said:
I know thats what the insurance companies tell us and they are the experts after all. However personally I've not had an accident in 20 years but I've had some pretty close calls over the years, I'm well overdue for a biggie. Its not even me either, its all the other dheads on the road, quite how I've managed to dodge some of the pricks lately is beyond me, my luck is going to run out sooner or later. So I would argue that I'm the biggest risk for a no fault claim at the moment.
Considering that you've done a good job (so far!) at avoiding people then you're probably quite good at it, maybe better than some of those who suffer non-fault accidents...heads on the road, quite how I've managed to dodge some of the pricks lately is beyond me, my luck is going to run out sooner or later. So I would argue that I'm the biggest risk for a no fault claim at the moment.PixelpeepS3 said:
...my light was green,
Mate of mine, who is a police officer, was threatened with prosecution when a taxi going through a red light crashed into him. Traffic Officers told him they couldn't prove the taxi went through a red light but that he had committed an offence by driving through a green light when it wasn't safe to do so. mickmcpaddy said:
vonhosen said:
You are talking about two separate elements that potentially affect premiums.
NCB is one.
You won't lose 17 years NCB for one accident, you lose some (where held liable - unless you've paid extra to protect your NCB in the event of a claim). It's also possible that you may lose some of this whilst a (what turns out to be non-fault) claim is dealt with & premiums increase in the meantime. But if it is settled as a non-fault & all monies recouped by insurer you should get the NCB & extra premiums back.
Collisions is the second.
Even if your NCB isn't affected (because it was a non-fault claim), you've still had an accident. The stats show that people who have an accident this year (even those who have a non fault accident this year) are more likely to have an accident next year than somebody who didn't have an accident this year.
Your risk profile therefore changes.
Therefore your premium may change following a non-fault accident.
You can get policies that guarantee a better hire car. But they are more expensive policies.
I know thats what the insurance companies tell us and they are the experts after all. However personally I've not had an accident in 20 years but I've had some pretty close calls over the years, I'm well overdue for a biggie. Its not even me either, its all the other dNCB is one.
You won't lose 17 years NCB for one accident, you lose some (where held liable - unless you've paid extra to protect your NCB in the event of a claim). It's also possible that you may lose some of this whilst a (what turns out to be non-fault) claim is dealt with & premiums increase in the meantime. But if it is settled as a non-fault & all monies recouped by insurer you should get the NCB & extra premiums back.
Collisions is the second.
Even if your NCB isn't affected (because it was a non-fault claim), you've still had an accident. The stats show that people who have an accident this year (even those who have a non fault accident this year) are more likely to have an accident next year than somebody who didn't have an accident this year.
Your risk profile therefore changes.
Therefore your premium may change following a non-fault accident.
You can get policies that guarantee a better hire car. But they are more expensive policies.
heads on the road, quite how I've managed to dodge some of the pricks lately is beyond me, my luck is going to run out sooner or later. So I would argue that I'm the biggest risk for a no fault claim at the moment.Sheepshanks said:
Mate of mine, who is a police officer, was threatened with prosecution when a taxi going through a red light crashed into him. Traffic Officers told him they couldn't prove the taxi went through a red light but that he had committed an offence by driving through a green light when it wasn't safe to do so.
But surely they have contradicted themselves by saying he shouldnt have gone through a green when not safe to do so. that would mean by default the taxi went through a red!chow pan toon said:
mickmcpaddy said:
I know thats what the insurance companies tell us and they are the experts after all. However personally I've not had an accident in 20 years but I've had some pretty close calls over the years, I'm well overdue for a biggie. Its not even me either, its all the other dheads on the road, quite how I've managed to dodge some of the pricks lately is beyond me, my luck is going to run out sooner or later. So I would argue that I'm the biggest risk for a no fault claim at the moment.
Considering that you've done a good job (so far!) at avoiding people then you're probably quite good at it, maybe better than some of those who suffer non-fault accidents...heads on the road, quite how I've managed to dodge some of the pricks lately is beyond me, my luck is going to run out sooner or later. So I would argue that I'm the biggest risk for a no fault claim at the moment.It's usually called "defensive driving". We all know those people who really don't do it, don't we?
TwigtheWonderkid said:
mickmcpaddy said:
TwigtheWonderkid said:
If I'm asked to decide between your view of risk and statistics based on millions of policies, I'm going with the latter.
I don't make millions off my views thoughmickmcpaddy said:
TwigtheWonderkid said:
mickmcpaddy said:
TwigtheWonderkid said:
If I'm asked to decide between your view of risk and statistics based on millions of policies, I'm going with the latter.
I don't make millions off my views thoughAdmiral reports record profits of £377m as car insurance business continues to grow and turnover tops £2.1bn
http://www.walesonline.co.uk/business/business-new...
Make sure your factory fitted extras are covered with this pirate!
http://www.walesonline.co.uk/business/business-new...
Make sure your factory fitted extras are covered with this pirate!
Forums | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff