Insurance questions re: crash
Discussion
Hopefully this is the right forum and thank you in advance for advice. My wife was involved in an accident - her car was stopped at a traffic light and was at the front of a three car sandwich. I am travelling so have only seen photos, but damage looks relatively light to her car (although the crumple zones etc haven't been checked yet). The middle car (ie the one that hit her, having been hit by another vehicle behind) was quite badly damaged.
My question is this: the middle car driver's insurer has been calling and messaging my wife offering the services of their claims team rather than going through her own insurer. Is there any danger in this over going through her own insurer?
My question is this: the middle car driver's insurer has been calling and messaging my wife offering the services of their claims team rather than going through her own insurer. Is there any danger in this over going through her own insurer?
As I understand these things, if your wife claims from her insurance company, they will then claim it back from the middle car's driver's insurance company, and they in turn will claim the cost of repairs to their own insured asset and your wife's car's repair costs from the insurer of the car which caused the crash. I don't think there would be anything to gain or lose by going through the insurers of the middle car. They might be looking at it pragmatically knowing that it'll have to go through them anyway and trying to save time and effort. If they start becoming a PITA, she can always go through her own insurer anyway. In any situation, she needs to inform her insurance company so she could check with them as to which they would prefer. That would be what I would do if I were in that situation.
I am neither a lawyer nor have I ever worked in insurance.
I am neither a lawyer nor have I ever worked in insurance.
Thank you, very helpful.
The damage from the photographs I have seen looks to be relatively light cosmetic on our vehicle (Swedish tank) whereas the other two vehicles were more heavily damaged. I'm not sure we are keen to claim, as there is little benefit, but the other party's insurer is being very irritating and has been calling my wife hourly for three days.
The damage from the photographs I have seen looks to be relatively light cosmetic on our vehicle (Swedish tank) whereas the other two vehicles were more heavily damaged. I'm not sure we are keen to claim, as there is little benefit, but the other party's insurer is being very irritating and has been calling my wife hourly for three days.
I would go direct through your own.
There is still some liability to decide, did the middle car crash into your wife then the third car into the back of them, or the third car push middle car?
Nothing wrong with dealing with third party if it was their fault.
I was the middle car once, third car pushed me into first car (my SIL) luckily we both claimed off the third car with hers being very light whilst mine was written off
There is still some liability to decide, did the middle car crash into your wife then the third car into the back of them, or the third car push middle car?
Nothing wrong with dealing with third party if it was their fault.
I was the middle car once, third car pushed me into first car (my SIL) luckily we both claimed off the third car with hers being very light whilst mine was written off
beigepants said:
Thank you, very helpful. ........the other party's insurer is being very irritating and has been calling my wife hourly for three days.
In my experience, if you let your own insurer know this is happening, they will act to stop this. Had something similar last year, my ins.co took a pretty dim view of it and it stopped almost immediately. Your insurers won't want your wife speaking to anyone but them.SmoothCriminal said:
What is your excess? if you go through your own insurance you will have to pay that until they claim it back from the TP
It depends, if it's an open and shut case (which this seems to be) and the other party(ies) have accepted liability, then you won't have to pay the excess.My Swedish tank was hit from behind last week , and my insurers are handling everything, I politely told the 3rd party's insurers to jog on.
The reason the at fault driver's insurer is offering services is to stop them getting a large credit hire bill from your wife's insurance company who would no doubt instruct an accident management company to deal with her hire and repairs.
She's perfectly able to accept the offer of intervention from the Third Party Insurer, and they will be acting under the same broad governing principles and under the same regulations as her own insurance company, under the PRA, FCA & FOS.
All insurers offer intervention when they know they're at fault, to mitigate costs.
Just remind her that if she opts to go with the TPI, she can't then go back to her own insurer if there are any issues.
Her insurer will close her claim down as a notification only non-fault incident in that scenario.
If she wants to go with her own insurer, does she have the reg, name & telephone number of the at fault driver?
If so, her insurer would probably just waive her excess and allow her no claims bonus based purely on the circs and details she has.
If it were one of my claims, I'd waive her excess if she just sent me in a screenshot of the SMS from the TPI offering her their services, but I'm generous like that
She's perfectly able to accept the offer of intervention from the Third Party Insurer, and they will be acting under the same broad governing principles and under the same regulations as her own insurance company, under the PRA, FCA & FOS.
All insurers offer intervention when they know they're at fault, to mitigate costs.
Just remind her that if she opts to go with the TPI, she can't then go back to her own insurer if there are any issues.
Her insurer will close her claim down as a notification only non-fault incident in that scenario.
If she wants to go with her own insurer, does she have the reg, name & telephone number of the at fault driver?
If so, her insurer would probably just waive her excess and allow her no claims bonus based purely on the circs and details she has.
If it were one of my claims, I'd waive her excess if she just sent me in a screenshot of the SMS from the TPI offering her their services, but I'm generous like that
kindai said:
They know they are at fault so will want to manage it to keep their own costs down as best possible.
But as above, they dont have the same duty of care to you as your own insurer, so it depends on how bad you think the damage is as to if any repair work may end up being rejected.
What duty of care do they not have that your own insurer has?But as above, they dont have the same duty of care to you as your own insurer, so it depends on how bad you think the damage is as to if any repair work may end up being rejected.
You own insurer has a contract which will almost certainly have far more restrictions on thier liability to you than obligations to you. Where as the 3rd party if they have accepted liability has a statutory obligation to compensate you for all of your loses you make them aware of with very few allowable limitations.
QuickQuack said:
As I understand these things, if your wife claims from her insurance company, they will then claim it back from the middle car's driver's insurance company, and they in turn will claim the cost of repairs to their own insured asset and your wife's car's repair costs from the insurer of the car which caused the crash.
I am neither a lawyer nor have I ever worked in insurance.
I'm afraid it shows. If the middle car had stopped in time, and was hit in the rear, and pushed into OP's wife's car, then OP's wife or her insurer cannot claim off the middle vehicle, because they weren't negligent. The claim from the car at the front of the queue would be directly against the car at the back. The person whose negligence caused the damage. I am neither a lawyer nor have I ever worked in insurance.
OP, can your wife be sure of the sequence of events behind her? Could be that the middle car had already hit your wife, before being hit by the car at the rear. In which case the middle car is liable for your damage.
The middle car insurer seems to accept it has a liability - so why would you want to involve your own insurer?
Much better to have a claim against someone accepting liability than to claim from your own insurer - they will just give you grief IME.
FWIW I worked in the General Insurance Industry for over 30 years.
Much better to have a claim against someone accepting liability than to claim from your own insurer - they will just give you grief IME.
FWIW I worked in the General Insurance Industry for over 30 years.
Mr Tidy said:
The middle car insurer seems to accept it has a liability - so why would you want to involve your own insurer?
Much better to have a claim against someone accepting liability than to claim from your own insurer - they will just give you grief IME.
^ this ^Much better to have a claim against someone accepting liability than to claim from your own insurer - they will just give you grief IME.
When I had an accident, the liability was really clear - I was stationary, another car was pushed into me, and I had front & rear dashcam recordings.
My insurance company said that because it's a roundabout, and I didn't get the home address of the middle driver, I would have to pay my excess and it'd go down as a fault claim until it was all sorted out.
The third party contacted me, admitted liability and sorted it out. And were very nice on the phone (I think this is very deliberate!).
In addition, my insurance company would have a driver pick my car up and drive it to the body shop.
The third party, using the same bodyshop, would have it picked up on a low-loader.
So the service was actually better from the third party - bit snobby but I didn't really like the idea of having my hot hatch driven 25 miles cross-country by some randomer.
zygalski said:
The reason the at fault driver's insurer is offering services is to stop them getting a large credit hire bill from your wife's insurance company who would no doubt instruct an accident management company to deal with her hire and repairs.
As part of the paperwork I received from the third party, it listed absolutely every category of car they can supply, with examples, even down to extras for roof-racks, towbars, dual controls etc, with daily hire rates for each one.It was very clear that these are the prices they are paying to source a car - if you want to source a car yourself you can do, but you'll be paying the difference yourself. Which seemed very fair.
The third party insurer contacting you should be seen as a godsend. All the caveats that insurers impose about having to use their network of repairers or you don't get x, y or z drop; you pick a good bodyshop that you want to use and can trust and they pay, all whilst sending you out a car to use if you want to take that option too.
You are far better off taking that option that troubling your own insurers, from past experience. My insurers weren't bad, they just wanted to lean on their money-making opportunities. The third party's insurers will be looking to make sure you get everything done quickly and properly but most importantly at your convenience, as your insurer's idea of convenience is to put you in a like-for-like car and take yours away to sit in a queue, costing the third party money.
You are far better off taking that option that troubling your own insurers, from past experience. My insurers weren't bad, they just wanted to lean on their money-making opportunities. The third party's insurers will be looking to make sure you get everything done quickly and properly but most importantly at your convenience, as your insurer's idea of convenience is to put you in a like-for-like car and take yours away to sit in a queue, costing the third party money.
They are doing it more and more these days to cut down on expensive loan cars being dished out whilst the insurance companies exchange letter after pointless letter. It also speeds the process up as they have a vested interest in getting it sorted quickly.
There is no need to involve your insurance company and it puts you in a good position as you can dictate what and where you want the repair done. If you are not happy then you can revert to your own insurance company.
Come renewal time , it will need to be mentioned regardless of whether you involve your own insurance company or not.
There is no need to involve your insurance company and it puts you in a good position as you can dictate what and where you want the repair done. If you are not happy then you can revert to your own insurance company.
Come renewal time , it will need to be mentioned regardless of whether you involve your own insurance company or not.
Forums | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff