Insurance wording
Discussion
Following an incident where someone scraped down the back of my van i am wondering if there is any specific language i should use in the claim form (other than obvious swear words relating other guys parentage), as i have never fortunately had to do one before.
Briefly: My van was parked in a car park and a guy scraped the back of it whilst swinging out to get into a space opposite i didn't even have the engine running as i was eating lunch.
I get out tell the guy he's was a muppet, he appologises saying this is his third ding that month!! Now i get a claim form saying i backed into him! There is no witnesses and no cctv and so it is basically my word against his backed up by photos taken by me at the time which show location, etc and the impact point which is only a minor scrape not even worth bothering about in the middle of my rubber bumper (how i don't know its in the misddle only) and a rubber mark all the way along his car starting at front wing and ending at rear door.I still don't know quite how he managed it except he was moving pretty fast.
Worst thing is there is basically no damage to either vehicle no broken paint and only a very small dent in his front wing/bumper, i think he is just trying to get previous damage to his bumper paid for by me. Not really bothered as much by the money, but that i didn't do it and don't want it on my insurance history.
Is there any wording that will help my case, or is that clear enough, and will it just go 50/50 because of the lack or clarity on paper with 2 differing versions of events as to what actually happened.
I know is sounds like an agony aunt column but if anyone has any experience of this and the likely outcome it would be much appreciated as its really aggrivating me not knowing.
Briefly: My van was parked in a car park and a guy scraped the back of it whilst swinging out to get into a space opposite i didn't even have the engine running as i was eating lunch.
I get out tell the guy he's was a muppet, he appologises saying this is his third ding that month!! Now i get a claim form saying i backed into him! There is no witnesses and no cctv and so it is basically my word against his backed up by photos taken by me at the time which show location, etc and the impact point which is only a minor scrape not even worth bothering about in the middle of my rubber bumper (how i don't know its in the misddle only) and a rubber mark all the way along his car starting at front wing and ending at rear door.I still don't know quite how he managed it except he was moving pretty fast.
Worst thing is there is basically no damage to either vehicle no broken paint and only a very small dent in his front wing/bumper, i think he is just trying to get previous damage to his bumper paid for by me. Not really bothered as much by the money, but that i didn't do it and don't want it on my insurance history.
Is there any wording that will help my case, or is that clear enough, and will it just go 50/50 because of the lack or clarity on paper with 2 differing versions of events as to what actually happened.
I know is sounds like an agony aunt column but if anyone has any experience of this and the likely outcome it would be much appreciated as its really aggrivating me not knowing.
All you can do really is include every bit of evidence you have, and word events as firmly and fairly as you can.
This chap seems to have been given the advice to lie, as in the event of no witnesses and small costs, the insurers will indeed say it is your word against his....they then presume you won't have the energy or desire to take it to a small claims court.
The latter there is your only option if they play hard ball, and it is a gamble. Sometimes insurers realise the summons means you are serious and they pay immediately....other times they will let it go to court as they know lack of independent evidence will mean unless you can puncture the other bloke's lies, it will be thrown out.
This chap seems to have been given the advice to lie, as in the event of no witnesses and small costs, the insurers will indeed say it is your word against his....they then presume you won't have the energy or desire to take it to a small claims court.
The latter there is your only option if they play hard ball, and it is a gamble. Sometimes insurers realise the summons means you are serious and they pay immediately....other times they will let it go to court as they know lack of independent evidence will mean unless you can puncture the other bloke's lies, it will be thrown out.
"Hit whilst parked" is the key trigger phrase IMHO.
A few points on the advice above.
You cannot pursue a third party via the courts, when you have subrogated those rights to your insurer. It is one or the other.
Damage claims rarely go to court, that is what the civil procedure rules are there for. To stop clogging up the courts with liability claims.
You have a few choices.
1) go via your insurer. Depending on the insurer they are most likely to punt the claim out to a ULR solicitor ( a few handle non-faults themselves).
2) appoint a solicitor yourself, perhaps via a Credit Repair company (assuming you don't want to pay for the repairs up front).
3) take them to small claims court yourself
It seems you are going via 1) anyway. Would seem the quickest course of action. Your insurer pays the repair costs and you get the van back, the ULR solicitor gets your excess + the insurers outlay back.
HTH, and good luck.
A few points on the advice above.
You cannot pursue a third party via the courts, when you have subrogated those rights to your insurer. It is one or the other.
Damage claims rarely go to court, that is what the civil procedure rules are there for. To stop clogging up the courts with liability claims.
You have a few choices.
1) go via your insurer. Depending on the insurer they are most likely to punt the claim out to a ULR solicitor ( a few handle non-faults themselves).
2) appoint a solicitor yourself, perhaps via a Credit Repair company (assuming you don't want to pay for the repairs up front).
3) take them to small claims court yourself
It seems you are going via 1) anyway. Would seem the quickest course of action. Your insurer pays the repair costs and you get the van back, the ULR solicitor gets your excess + the insurers outlay back.
HTH, and good luck.
Forums | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff