Insurers pushing OH to use legal expenses cover
Discussion
My OH was stationary in traffic at a red light when she was hit up the rear by the 3rd party. All pretty clear cut and it was downhill so it can't even be claimed she rolled backwards and caused the damage.
This all happened months ago and the 3rd party insurers have apparently just been ignoring our insurers, who are claiming they can't get hold of them. We have paid the excess and had the car repaired, so just want a no fault established so our premiums go back down.
Now OH's insurers have said they are going to start court action (good) but have sent forms and Ts&Cs to OH to start this as a separate claim on her legal expenses cover. This then puts the risk back on my OH if costs get out of hand or, presumably, if they lose the case (say a witness is magically invented).
Are they within their rights to do this? I was under the impression legal expenses was to recover personal injury losses or uninsured losses. Should our insurance company not be simply pursuing it directly to recover their losses for the repair, as part of their obligation under the insurance contract?
This all happened months ago and the 3rd party insurers have apparently just been ignoring our insurers, who are claiming they can't get hold of them. We have paid the excess and had the car repaired, so just want a no fault established so our premiums go back down.
Now OH's insurers have said they are going to start court action (good) but have sent forms and Ts&Cs to OH to start this as a separate claim on her legal expenses cover. This then puts the risk back on my OH if costs get out of hand or, presumably, if they lose the case (say a witness is magically invented).
Are they within their rights to do this? I was under the impression legal expenses was to recover personal injury losses or uninsured losses. Should our insurance company not be simply pursuing it directly to recover their losses for the repair, as part of their obligation under the insurance contract?
Thanks to those trying to help.
Background: my missus was stationary in traffic when hit from behind by a third party. She is fully comp. She called her insurance, explained it and had the car repaired for the cost of the excess. We expected this to be sorted quickly as clearly no fault on her side, in the meantime our premiums have risen as the accident is not resolved as a no fault yet.
Since then: lots of calls to our insurance to chase progress. They have stated that it is clearly not my missus' fault and that they are pushing for a response from the third party.
Now: our insurance have arranged for court proceedings to start against the third party. This however seems to be set up so the proceedings and any costs that are outside the legal expenses cover are on behalf of my missus, with the legal firm stating they cannot take any instruction from our insurance company.
My question is: should our insurance company be issuing proceedings themselves as part of their service rather than placing the risk (such as it might be - we have no idea how expensive these things get and it isn't clear from the terms and conditions that have been sent) on my other half.
Not being involved in accidents, claims or legal proceedings on a regular basis my other half is stressed by what liability she may be taking on and is thinking of dropping it. Which annoys me as this is what the third party insurers are banking on happening.
LoonR1 said:
No, I find it impossible to explain it when there is nothing in the OP that makes any semblance of sense.
Ok, I apologise, as I thought it was pretty clear. But here goes, as simply as I can make it:Background: my missus was stationary in traffic when hit from behind by a third party. She is fully comp. She called her insurance, explained it and had the car repaired for the cost of the excess. We expected this to be sorted quickly as clearly no fault on her side, in the meantime our premiums have risen as the accident is not resolved as a no fault yet.
Since then: lots of calls to our insurance to chase progress. They have stated that it is clearly not my missus' fault and that they are pushing for a response from the third party.
Now: our insurance have arranged for court proceedings to start against the third party. This however seems to be set up so the proceedings and any costs that are outside the legal expenses cover are on behalf of my missus, with the legal firm stating they cannot take any instruction from our insurance company.
My question is: should our insurance company be issuing proceedings themselves as part of their service rather than placing the risk (such as it might be - we have no idea how expensive these things get and it isn't clear from the terms and conditions that have been sent) on my other half.
Not being involved in accidents, claims or legal proceedings on a regular basis my other half is stressed by what liability she may be taking on and is thinking of dropping it. Which annoys me as this is what the third party insurers are banking on happening.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff