Advice please : Mother-in-Law problem !
Discussion
Mother-in-law has just had her car totalled by some old Coffin Dodger. Luckily her car was parked up and they had just left to go into ( Church !! ). Apparently the guy who ran into her admitted fault at the scene but ….. guess what ! Yup… Later said that someone had dazzled him and that had caused the accident !! The best bit is that the Mother-in-law ( who is spot on by the way ) is insured with the same company as the Coffin Dodger and said company is now refusing to pay on her behalf unless she can contact the third party. The third party, they say, is the bloke that dazzled the Coffin Dodger ! WTF is the world coming to ??!! F#cking insurance companies ! Is there anything she can do ? I’ve advised her to contact the Citizens Advice etc.
At a rough guess I'd have said that was their job - She's made her statement, he's made his - He hit a stationary car - Now where would you imagine the burden of proof should lie.
I'd ask them, none too politely why it was I was paying my premiums only to have to douyble up as a claims investigator!!
I'd ask them, none too politely why it was I was paying my premiums only to have to douyble up as a claims investigator!!
Very strange that, the facts, as I understand from your post. Car was parked up and some one else hits it? Surely the onus must be on the other party to prove that the third party (dazzler) exists 
.
The only issue I could see going against the outlaw is that if she was illegally parked and a hazard, in which case they may have half a leg to stand on? I assume she was rear ended as well?
I would state my case, firmly, again to the insurance company highlighting that 'you' are not in a position to provide the other parties with an alibi, as 'you' were not in the car at the time and not witness to this.
The other party has called a third party into the equation, without registration or a name it ranks amongst the 'a fox ran out/diesel on the road' excuses. Good for saving face down the pub but bugger all good in an insurance claim/court case.
If he has made a statement to the effect that he hit a parked car, has he not admitted to carless driving? or some other traffic offence? perhaps a hint that you may get the police involved may focus the mind and stop this nonsense
.
I know the above doesn't really add much to what you've already said but it also p*sses me off when Ins Co. try this sort of thing on.
Call their bluff and enquire about claiming for hire cars as well, a necessity introduced due to their unreasonable delays on what is obviously a cut and dried no other party involved type of accident
.
Harry
Obviously all IMHO
. The only issue I could see going against the outlaw is that if she was illegally parked and a hazard, in which case they may have half a leg to stand on? I assume she was rear ended as well?
I would state my case, firmly, again to the insurance company highlighting that 'you' are not in a position to provide the other parties with an alibi, as 'you' were not in the car at the time and not witness to this.
The other party has called a third party into the equation, without registration or a name it ranks amongst the 'a fox ran out/diesel on the road' excuses. Good for saving face down the pub but bugger all good in an insurance claim/court case.
If he has made a statement to the effect that he hit a parked car, has he not admitted to carless driving? or some other traffic offence? perhaps a hint that you may get the police involved may focus the mind and stop this nonsense
. I know the above doesn't really add much to what you've already said but it also p*sses me off when Ins Co. try this sort of thing on.
Call their bluff and enquire about claiming for hire cars as well, a necessity introduced due to their unreasonable delays on what is obviously a cut and dried no other party involved type of accident
. Harry
Obviously all IMHO
Absolutely, it is the insurance company's job and an admission of 100% liability is exactly that. I would suggest that your M.i.L. should tell them to find this mystery dazzling driver, failing that, pay up on the basis that the 'coffin dodger' admitted liability and he hit a stationary car. Don't accept any nonsense from these b@stards, make 'em cough up. As an additional thought were the police called 'cos insurance people tend to be a bit more cooperative if p.c. Plod is involved. Good luck...
They're a bunch of numbwits.
You have to stand up for yourself in any accidnet nowadays else they will just go 50/50 or not pay out at all.
If I were your MiL I'd be talking to a seperate Solicitor right now for breach of contract or somesuch..... Definitely get some legal advice if they won't listen to her.
You have to stand up for yourself in any accidnet nowadays else they will just go 50/50 or not pay out at all.
If I were your MiL I'd be talking to a seperate Solicitor right now for breach of contract or somesuch..... Definitely get some legal advice if they won't listen to her.
Wouldn't even be an issue if it wasn't the same insurance co I'll bet. Grrr
It should be codger's responsibility to prove some kind of extenuating circumstances for hitting a stationary car, not the other way 'round.
FFS Next we'll all be needing to find & talk to the pilot of the mystery spacecraft that beamed up some blind old git & then dropped them off in the wrong carriageway of the motorway...
It should be codger's responsibility to prove some kind of extenuating circumstances for hitting a stationary car, not the other way 'round.
FFS Next we'll all be needing to find & talk to the pilot of the mystery spacecraft that beamed up some blind old git & then dropped them off in the wrong carriageway of the motorway...
Get her to write (on computer) a letter in a business style, that basically says:
- You are talking bollocks
- It is not my responsibility to find this person
- Highway Code (get a specific quotation) says: if you're dazzled stop.
- Final statement required within ten working days (state date). All costs of pursuance from this date will be charged.
Then the crafty bit - attach a slightly scrumpled , often peeled Post-It note that says:
"Sophie,
That's fine, please ensure this goes out by recorded delivery tonight. Please also track down the details for the Insurance Ombudsman and while you're at it BBC Watchdog and Working Lunch"
- You are talking bollocks
- It is not my responsibility to find this person
- Highway Code (get a specific quotation) says: if you're dazzled stop.
- Final statement required within ten working days (state date). All costs of pursuance from this date will be charged.
Then the crafty bit - attach a slightly scrumpled , often peeled Post-It note that says:
"Sophie,
That's fine, please ensure this goes out by recorded delivery tonight. Please also track down the details for the Insurance Ombudsman and while you're at it BBC Watchdog and Working Lunch"
In my professional oppinion, write to the insurance company again, if by a set date you have not had any indication that the co. is going to reasonablly attempt to settle this problem, go to the ombudsman. All insurance companies are regulated by the General Insurance Standards Council, and soon to be regulated by the FSA.
As a matter of interst;
What is the insurance company?
Did anyone else witness the confession?
What happened to "Driving with Due care and attention"
I always thought that if you hit a stationary object you are at fault.
As a matter of interst;
What is the insurance company?
Did anyone else witness the confession?
What happened to "Driving with Due care and attention"
I always thought that if you hit a stationary object you are at fault.
read the thread then Forums | General Gassing [Archive] | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff