Why does a non- fault claim put your insurance up.

[Mikeyplum]

I've always wondered about claiming for the increase in Insurance Premiums from the "at fault" driver's insurance company.

How would that go down do you reckon?

[balls-out]

Had a colleague at work whos wife had been driven into the back of 3 times in 3 years - ie non fault.
I commented on what terrible luck.
"yes", he replied, "but her habbit of stopping suddenly of no reason, might explain some of it"....

[Frenchda]

otolith said:

Because they have noticed that people who have had a non-fault claim are more likely to cost them money down the line. That's all there is to it.

Rear ended whilst stationary - my 11 years NCB obviously has nothing to do with it and I am now obviously a greater risk.

[Frenchda]

Because of this, I will do everything to avoid involving insurers in future, I merely have it to abide by the law and in the worst case. And if I have to make a claim against someone (damage to my car), then I will go to town with it now- As its nigh on impossible to claim for the increase in my future insurance premiums.



This.

[brakes]

If you have a "no blame" accident and the other party pays for repairs, how does your insurance company know about the incident? Or is it just up to you to declare it when you apply for insurance?

[StottyZr]

I've kept this quiet but I was crashed into again recently. I pulled over to exchange details and he sped away!

I was overcome with relief.

Its a very, very sad day when your crashed into, and are overwhelmed with happiness when the at fault driver does a hit and run.

[Frik]

Frenchda said:

otolith said:

Because they have noticed that people who have had a non-fault claim are more likely to cost them money down the line. That's all there is to it.

Rear ended whilst stationary - my 11 years NCB obviously has nothing to do with it and I am now obviously a greater risk.

Your argument doesn't negate otolith's. The bit in bold is relevant. It doesn't mean you personally are more likely to have an accident now, it just means that statistically speaking, you now belong in a different demographic.

Of course, it's perfectly possible to cause an accident whilst stationary...

[otolith]

Frenchda said:

otolith said:

Because they have noticed that people who have had a non-fault claim are more likely to cost them money down the line. That's all there is to it.

Rear ended whilst stationary - my 11 years NCB obviously has nothing to do with it and I am now obviously a greater risk.

It would appear that you are, yes - or, at least, that people in the same situatiion as you are, which is all they have to go off.

[croyde]

Someone crashed into my car a couple of years ago, it was parked and I was in the house. I dealt directly with the driver and her insurance company and although it took a while and a bit of work my end, I eventually had my car repaired.

Guess what, come renewal time I was loaded by my insurance co, who I had not involved in the process, for a non-fault claim even tho' it had not cost them a penny.

That seemed pretty unfair.