Where there's a claim - there's blame

[B'stard Child]

I couldn't believe what a friend of mine told me today

Last month early one morning she was running late and in getting out of her allocated parking space she reversed into a van parked in the next one - bumper to bumper bit of minor damage on each car.

She knew who owned the van (a neighbour in the flats she lives in) so knocked on the door and once the chap had woken up he came to the door in his jim-jams - she apologised and said she'd provide insurance details later that day as she needed to a) find them and b) she was late for work.

True to her word she did and her insurance company sorted out the damage on her car

Guess what - today she's been informed that the driver is claiming for whiplash injuries and her insurance company aren't fighting it.......

FFS - how the hell do you get a whiplash injury when you are in bed and 200 yrds away from the car

No wonder insurance premiums are sky rocketing!!!

[LukeSi]

tell her to counter claim for emotional stress. Or sue him for fraud.

Edited by LukeSi on Friday 31st December 20:10

[Garlick]

Mrs was involved in a rear ender (ooh err) at a roundabout recently. The insurer was very forceful in suggesting that she claimed for whiplash. She didn't but they didn't like it.

Apologies for being O/T.....

[Heathwood]

Surely this can't be true.

[paintman]

The OP did start his post by saying he wouldn't believe what he had been told.
Might be the most accurate part of the post

Edited by paintman on Friday 31st December 20:13

[sinizter]

Is this a friend of a friend of friend's friend type story ? Sounds daft.

[mybrainhurts]

When she knocked on the door, he was on the vinegar strokes and fell out of bed, thus sustaining whiplash injuries...

Probably...

[B'stard Child]

sinizter said:

Is this a friend of a friend of friend's friend type story ? Sounds daft.

It's a good friend I've known her for years

The insurance company have said unless she had physically looked in the van and made sure there was no-one in there it's a open and shut case

Yes it's chuffing daft - what can I say!

[B'stard Child]

Heathwood said:

Surely this can't be true.

She told me the day of the accident - in fact I had a look at the car just to make sure it was safe to drive (she wanted to be sure) it was a car park dink made slightly worse by the fact it was a ford.....

It just sounded to me like she was gonna lose a little no claims and she'd get a washed and polished car back after the repair (she doesn't "do" car cleaning)

[B'stard Child]

Garlick said:

Mrs was involved in a rear ender (ooh err) at a roundabout recently. The insurer was very forceful in suggesting that she claimed for whiplash. She didn't but they didn't like it.

Apologies for being O/T.....

Insurer or ambulance chaser?

I was so surprise that the insurance company just don't want to fight it all - pay up and move on - we'll just put the premiums up again for everyone else

[madala]

Heathwood said:

Surely this can't be true.

...I agree....it only needs a phone call or two and if needs be a court case....also I would be having a quite word that neighbour.

[Globs]

B'stard Child said:

sinizter said:

Is this a friend of a friend of friend's friend type story ? Sounds daft.

It's a good friend I've known her for years

The insurance company have said unless she had physically looked in the van and made sure there was no-one in there it's a open and shut case

Yes it's chuffing daft - what can I say!

But she is a witness that the claimant was not in the van at the time.
That makes it insurance fraud.

Sounds very odd to me, she should raise more of a fuss I think, and contact the ombudsman if required.

[B'stard Child]

madala said:

Heathwood said:

Surely this can't be true.

...I agree....it only needs a phone call or two and if needs be a court case....also I would be having a quite word that neighbour.

She's had a word with the neighbour it didn't go well

Her insurance company appear to be quite happy to settle despite her objections and statements regarding the circumstances of the accident

[madala]

B'stard Child said:

sinizter said:

Is this a friend of a friend of friend's friend type story ? Sounds daft.

It's a good friend I've known her for years

The insurance company have said unless she had physically looked in the van and made sure there was no-one in there it's a open and shut case

Yes it's chuffing daft - what can I say!

....yes she did look in the van.....sigh....that's when she no-one in it...and that's why she knocked on the door of the neighbour who opened the door in his pajamas.....is the insurance company that stupid or just too fking lazy.

[Garlick]

B'stard Child said:

Garlick said:

Mrs was involved in a rear ender (ooh err) at a roundabout recently. The insurer was very forceful in suggesting that she claimed for whiplash. She didn't but they didn't like it.

Apologies for being O/T.....

Insurer or ambulance chaser?

I was so surprise that the insurance company just don't want to fight it all - pay up and move on - we'll just put the premiums up again for everyone else

'legal experts' acting under instruction from insurer.

[B'stard Child]

Globs said:

B'stard Child said:

sinizter said:

Is this a friend of a friend of friend's friend type story ? Sounds daft.

It's a good friend I've known her for years

The insurance company have said unless she had physically looked in the van and made sure there was no-one in there it's a open and shut case

Yes it's chuffing daft - what can I say!

But she is a witness that the claimant was not in the van at the time.
That makes it insurance fraud.

Sounds very odd to me, she should raise more of a fuss I think, and contact the ombudsman if required.

It's her insurance company that stated if she didn't check in the van they couldn't fight it

Ombudsman - she has no beef with her insurance company other than they are not prepared to contest the claim made by the other party - she's already lost her NCB and she is no worse off

[B'stard Child]

Garlick said:

B'stard Child said:

Garlick said:

Mrs was involved in a rear ender (ooh err) at a roundabout recently. The insurer was very forceful in suggesting that she claimed for whiplash. She didn't but they didn't like it.

Apologies for being O/T.....

Insurer or ambulance chaser?

I was so surprise that the insurance company just don't want to fight it all - pay up and move on - we'll just put the premiums up again for everyone else

'legal experts' acting under instruction from insurer.

I think I got it right earlier

[Garlick]

I think you might have too...

[2fster]

Garlick said:

B'stard Child said:

Garlick said:

Mrs was involved in a rear ender (ooh err) at a roundabout recently. The insurer was very forceful in suggesting that she claimed for whiplash. She didn't but they didn't like it.

Apologies for being O/T.....

Insurer or ambulance chaser?

I was so surprise that the insurance company just don't want to fight it all - pay up and move on - we'll just put the premiums up again for everyone else

'legal experts' acting under instruction from insurer.

Legal Experts acting on a referral from her insurer. They only make any money if she claims for whiplash. They can't exactly claim much in costs if they've only submitted her excess receipt.

[v8will]

Some prat in a transit drove into my car a few weeks ago and refused to hand over details because he said he hadn't hit me at all and he didn't want a whip lash claim.

All was fine after a game of pushy shovey and the police being called.