Non-fault Insurance claim
Discussion
Someone hit my parked car on Sunday and has admitted liability. I told them I would be going through the insurance as I don’t have time to go around garages getting quotes and sorting courtesy cars out due to work.
I reported it to my insurance and they have been sorting the claim - the speed at which they have done this is impressive, however, now I know why…
The other insurance company (Aviva) contacted me to today and offered to fix the car. I rejected the offer as per my insurers instructions; they then offered me £500 as a goodwill gesture. The guy from Aviva was really transparent and explained that they are offering this to reduce their costs as MY insurance will inflate costs and charge more for a hire car.
I have never made a claim before so this is all new to me. So my question is, is it too good to be true?
They have emailed me saying they will repair the car and provide a hire car etc and I have gone back to them and asked;
1 Has liability has been accepted 100% by your policy holder?
2. Is the £500 is an additional goodwill/compensation payment and doesn’t reduce the amount you will spend to repair my car.
3. No excess is payable by me
4. You will provide a like-for-like courtesy car (this needs to be an EV) for the entire period my car is being repaired.
5. A Tesla approved repairer will be used and ADAS (Advanced Driver Assistance Systems) calibration included.
6. You will cover any reasonable additional losses arising from the accident.
7. My Hastings policy can simply remain notified as an incident and I don’t need to make a claim through Hastings.
8.Will I be given a courtesy car for the entirety of the repair, even if the repair takes longer?
9. What happens if I am not happy with the quality of the repair?
I reported it to my insurance and they have been sorting the claim - the speed at which they have done this is impressive, however, now I know why…
The other insurance company (Aviva) contacted me to today and offered to fix the car. I rejected the offer as per my insurers instructions; they then offered me £500 as a goodwill gesture. The guy from Aviva was really transparent and explained that they are offering this to reduce their costs as MY insurance will inflate costs and charge more for a hire car.
I have never made a claim before so this is all new to me. So my question is, is it too good to be true?
They have emailed me saying they will repair the car and provide a hire car etc and I have gone back to them and asked;
1 Has liability has been accepted 100% by your policy holder?
2. Is the £500 is an additional goodwill/compensation payment and doesn’t reduce the amount you will spend to repair my car.
3. No excess is payable by me
4. You will provide a like-for-like courtesy car (this needs to be an EV) for the entire period my car is being repaired.
5. A Tesla approved repairer will be used and ADAS (Advanced Driver Assistance Systems) calibration included.
6. You will cover any reasonable additional losses arising from the accident.
7. My Hastings policy can simply remain notified as an incident and I don’t need to make a claim through Hastings.
8.Will I be given a courtesy car for the entirety of the repair, even if the repair takes longer?
9. What happens if I am not happy with the quality of the repair?
My claim no fault is in court. £4k is the cost. Most of that is the car hire. I was offered money many many years ago by the other insurer when I got hit.
Basically the ambulance chasers make a nice profit from insurance claims when it’s not them paying out.
If it’s cosmetic it’s not that expensive and yes even if it’s no fault until it’s settled you’ll be hit with having to declare as a fault claim as it’s not settled which increases your insurance
Basically the ambulance chasers make a nice profit from insurance claims when it’s not them paying out.
If it’s cosmetic it’s not that expensive and yes even if it’s no fault until it’s settled you’ll be hit with having to declare as a fault claim as it’s not settled which increases your insurance
Citizens Advice have a page about it: https://www.citizensadvice.org.uk/consumer/insuran...
It mostly seems to be focused on the disadvantages if you've been injured though; it doesn't really seem to imply any major disadvantages if you haven't.
It mostly seems to be focused on the disadvantages if you've been injured though; it doesn't really seem to imply any major disadvantages if you haven't.
Edited by kambites on Thursday 17th September 18:43
It’s not necessarily the case that one will spend less on your part of the claim than the other would but to some extent that’s academic.
You’ve asked some decent questions and it would be good to get their reply first.
If however their Insured has admitted liability ( usually suggested that never do this btw ) then in theory it’s 100% claimable from their insured as opposed to the 50/50 route.
There is an argument that your Insurer might be easier to deal with and you have more chance of controlling the claim cost such as the car hire aspect but you weren’t at fault so I think going with Aviva is probably the right answer.
Still won’t stop you having to declare the incident at each renewal though.
And obviously make sure that your Insurer knows that you are only reporting it for information only and not claiming via them.
His insurer would “ generally “ be considered perhaps more decent a company to deal with than yours but
that’s subjective.
You’ve asked some decent questions and it would be good to get their reply first.
If however their Insured has admitted liability ( usually suggested that never do this btw ) then in theory it’s 100% claimable from their insured as opposed to the 50/50 route.
There is an argument that your Insurer might be easier to deal with and you have more chance of controlling the claim cost such as the car hire aspect but you weren’t at fault so I think going with Aviva is probably the right answer.
Still won’t stop you having to declare the incident at each renewal though.
And obviously make sure that your Insurer knows that you are only reporting it for information only and not claiming via them.
His insurer would “ generally “ be considered perhaps more decent a company to deal with than yours but
that’s subjective.
Your insurer may also tell you that if you use the 3rd party, then any issues you have with the repair or claiming back out of pocket expenses will have to be done by you, as your insurer won't have any skin in the game
If you have motor legal cover on your policy that may not cover assisting you either it either as it may require you to have gone through your own insurer.
As it was near Christmas, mine couldn't even source me a courtesy car (which had to come from the repair centre) for 6 weeks, and then they claimed it was because they couldn't authorise it until they knew whether it was going to be written off (courtesy car provision) or repaired (courtesy car provided)...and the repair centre was dragging their feet with the estimate.
In my case, going through my own insurer did not help much with missing out of pocket expenses or poor repairs by a Fooker's repair centre (despite the ISO quality certificate / guarantee I was handed) - which conveniently ceased to exist 3 months later. Luckily an independent engineer's report and ombudsman threats got my insurer to fork out another £3.5k for remedial works and 6 weeks of a small group 1 hire car from Enterprise so that I could get to work (£100/week).
If you have motor legal cover on your policy that may not cover assisting you either it either as it may require you to have gone through your own insurer.
As it was near Christmas, mine couldn't even source me a courtesy car (which had to come from the repair centre) for 6 weeks, and then they claimed it was because they couldn't authorise it until they knew whether it was going to be written off (courtesy car provision) or repaired (courtesy car provided)...and the repair centre was dragging their feet with the estimate.
In my case, going through my own insurer did not help much with missing out of pocket expenses or poor repairs by a Fooker's repair centre (despite the ISO quality certificate / guarantee I was handed) - which conveniently ceased to exist 3 months later. Luckily an independent engineer's report and ombudsman threats got my insurer to fork out another £3.5k for remedial works and 6 weeks of a small group 1 hire car from Enterprise so that I could get to work (£100/week).
Edited by mmm-five on Thursday 17th September 18:59
You've paid the premium.
You've got a claim.
Just let your insurers handle it.
When it comes to next year's renewal you'll get rated on having had an "incident" whether or not you "claim". And if you've been paying the small additional premium for NCD protect you shouldn't be much affected in any event.
You've got a claim.
Just let your insurers handle it.
When it comes to next year's renewal you'll get rated on having had an "incident" whether or not you "claim". And if you've been paying the small additional premium for NCD protect you shouldn't be much affected in any event.
I got a tap in the rear in 2023 and claimed against the insurer of the other driver which was Hastings.
There was no issue regarding liability as they contacted me after the other driver reported it to them. I went to a bodyshop they recommended who sent Hastings an inflated estimate and Hastings made my car a Cat N more than a week before they bothered to tell me.
Then they made a pitiful offer which I managed to get increased by a couple of hundred quid but then they wouldn't budge. But as the damage was minimal and it wouldn't cost much to keep the car I reluctantly accepted.
But I wouldn't use the words "Hastings" and "reputable" in the same sentence.
Before my next renewal I declared it to my insurer, Saga, who added about £40 to the premium and increased the excess anyway. I wasn't too impressed with that either!
There was no issue regarding liability as they contacted me after the other driver reported it to them. I went to a bodyshop they recommended who sent Hastings an inflated estimate and Hastings made my car a Cat N more than a week before they bothered to tell me.
Then they made a pitiful offer which I managed to get increased by a couple of hundred quid but then they wouldn't budge. But as the damage was minimal and it wouldn't cost much to keep the car I reluctantly accepted.
But I wouldn't use the words "Hastings" and "reputable" in the same sentence.
Before my next renewal I declared it to my insurer, Saga, who added about £40 to the premium and increased the excess anyway. I wasn't too impressed with that either!
When I made Hastings aware, they implied that it wouldn’t count against me as I’m claim off the other insurance. When Aviva rang me today, they implied that it would count against me if I went through Hastings but wouldn’t if I went through them. As things stand, Hastings haven’t asked for any money from me, however am I going to be asked to pay the excess?
What I don’t like about the situation is that I rang Hastings and 10 minutes later a company called Nationwide Hire contacted me. 30 minutes later, Enterprise contacted me. I feel like I’m not really in control of the situation as I’m a little lost as to who I’m actually dealing with!
Surely if I claim from their insurance (Aviva) it cuts out the middle man? I know they aren’t acting in my behalf but I can’t image a company of that size are going to try and screw me for a few hundred quid! Maybe I am being naive but it’s just an absolute minefield!
What I don’t like about the situation is that I rang Hastings and 10 minutes later a company called Nationwide Hire contacted me. 30 minutes later, Enterprise contacted me. I feel like I’m not really in control of the situation as I’m a little lost as to who I’m actually dealing with!
Surely if I claim from their insurance (Aviva) it cuts out the middle man? I know they aren’t acting in my behalf but I can’t image a company of that size are going to try and screw me for a few hundred quid! Maybe I am being naive but it’s just an absolute minefield!
I was in a similar situation in April this year. My wife’s car was hit at a roundabout and he admitted liability at the road side. The next day his insurer had made contact with us offering to sort everything out.
I had already started the claim with our insurer via their online portal the evening of the accident. I was really undecided which route to continue with as I certainly didn’t want to sign a credit hire agreement for the loan car as I’ve heard of too many horror stories but keeping it with our insurer means they are on our side.
In the end I stayed with the 3rd party insurer as they offered us £350 to do so. I wished I’d not bothered to a certain extent as I ended up having to call the repairer and the hire car company several times to arrange everything as they all kept telling me different things which contradicted everyone else.
In the end it all worked out ok. We got the car back after 4 weeks and had an M135i as a loan car which cost the 3rd party insurer £56 a day. Still can’t believe a rear bumper, small dent on the tailgate, tow bar and exhaust back box came to nearly £5k though! Another £1k and it would have been written off apparently.
I had already started the claim with our insurer via their online portal the evening of the accident. I was really undecided which route to continue with as I certainly didn’t want to sign a credit hire agreement for the loan car as I’ve heard of too many horror stories but keeping it with our insurer means they are on our side.
In the end I stayed with the 3rd party insurer as they offered us £350 to do so. I wished I’d not bothered to a certain extent as I ended up having to call the repairer and the hire car company several times to arrange everything as they all kept telling me different things which contradicted everyone else.
In the end it all worked out ok. We got the car back after 4 weeks and had an M135i as a loan car which cost the 3rd party insurer £56 a day. Still can’t believe a rear bumper, small dent on the tailgate, tow bar and exhaust back box came to nearly £5k though! Another £1k and it would have been written off apparently.
It’s crazy that insurance/making a claim is this complicated. There should be one clear-cut route, and no trying to figure out what’s the better option. Let us know what you decide OP.
Most important for me would be who does the repair and what happens if I’m not happy with the end result (I’m sure I’ve read that if you go with third-party insurers, it could be harder to fight against poor repair work as the third-party won’t care and obviously it’s nothing to do with your insurers).
Whether you claim on your insurance or not, you’ll still have to answer ‘yes’ to the ‘have you had to make a claim/had an accident in the last 5 years’ question.
Most important for me would be who does the repair and what happens if I’m not happy with the end result (I’m sure I’ve read that if you go with third-party insurers, it could be harder to fight against poor repair work as the third-party won’t care and obviously it’s nothing to do with your insurers).
Whether you claim on your insurance or not, you’ll still have to answer ‘yes’ to the ‘have you had to make a claim/had an accident in the last 5 years’ question.
Edited by BUG4LIFE on Thursday 17th September 22:42
Panamax said:
You've paid the premium.
You've got a claim.
Just let your insurers handle it.
My position also, and how I've dealt with stuff previously.You've got a claim.
Just let your insurers handle it.
You're paying them for their services, and they know about the incident either way, so let them sort it out.
My experience was that, once the claim was 100% settled as non fault, which took a fair while, my insurer refunded me the (admittedly quite nominal) amount they'd uplifted my premium by when renewing with an open claim.
Obviously they all behave differently.
My elderly father has just got his car back from a minor, non-fault repair where another elderly driver misjudged the turning circle of her Yaris coming out of a supermarket parking space, so that her front tyre/arch contacted my father's rear arch/tyre. at <10mph.
3rd party insurer offered to sort it all out, and offered increasing amounts to let them sort it out, but father told them that he didn't need a hire car as the damage was minor and it could be safely driven until they could take it in for repair, so told them he would just let his own insurer deal with it.
A week later the accident repair centre came and picked he car up, and about 2 weeks later he got the car back - which was strange in itself as they told us they wouldn't collect the car until they had all the parts in stock and a repair slot.
I don't know what the final bill was (father didn't see it, and there was no excess to pay), but I think it's been padded with extra work to increase the claimed labour.
The only visible damage was a plastic trim off the rear arch (the clips were broke but there was not a single scratch/scuff/ding on any paintwork), a bit of transfer/light scuffing on the adjacent trim. There was also marks on the tyre very light scuff on the wheel - but knowing my father they might have been there beforehand as the wheel/tyre is about 1" recessed into the arch.
Anyway, it seems the accident repair centre decided the car needed both 6 month / 2000 mile old rear wheels & tyres replaced (I assume to ensure they match), all the trim along one side of the car, and a new rear bumper (which wasn't touched in the accident).
3rd party insurer offered to sort it all out, and offered increasing amounts to let them sort it out, but father told them that he didn't need a hire car as the damage was minor and it could be safely driven until they could take it in for repair, so told them he would just let his own insurer deal with it.
A week later the accident repair centre came and picked he car up, and about 2 weeks later he got the car back - which was strange in itself as they told us they wouldn't collect the car until they had all the parts in stock and a repair slot.
I don't know what the final bill was (father didn't see it, and there was no excess to pay), but I think it's been padded with extra work to increase the claimed labour.
The only visible damage was a plastic trim off the rear arch (the clips were broke but there was not a single scratch/scuff/ding on any paintwork), a bit of transfer/light scuffing on the adjacent trim. There was also marks on the tyre very light scuff on the wheel - but knowing my father they might have been there beforehand as the wheel/tyre is about 1" recessed into the arch.
Anyway, it seems the accident repair centre decided the car needed both 6 month / 2000 mile old rear wheels & tyres replaced (I assume to ensure they match), all the trim along one side of the car, and a new rear bumper (which wasn't touched in the accident).
You don't have to pay the excess if claiming from the third party insurance.
The excess is what you agreed to with your insurance company - and if you were claiming from them, they should get it back from the third party insurers anyway.
If you claim directly from the third party - there is no excess. You have never agreed to an excess with a company that doesn't insure you / you have no contract with.
The excess is what you agreed to with your insurance company - and if you were claiming from them, they should get it back from the third party insurers anyway.
If you claim directly from the third party - there is no excess. You have never agreed to an excess with a company that doesn't insure you / you have no contract with.
BUG4LIFE said:
It s crazy that insurance/making a claim is this complicated. There should be one clear-cut route, and no trying to figure out what s the better option. Let us know what you decide OP.
Most important for me would be who does the repair and what happens if I m not happy with the end result (I m sure I ve read that if you go with third-party insurers, it could be harder to fight against poor repair work as the third-party won t care and obviously it s nothing to do with your insurers).
Whether you claim on your insurance or not, you ll still have to answer yes to the have you had to make a claim/had an accident in the last 5 years question.
When it happened to me, and I claimed off third party insurers - I decided where the car was being repaired. And obviously I chose a place that had excellent reputation / guaranteed their work etc.Most important for me would be who does the repair and what happens if I m not happy with the end result (I m sure I ve read that if you go with third-party insurers, it could be harder to fight against poor repair work as the third-party won t care and obviously it s nothing to do with your insurers).
Whether you claim on your insurance or not, you ll still have to answer yes to the have you had to make a claim/had an accident in the last 5 years question.
Edited by BUG4LIFE on Thursday 17th September 22:42
If a third-party has admitted fault, then I always push for their insurer to repair.
As Aviva have said to you, they're trying to control the costs themselves.
It won't matter to your insurer if they put you in a credit hire car at great cost to the other insurer. And potentially you if they quibble.
Whereas it sounds like Aviva are saying they'll get it fixed and put you in a courtesy car. Which is all you need.
I'm not sure why all the questions. Insurers don't pick up the phone to the third-party and offer to fix their car for them unless they're certain it was their insured at fault. Fair play to them for jumping into action.
As Aviva have said to you, they're trying to control the costs themselves.
It won't matter to your insurer if they put you in a credit hire car at great cost to the other insurer. And potentially you if they quibble.
Whereas it sounds like Aviva are saying they'll get it fixed and put you in a courtesy car. Which is all you need.
I'm not sure why all the questions. Insurers don't pick up the phone to the third-party and offer to fix their car for them unless they're certain it was their insured at fault. Fair play to them for jumping into action.
Forums | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff