Auxillis - Accident Claims Management - Non Fault Claim
Discussion
Smurfsarepeopletoo said:
So lets say you own a lamborghini, your paying for it monthly, and someone drives into it when its parked up, Lamborghini are on partial shut down, so parts arent available for 6 months.
So your paying for a lamborgini, but now you have to drive around in a KA, because you obviously only need 2 seats, for 6 months, still paying for a lamborghini that you cant use, and the only way you can drive something equivelant is to pay for it yourself.
You think that its fair that the other person shouldnt be responsible for that?
If you're driving a lambo, odds are its not your only car and there shouldn't be a need for a replacement vehicle. Seen plenty of posts/articles about people taking an equivalent courtesy car and being hounded for costs because they had another car they could use and didn't need it.So your paying for a lamborgini, but now you have to drive around in a KA, because you obviously only need 2 seats, for 6 months, still paying for a lamborghini that you cant use, and the only way you can drive something equivelant is to pay for it yourself.
You think that its fair that the other person shouldnt be responsible for that?
The at fault party didn't choose what car the claimant bought, the claimant did, he knew he'd bought a special car where if something went wrong it would be off the road for a while waiting for parts to be manufactured. If the car breaks down under warranty, he doesn't magically stop paying and isn't guaranteed an equivalent car while its in for repair.
how much does everybody's premium go up if everyone who hits a lambo has to hire the claimant a new lambo? It would be far simpler if there was a defined line saying this is the pool of industry standard cars, if in the vent of a claim you want more than that here is a bolt on package as a seperate product.
Mr Lambo then knows his premium is X and if he has an accident fault or not he gets Car A, he can however pay Y and that will guarantee him Car B.
Smurfsarepeopletoo said:
Maybe we do this a different way, if you run into my car, I get a like for like replacement, Your insurance company cover the cost of everything, but then they will claim all of the hire and injury costs from you, and if you are not in a position to pay it, either add an attachment of earnings, or take your house or property to cover the costs.
As your the one at fault, then surely you should be the one inconvenienced and responsible, people would probably drive alot safer, and the amount of accidents would reduce massively.
In that magical scenarios the insurers would be reducing premiums as they no longer have to provide a hire car or pay for injury costs in event of a claim and insurance would get cheaper. The insurers would then offer another tier of insurance which included 3rd party liabilities beyond repair as they could make a fortune off it.As your the one at fault, then surely you should be the one inconvenienced and responsible, people would probably drive alot safer, and the amount of accidents would reduce massively.
TwigtheWonderkid said:
catman said:
The 3rd party Insurer don't have any responsibility to you, it's to the owner of the car.
The third party insurer's responsibility is to their customer only. They have a responsibility to pay what their customer owes for the damage/injury he/she caused. catman said:
TwigtheWonderkid said:
catman said:
The 3rd party Insurer don't have any responsibility to you, it's to the owner of the car.
The third party insurer's responsibility is to their customer only. They have a responsibility to pay what their customer owes for the damage/injury he/she caused. MElliottUK said:
TwigtheWonderkid said:
Chris Jay said:
I'm glad I saw this thread, Auxillis (forwarded to me by my insurance company) provided me with a hire car whilst my own car was being repaired due to a bump (non fault claim).
I've just had a letter this morning stating that the third party (the AA) have not settled the outstanding amount and they will be seeking legal action through the courts to recover the monies should no agreement be reached.
I'm not sure how this one is going to pan out, the hire was for just over a week.
Just cooperate with them in their attempts to get their money back and you'll be fine. Even if Auxillis lose the case. I've just had a letter this morning stating that the third party (the AA) have not settled the outstanding amount and they will be seeking legal action through the courts to recover the monies should no agreement be reached.
I'm not sure how this one is going to pan out, the hire was for just over a week.
Chris Jay said:
Just to update this should anyone be interested, the third party still refuse to pay the hire charges and Auxillis are now seeking to pursue the matter through the courts. A solicitor has been instructed and the paperwork has begun.
I mentioned my experience earlier in the thread - since then I had to attend the remote court hearing in early December - it was fine - they went through my bank statements with a fine toothed comb and pulled out various transactions that they wanted explaining.The legal test that's relevant is whether you are 'impecunious' or not - basically skint! Interestingly, despite me never having much in the bank at the end of the month (at least not before 2020 anyway!), the fact I started the month with enough money to pay the hire car bill of a similar vehicle I'd arranged myself, never mind that if I'd spent it on the hire car I probably would've incurred substantial debt if I'd spent normally on other things, that meant I was not considered impecunious. That and the fact I have a few credit cards, which are all arranged to clear any balances every month, meaning I have shed loads of access to credit that if I used would bankrupt me in a matter of months. They then argued about the correct rate for the vehicle in question, and determined that the hire car company were owed an amount based on the lower rate that's been established through previous legal cases.
I forget the exact numbers, but basically the bill from the credit hire lot was £4-5k, the insurer of the 3rd party that hit my parked car offered £1k to settle, the court determined they'd get about £2.5k, so 'my' barrister said the credit hire lot would be happy with that, for one of those cases that actually went all the way to court without being settled. I got expenses for half a day (expenses are capped at £90 IIRC) of about £82.50 I think.
Basically don't panic, don't take it personally, and play along with the process. It may still be settled days before the hearing, but even if it goes ahead my experience was nothing to worry about. I knew this was always a possible outcome of entering into the agreement, so you just suck it up and get on with it
just make sure your statement (written by the solicitor on your behalf) is actually accurate! Took 5 iterations for them to get mine right.buggalugs said:
Thanks for the updates. The other parties insurers are still stonewalling 6 months later. Good to know what might be down the road.
To me this all smacks of a racket preying on people when they are vulnerable i.e just after an accident when you might not be thinking clearly.My insurance co recommended Auxillis after the accident so you just take it as red this is the way things are done, more fool me. I was the innocent party and now I have all this to deal with.
To make matters worse the third party insurance contacted me with a view to arrange everything, but I was told by my insurers under no circumstances must I deal with them, effectively forcing me upon their AMC.
Chris Jay said:
buggalugs said:
Thanks for the updates. The other parties insurers are still stonewalling 6 months later. Good to know what might be down the road.
To me this all smacks of a racket preying on people when they are vulnerable i.e just after an accident when you might not be thinking clearly.My insurance co recommended Auxillis after the accident so you just take it as red this is the way things are done, more fool me. I was the innocent party and now I have all this to deal with.
To make matters worse the third party insurance contacted me with a view to arrange everything, but I was told by my insurers under no circumstances must I deal with them, effectively forcing me upon their AMC.
A few years ago I had a no-fault accident & my insurance company referred me to an Accident Management Company. During the phone call I told the AMC that I didn't need a replacement car as I could use my wife's. They immediately said they couldn't help me & put the phone down.
Another - a mild coming together with another car when exiting my 'blind' gateway. Slight scrape on my bumper & broken headlamp on other car (a very old shed Audi A4). The driver also blamed me for damage to the front wing that was considerably lower down than my car's bumper. He got a quote from a friend's body shop to repair the car - twice what the car was worth & would take 2 weeks during which he would hire a new A4 from a company 20 miles away. I received a solicitor's letter demanding that I pay for the repairs & hire cost.
I pointed out that he could hire a 3 year old Astra for a third of the hire cost of the new A4 from a company 5 minutes walk from his house. I replied offering to pay for 5 days hire of the Astra & buy his car off him at market value. Never heard from solicitor or driver again.
Another - a mild coming together with another car when exiting my 'blind' gateway. Slight scrape on my bumper & broken headlamp on other car (a very old shed Audi A4). The driver also blamed me for damage to the front wing that was considerably lower down than my car's bumper. He got a quote from a friend's body shop to repair the car - twice what the car was worth & would take 2 weeks during which he would hire a new A4 from a company 20 miles away. I received a solicitor's letter demanding that I pay for the repairs & hire cost.
I pointed out that he could hire a 3 year old Astra for a third of the hire cost of the new A4 from a company 5 minutes walk from his house. I replied offering to pay for 5 days hire of the Astra & buy his car off him at market value. Never heard from solicitor or driver again.
I had a no fault 3 years ago and the insurer passed me to Auxilis.
Luckily car was still drivable so I had time. The other parties insurer contacted me and pointed out that the cost of Auxilis’ car may not be allowable and offered to provide a car themselves. I told Auxilis that they were doing everything but the temp vehicle and that was provided by NFU.
Renault Captur provided when my Superb went in, I grumbled that it wasn’t really equivalent but would see how it went. During the period I had the car four of us were due to visit my son and the Captur boot wasn’t big enough so they swopped it for an estate.
Meant I had no concerns about costs being covered.
Luckily car was still drivable so I had time. The other parties insurer contacted me and pointed out that the cost of Auxilis’ car may not be allowable and offered to provide a car themselves. I told Auxilis that they were doing everything but the temp vehicle and that was provided by NFU.
Renault Captur provided when my Superb went in, I grumbled that it wasn’t really equivalent but would see how it went. During the period I had the car four of us were due to visit my son and the Captur boot wasn’t big enough so they swopped it for an estate.
Meant I had no concerns about costs being covered.
I recall reading this when it was first posted and shocked at the minefield you walk into when you lose your car through an accident. To find it still an ongoing issue i would like some generic clarification from those able.
What's the best advice.
Always try to go to the "at fault" insurer whether that be yours or the 3rd party and refuse to deal with AMCs?
If you can afford to hire you own replacement then do so? Is it easy to claim those costs back afterwards?
What's the best advice.
Always try to go to the "at fault" insurer whether that be yours or the 3rd party and refuse to deal with AMCs?
If you can afford to hire you own replacement then do so? Is it easy to claim those costs back afterwards?
TheDrownedApe said:
I recall reading this when it was first posted and shocked at the minefield you walk into when you lose your car through an accident. To find it still an ongoing issue i would like some generic clarification from those able.
What's the best advice.
Always try to go to the "at fault" insurer whether that be yours or the 3rd party and refuse to deal with AMCs?
If you can afford to hire you own replacement then do so? Is it easy to claim those costs back afterwards?
There is no best advice. It depends on the various factors of the claim, any disputer over blame, how cooperative is the tp or their insurers, how do your insurers want to handle it, etc.etc. What's the best advice.
Always try to go to the "at fault" insurer whether that be yours or the 3rd party and refuse to deal with AMCs?
If you can afford to hire you own replacement then do so? Is it easy to claim those costs back afterwards?
Yeah, it's tricky for a one size fits all response - in my case blame was never in question, as the car was legally parked when hit. The third party (a large online food delivery outfit) use their own AMC to deal with claims for their vehicles, and also for 3rd parties taken out by their vehicles. Their repair garages are aimed at commercial vehicles that the owner can't afford to have off the road for long, and the ones around me were not approved by car manufacturers for bodywork repairs. They might've been fine, but I'm not taking a punt on them not applying an inch thick layer of filler instead of replacing a panel, because the AMC wants them to cut corners on cost grounds.
Their AMC was asked to provide a 'comparable' vehicle, but weren't prepared to get close (I spoke to their hire car provider, who coincidentally as also a credit hire supplier anyway, and they said they could supply something similar but that the AMC had said no!) - in the end I backed out of using the 3rd party AMC at all, for repair or hire car. They sent me a standard snotty letter saying they wouldn't pay hire car charges unless I went through them, at which point I just rang my own insurer and went through them for everything.
In retrospect I probably should've hired a car myself at commercial rates - any interest on debt accrued would've been claimable from the 3rd party, as I understand it, but it probably would've taken a similar period of time to resolve.
Their AMC was asked to provide a 'comparable' vehicle, but weren't prepared to get close (I spoke to their hire car provider, who coincidentally as also a credit hire supplier anyway, and they said they could supply something similar but that the AMC had said no!) - in the end I backed out of using the 3rd party AMC at all, for repair or hire car. They sent me a standard snotty letter saying they wouldn't pay hire car charges unless I went through them, at which point I just rang my own insurer and went through them for everything.
In retrospect I probably should've hired a car myself at commercial rates - any interest on debt accrued would've been claimable from the 3rd party, as I understand it, but it probably would've taken a similar period of time to resolve.
I've used an Accident management company before introduced via my local BMW dealer who did the repairs, if you're sat stationery and someone smashes into the back of you then the least you deserve is a bit of service, the 3rd party insurance company should provide it but they don't they mess around, ask you to hire a car via text expecting you to fund/bridge the expense caused by their driver with no detail on how or when you'd be reimbursed, as long as they continue to do this then there will be a market for the people that are willing to send a brand new 7 series round after yours has been smashed up.
As mentioned by previous posters in the thread, I have now received large amounts of paperwork asking for my financial details - bank statements, credit cards, savings etc. This is most uncomfortable and I feel as though i’m being investigated for a heinous crime rather than a hire car.
Chris Jay said:
As mentioned by previous posters in the thread, I have now received large amounts of paperwork asking for my financial details - bank statements, credit cards, savings etc. This is most uncomfortable and I feel as though i’m being investigated for a heinous crime rather than a hire car.
It will get worse... once you’ve handed all that over, they then pick through it and make you justify transactions and accounts ! We’re 18 months in with court being moved once already. New court date is June. Psycho Warren said:
Is there any way to get a courtesty car during a claim without screwing yourself over and being forced to sign an unwanted and unneeded credit agreement?
You can accept a courtesy car from the garage that is repairing your car through your insurers, but you will have to accept what they have, and when they have it available, so this may be something like a Toyota Yaris, and it may not be available for weeks depending on how busy they are.And its the same with hiring your own car, you can do that, but you may be in the same position that the TPI may dispute the cost of the hire, and you may have to go to court to recover that money, or may not end up recovering the money at all.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff