Auxillis - Accident Claims Management - Non Fault Claim
Discussion
Smurfsarepeopletoo said:
I used to work for an AMC, luckily it was a reputable company and they would not look to recover the costs from the client, although this was built into the contract just in case.
But just to put the hire costs into perspective, to insure their fleet was 7 million a year, they had a high number of hire vehicles stolen every year, some through people making fraudulent claims, they have probably 20 - 30 people crash their vehicles a week, plus all of the other overheads.
And the only reason that AMC's are around is because a large percentage of people cant make do with a small courtesy car to replace theirs, and also bodyshops will tend to only keep a couple of courtesy cars.
So the only other option is for the insurers to provide you with a car through someone like enterprise, but they would still have to recover those costs, and then you have the extra issue of Enterprise then charging £1200 for a small amount of damage to the hire, unless you decide to pay £10 a day for CDW.
Even with the extra, all-inclusive insurance, a like-for-like vehicle from Enterprise would be less than £100/day!But just to put the hire costs into perspective, to insure their fleet was 7 million a year, they had a high number of hire vehicles stolen every year, some through people making fraudulent claims, they have probably 20 - 30 people crash their vehicles a week, plus all of the other overheads.
And the only reason that AMC's are around is because a large percentage of people cant make do with a small courtesy car to replace theirs, and also bodyshops will tend to only keep a couple of courtesy cars.
So the only other option is for the insurers to provide you with a car through someone like enterprise, but they would still have to recover those costs, and then you have the extra issue of Enterprise then charging £1200 for a small amount of damage to the hire, unless you decide to pay £10 a day for CDW.
Mine was £55/day for an f31 320D Touring with zero excess, roadside assistance, other driver & unlimited mileage (it could have been a 1-series or an X5, as I just said I was happy to have any BMW as a replacement my Z4) .
Total cost of hire car to 3rd party was less than £800 for 2 weeks - agreed and paid directly by the TPI.
That compares to the £7k for the 2-and-a-bit weeks the AMC charged in my last accident (5 years previously) for a BMW e90 3-series, because they didn't have any 2-seaters to replace my Z4. That was also despite me saying I was only running around town as I was working from home, so didn't need anything bigger than a city car - but they insisted on 'like for like' and then still gave me a barge.
Their Bolton-based solicitors handling the case were useless, as they kept sending me the statements full of errors to check over (e.g. the wrong car & accident location in)...and it was only at the 3rd or 4th revision that they noticed I'd removed some of the statements that I didn't agree with (because they were false)...and then threatened to come after me if they didn't recover all their costs.
Never again!
Smurfsarepeopletoo said:
shopper150 said:
Admiral said I can use Auxillis or can can claim through them!
Will Admiral provide you with a vehicle of a similar class?mmm-five said:
Smurfsarepeopletoo said:
I used to work for an AMC, luckily it was a reputable company and they would not look to recover the costs from the client, although this was built into the contract just in case.
But just to put the hire costs into perspective, to insure their fleet was 7 million a year, they had a high number of hire vehicles stolen every year, some through people making fraudulent claims, they have probably 20 - 30 people crash their vehicles a week, plus all of the other overheads.
And the only reason that AMC's are around is because a large percentage of people cant make do with a small courtesy car to replace theirs, and also bodyshops will tend to only keep a couple of courtesy cars.
So the only other option is for the insurers to provide you with a car through someone like enterprise, but they would still have to recover those costs, and then you have the extra issue of Enterprise then charging £1200 for a small amount of damage to the hire, unless you decide to pay £10 a day for CDW.
Even with the extra, all-inclusive insurance, a like-for-like vehicle from Enterprise would be less than £100/day!But just to put the hire costs into perspective, to insure their fleet was 7 million a year, they had a high number of hire vehicles stolen every year, some through people making fraudulent claims, they have probably 20 - 30 people crash their vehicles a week, plus all of the other overheads.
And the only reason that AMC's are around is because a large percentage of people cant make do with a small courtesy car to replace theirs, and also bodyshops will tend to only keep a couple of courtesy cars.
So the only other option is for the insurers to provide you with a car through someone like enterprise, but they would still have to recover those costs, and then you have the extra issue of Enterprise then charging £1200 for a small amount of damage to the hire, unless you decide to pay £10 a day for CDW.
That's what you are paying for. The ARM are fronting the costs, at full risk to them and not to you (providing you cooperate in the recovery of their outlay), based on your version of events.
mmm-five said:
Even with the extra, all-inclusive insurance, a like-for-like vehicle from Enterprise would be less than £100/day!
Mine was £55/day for an f31 320D Touring with zero excess, roadside assistance, other driver & unlimited mileage (it could have been a 1-series or an X5, as I just said I was happy to have any BMW as a replacement my Z4) .
Total cost of hire car to 3rd party was less than £800 for 2 weeks - agreed and paid directly by the TPI.
That compares to the £7k for the 2-and-a-bit weeks the AMC charged in my last accident (5 years previously) for a BMW e90 3-series, because they didn't have any 2-seaters to replace my Z4. That was also despite me saying I was only running around town as I was working from home, so didn't need anything bigger than a city car - but they insisted on 'like for like' and then still gave me a barge.
Their Bolton-based solicitors handling the case were useless, as they kept sending me the statements full of errors to check over (e.g. the wrong car & accident location in)...and it was only at the 3rd or 4th revision that they noticed I'd removed some of the statements that I didn't agree with (because they were false)...and then threatened to come after me if they didn't recover all their costs.
Never again!
The difference being, if you go through the TPI then they will provide you with a vehicle at whatever the daily cost is that they have agreed with Enterprise.Mine was £55/day for an f31 320D Touring with zero excess, roadside assistance, other driver & unlimited mileage (it could have been a 1-series or an X5, as I just said I was happy to have any BMW as a replacement my Z4) .
Total cost of hire car to 3rd party was less than £800 for 2 weeks - agreed and paid directly by the TPI.
That compares to the £7k for the 2-and-a-bit weeks the AMC charged in my last accident (5 years previously) for a BMW e90 3-series, because they didn't have any 2-seaters to replace my Z4. That was also despite me saying I was only running around town as I was working from home, so didn't need anything bigger than a city car - but they insisted on 'like for like' and then still gave me a barge.
Their Bolton-based solicitors handling the case were useless, as they kept sending me the statements full of errors to check over (e.g. the wrong car & accident location in)...and it was only at the 3rd or 4th revision that they noticed I'd removed some of the statements that I didn't agree with (because they were false)...and then threatened to come after me if they didn't recover all their costs.
Never again!
You wouldnt be able to walk into Enterprise and hire that car for £55 a day yourself, it will be part of the contract that the insurers have with Enterprise.
What if the accident had not been a non fault accident though? What if the TPI had disputed and not offered to deal with your claim? what if you needed a similar car to your own?
The AMC will factor in wether they can justify providing you with a vehicle knowing that they may only recover 50% of the costs back.
Its not as straightforward as you think unfortunately.
When you use an ABI insurer to claim through, the Hire costs are set out by the ABI.
TwigtheWonderkid said:
If you walked into Enterprise and asked for a like for like vehicle at £100/day, but said "I can't afford to pay for it, but in the fullness of time, the person who hit me will pay for it", do you think you'd drive away in the car?
That's what you are paying for. The ARM are fronting the costs, at full risk to them and not to you (providing you cooperate in the recovery of their outlay), based on your version of events.
Surely the insurer would be better off saying:That's what you are paying for. The ARM are fronting the costs, at full risk to them and not to you (providing you cooperate in the recovery of their outlay), based on your version of events.
1) Go to Enterprise
2) Quote reference ID nnnnnn
3) You can pick any car under £200 a day (or whatever level your car was at).
4) The bill goes to the insurer, so no credit issues.
Enterprise would do them a cracking deal, the scum that are claims companies would be out of business and premiums would be cheaper for everyone.
TwigtheWonderkid said:
That's what you are paying for. The ARM are fronting the costs, at full risk to them and not to you (providing you cooperate in the recovery of their outlay), based on your version of events.
You are also paying for your insurer to refer you to the credit hire provider. They are taking a percentage/flat fee based on the arrangement.rxe said:
TwigtheWonderkid said:
If you walked into Enterprise and asked for a like for like vehicle at £100/day, but said "I can't afford to pay for it, but in the fullness of time, the person who hit me will pay for it", do you think you'd drive away in the car?
That's what you are paying for. The ARM are fronting the costs, at full risk to them and not to you (providing you cooperate in the recovery of their outlay), based on your version of events.
Surely the insurer would be better off saying:That's what you are paying for. The ARM are fronting the costs, at full risk to them and not to you (providing you cooperate in the recovery of their outlay), based on your version of events.
1) Go to Enterprise
2) Quote reference ID nnnnnn
3) You can pick any car under £200 a day (or whatever level your car was at).
4) The bill goes to the insurer, so no credit issues.
Enterprise would do them a cracking deal, the scum that are claims companies would be out of business and premiums would be cheaper for everyone.
rxe said:
Surely the insurer would be better off saying:
1) Go to Enterprise
2) Quote reference ID nnnnnn
3) You can pick any car under £200 a day (or whatever level your car was at).
4) The bill goes to the insurer, so no credit issues.
Enterprise would do them a cracking deal, the scum that are claims companies would be out of business and premiums would be cheaper for everyone.
But what if it was a 50/50 claim, your insurers wont pay for a car from enterprise, so youd then only get a courtesy car.1) Go to Enterprise
2) Quote reference ID nnnnnn
3) You can pick any car under £200 a day (or whatever level your car was at).
4) The bill goes to the insurer, so no credit issues.
Enterprise would do them a cracking deal, the scum that are claims companies would be out of business and premiums would be cheaper for everyone.
What if enterprise didnt have anything suitable, whose then going to organise you a car
what if you dont have a hire company that the insurers have an agreement with local to you
what if you cant get to a branch as you have no transport,
and a hundred different scenarios.
Okay, I'll answer as well as I can...and remember this is only in my experience. I'll assume there are many people who are completely happy with the service and haven't been asked to attend court 2 years later to clarify points of their statement around excessive credit hire costs.
However, a similar car last year (for a round Britain jaunt whilst my Z4 is having an engine rebuild) paid for by me, was £462.44 for 8 days (would have been cheaper had I not opted to pay the £17/day for CDW, £0 excess and £5/day roadside assistance).
tty bodyshop loaner, or hire a car myself.
The 'excessive credit hire costs' were being disputed. There's cooperation, and then there's attempted fraud by asking the insured party to falsify their statement!
This is the 4th attempt of getting them to use the correct statement. Even in this version they still had the location of accident in the wrong part of the country and the vehicles wrong. I'd already updated these in versions 2 & 3 and they ignored these changes...along with others.
Smurfsarepeopletoo said:
The difference being, if you go through the TPI then they will provide you with a vehicle at whatever the daily cost is that they have agreed with Enterprise.
Their client has admitted liability, so the TPI is paying for it, that's all I care about.Smurfsarepeopletoo said:
You wouldnt be able to walk into Enterprise and hire that car for £55 a day yourself, it will be part of the contract that the insurers have with Enterprise.
Well no, but I'm not an insurance company renting thousands of cars a year.However, a similar car last year (for a round Britain jaunt whilst my Z4 is having an engine rebuild) paid for by me, was £462.44 for 8 days (would have been cheaper had I not opted to pay the £17/day for CDW, £0 excess and £5/day roadside assistance).
Smurfsarepeopletoo said:
What if the accident had not been a non fault accident though? What if the TPI had disputed and not offered to deal with your claim? what if you needed a similar car to your own?
Would be in the same position as if I'd had a fault claim - and would either have to accept the stty bodyshop loaner, or hire a car myself.Smurfsarepeopletoo said:
The AMC will factor in wether they can justify providing you with a vehicle knowing that they may only recover 50% of the costs back.
So they charge 10x the price to justify the risk of a 50% loss?Smurfsarepeopletoo said:
Its not as straightforward as you think unfortunately.
I wouldn't expect it to be, I'm just trying to show what my experience was.Smurfsarepeopletoo said:
When you use an ABI insurer to claim through, the Hire costs are set out by the ABI.
Did the ABI do independent benchmarking or prices, or did they take the word of all the AMCs. said:
You might not get an equivalent car.
I didn't, I got an e90 320i as 'like for like' for my Z4MC - as that's all the could get me at short notice (48 hours, and came from Brum). This was despite me saying I didn't need a like-for-like vehicle, and a little city car would suffice...but oh no!, they insisted it had to be like-for-like, with all the same insurance options I had on my own car, just so they could justify the charges (which were actually more when I saw the extras for delivery, 3 different damage waivers, sat-nav, etc.) said:
You may be on the line for some of the costs if you don't cooperate when it gets disputed.
The accident wasn't being disputed, and the £1700 claim for wing/door/paint was paid very quickly.The 'excessive credit hire costs' were being disputed. There's cooperation, and then there's attempted fraud by asking the insured party to falsify their statement!
This is the 4th attempt of getting them to use the correct statement. Even in this version they still had the location of accident in the wrong part of the country and the vehicles wrong. I'd already updated these in versions 2 & 3 and they ignored these changes...along with others.
couple of bits of the statement I was asked to sign said:
28. In addition to the standard daily hire charge of £220.00 per day, I am now aware a satellite navigation charge of £7.50 per day, a basic excess waiver of £35.00 per day, a residual excess waiver at £50.00 per day along with windscreen, tyres and underbody waiver at £15.00 per day. The waivers charges are in place to protect me should the hire vehicle be damaged whilst in my possession as this brings the excess down to a more economic figure.
29. I am now aware a delivery and collection was charged at £100.00 plus vat. AMCompany Limited are based in TownName, West Midlands and I reside in Liverpool. I was grateful for the delivery service. I would not have been able to collect the hire car due to firstly having no further transport and further the distance.
Even in the statement, they are saying the delivery charge was necessary and I was grateful for it as I couldn't collect it. But that's only because they couldn't/wouldn't offer a different car somewhere local - there goes the 'what if there's nothing suitable available at the local enterprise argument'.29. I am now aware a delivery and collection was charged at £100.00 plus vat. AMCompany Limited are based in TownName, West Midlands and I reside in Liverpool. I was grateful for the delivery service. I would not have been able to collect the hire car due to firstly having no further transport and further the distance.
Edited by mmm-five on Tuesday 8th September 14:10
You were lucky in the sense that yours was a straight forward non fault claim that the TPI offered services on.
The people that tend to have issues, are the ones where TPI is disputing the liability, and will therefore dispute some of the hire charges.
When your involved in an accident, most people see it as black and white, and will quite often refuse to accept any liability, and this can then cause delays.
The amount of people that refuse to hand hire cars back because they think there 300 year old bmw is worth 5 million pounds, or that they have just fitted new brakes and tyres, so the car is now worth the equivelant of a brand new car.
The people that tend to have issues, are the ones where TPI is disputing the liability, and will therefore dispute some of the hire charges.
When your involved in an accident, most people see it as black and white, and will quite often refuse to accept any liability, and this can then cause delays.
The amount of people that refuse to hand hire cars back because they think there 300 year old bmw is worth 5 million pounds, or that they have just fitted new brakes and tyres, so the car is now worth the equivelant of a brand new car.
I used them a few years ago, no problems. Dropped a car off for me, my car was taken to be repairs, I dropped the hire back and picked up my car with an approved repair. Last I heard of it.
There's a lot of FUD on this thread about them too. At the very basic, AMC's are hire-car companies with finance packages. They will hire you a car at a rate set by the insurance industry (not themselves) (see MIB). They have to demonstrate that they're not ripping off the insurance company with their hire rates. They also make money from the set interest rate on covering the costs of the hire and maybe repair of your vehicle.
Companies like Admiral direct you to their preferred AMC because shock horror, it is good business sense for them (which means it keeps their costs down), which ultimately means they can be more competitive with renewal prices and keep premiums down.
AMC's will only deal with cases that are non-fault as they won't get paid for their services, in these situations you have to deal with your own insurer. There are a number of benefits from using a AMC such as: not risking your excess when the claim can't be settled, not having a claim on your own insurance, having access to a wider range of vehicles if required (the garage's saxo isn't suitable for everybody).
Take a measured decision for works well for you. Some claims will be fought, it doesn't matter whether you're using a AMC, your own insurer or claiming directly. As with all companies, I'm sure some cases "go wrong", but again, I've seen plenty of moaning about insurance company claims processes.
To the comments on the government should crack down. They did in the early naughties. And creaming money off whiplash claims has been shutdown too. There is also plenty of case-law that sits around these type of companies. The big difference AMC's were the idea that if you're not at fault, then you're not out of pocket. Previously you could often find yourself stuffed with a knackered car, no suitable alternative transport and a sudden loss of earning. This doesn't apply to everyone's situation, if it does, use an AMC, if it doesn't, don't.
There's a lot of FUD on this thread about them too. At the very basic, AMC's are hire-car companies with finance packages. They will hire you a car at a rate set by the insurance industry (not themselves) (see MIB). They have to demonstrate that they're not ripping off the insurance company with their hire rates. They also make money from the set interest rate on covering the costs of the hire and maybe repair of your vehicle.
Companies like Admiral direct you to their preferred AMC because shock horror, it is good business sense for them (which means it keeps their costs down), which ultimately means they can be more competitive with renewal prices and keep premiums down.
AMC's will only deal with cases that are non-fault as they won't get paid for their services, in these situations you have to deal with your own insurer. There are a number of benefits from using a AMC such as: not risking your excess when the claim can't be settled, not having a claim on your own insurance, having access to a wider range of vehicles if required (the garage's saxo isn't suitable for everybody).
Take a measured decision for works well for you. Some claims will be fought, it doesn't matter whether you're using a AMC, your own insurer or claiming directly. As with all companies, I'm sure some cases "go wrong", but again, I've seen plenty of moaning about insurance company claims processes.
To the comments on the government should crack down. They did in the early naughties. And creaming money off whiplash claims has been shutdown too. There is also plenty of case-law that sits around these type of companies. The big difference AMC's were the idea that if you're not at fault, then you're not out of pocket. Previously you could often find yourself stuffed with a knackered car, no suitable alternative transport and a sudden loss of earning. This doesn't apply to everyone's situation, if it does, use an AMC, if it doesn't, don't.
I've received a letter in the post today (signed for) from Hastings offering me a free replacement vehicle of various types etc. The costs are much lower. They are saying that I can get a car from them even if I have already organised a car from a AMC etc.
They are also saying that I need to show this letter immediately to my legal representative, insurer, claims management company and company organising the hire car.
Any advice on how I should proceed?
I just signed Auxillis documents today, the hire car is due to be picked up tomorrow and my vehicle is being picked up for repair tomorrow too...
They are also saying that I need to show this letter immediately to my legal representative, insurer, claims management company and company organising the hire car.
Any advice on how I should proceed?
I just signed Auxillis documents today, the hire car is due to be picked up tomorrow and my vehicle is being picked up for repair tomorrow too...
shopper150 said:
I've received a letter in the post today (signed for) from Hastings offering me a free replacement vehicle of various types etc. The costs are much lower. They are saying that I can get a car from them even if I have already organised a car from a AMC etc.
They are also saying that I need to show this letter immediately to my legal representative, insurer, claims management company and company organising the hire car.
Any advice on how I should proceed?
I just signed Auxillis documents today, the hire car is due to be picked up tomorrow and my vehicle is being picked up for repair tomorrow too...
It seems like you're ignoring everything anyone says on here anyway, since you've gone from being wary of AMCs to signing a contract to use one.They are also saying that I need to show this letter immediately to my legal representative, insurer, claims management company and company organising the hire car.
Any advice on how I should proceed?
I just signed Auxillis documents today, the hire car is due to be picked up tomorrow and my vehicle is being picked up for repair tomorrow too...
So what's the point of anyone actually saying anything different?
Durzel said:
It seems like you're ignoring everything anyone says on here anyway, since you've gone from being wary of AMCs to signing a contract to use one.
So what's the point of anyone actually saying anything different?
I may not have followed any advice given by you, but I feel well informed and going in with my eyes open thanks to the input on this thread.So what's the point of anyone actually saying anything different?
shopper150 said:
I've received a letter in the post today (signed for) from Hastings offering me a free replacement vehicle of various types etc. The costs are much lower. They are saying that I can get a car from them even if I have already organised a car from a AMC etc.
They are also saying that I need to show this letter immediately to my legal representative, insurer, claims management company and company organising the hire car.
Any advice on how I should proceed?
I just signed Auxillis documents today, the hire car is due to be picked up tomorrow and my vehicle is being picked up for repair tomorrow too...
I would cancel the hire car and contract with AMC as soon as possible. Engage with Hastings and work with them; they will be looking to get things sorted ASAP for you as it saves them money. If you proceed with the AMC then you're going to be going to court to defend their rates in a years time. It won't look good if it transpires this conversation with Hastings is brought up and imagine the AMC will leave you high and dry with a big bill.They are also saying that I need to show this letter immediately to my legal representative, insurer, claims management company and company organising the hire car.
Any advice on how I should proceed?
I just signed Auxillis documents today, the hire car is due to be picked up tomorrow and my vehicle is being picked up for repair tomorrow too...
Edit: Just saw that they sent you a letter to show the AMC. I bet that is basically saying that they will refuse to pay the bill as they have offered a cheaper reasonable alternative. Show this to the AMC and cancel the contract.
AJ5641 said:
I would cancel the hire car and contract with AMC as soon as possible. Engage with Hastings and work with them; they will be looking to get things sorted ASAP for you as it saves them money. If you proceed with the AMC then you're going to be going to court to defend their rates in a years time. It won't look good if it transpires this conversation with Hastings is brought up and imagine the AMC will leave you high and dry with a big bill.
Edit: Just saw that they sent you a letter to show the AMC. I bet that is basically saying that they will refuse to pay the bill as they have offered a cheaper reasonable alternative. Show this to the AMC and cancel the contract.
This is what I’m thinking too. I think Auxillis contracts have 14 days cancellation. Edit: Just saw that they sent you a letter to show the AMC. I bet that is basically saying that they will refuse to pay the bill as they have offered a cheaper reasonable alternative. Show this to the AMC and cancel the contract.
shopper150 said:
AJ5641 said:
I would cancel the hire car and contract with AMC as soon as possible. Engage with Hastings and work with them; they will be looking to get things sorted ASAP for you as it saves them money. If you proceed with the AMC then you're going to be going to court to defend their rates in a years time. It won't look good if it transpires this conversation with Hastings is brought up and imagine the AMC will leave you high and dry with a big bill.
Edit: Just saw that they sent you a letter to show the AMC. I bet that is basically saying that they will refuse to pay the bill as they have offered a cheaper reasonable alternative. Show this to the AMC and cancel the contract.
This is what I’m thinking too. I think Auxillis contracts have 14 days cancellation. Edit: Just saw that they sent you a letter to show the AMC. I bet that is basically saying that they will refuse to pay the bill as they have offered a cheaper reasonable alternative. Show this to the AMC and cancel the contract.
ked in a years time if you continue with the AMC. I think the importance expressed by that Hastings letter tells you all you need to know.shopper150 said:
Durzel said:
It seems like you're ignoring everything anyone says on here anyway, since you've gone from being wary of AMCs to signing a contract to use one.
So what's the point of anyone actually saying anything different?
I may not have followed any advice given by you, but I feel well informed and going in with my eyes open thanks to the input on this thread.So what's the point of anyone actually saying anything different?
Are you in the habit of signing contracts that you are wary of and are uncertain about being bound by?
shopper150 said:
This is what I’m thinking too. I think Auxillis contracts have 14 days cancellation.
Personally I think you should stick with Auxillis. If you'd gone with the third party's insurer in the first place it would be different, but by cancelling now you'll potentially open a can of worms as well as lose your leverage with the other insurance company.We used Auxillis in a no-fault claim just over a year ago, and everything was fine. The scare stories are from several years ago now, and legislation has since changed so that you'll never be liable for charges - provided you cooperate.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff