Someone parking hit my car, I see, they deny!
Discussion
I fear that we're missing some vital information here.
No one in their right mind would eat a kebab sober.
Therefore. OP is either not in their right mind or driving drunk.
In all seriousness hope it gets sorted ASAP. People having a lack of respect for others property really annoys me.
No one in their right mind would eat a kebab sober.
Therefore. OP is either not in their right mind or driving drunk.
In all seriousness hope it gets sorted ASAP. People having a lack of respect for others property really annoys me.
popeyewhite said:
Hoofy said:
They're not about finding honest people. It's about assessing risk.
Because he's been hit once whilst stationary makes him more likely to be hit again? You don't believe that do you? You can use statistics to show anything you want it's a matter of what you want to find. Underwriters claim their statistics (anyone seen them?) show that once you've been in a accident you're more likely to be in another. That may be the case in a standard traffic accident scenario where two moving vehicles are involved, but in the case where you are absolutely, 100% not to blame, like the OP in this instance, it's complete bks. WIth regard to increased risk, it is now known that the OP regulary parks in this spot, and that this parking spot has been visited/might be visited again by a third party who causes damage when parking.
However infinitesimal the increase in risk, statistically it is significant enough to change the OP's risk profile in the eye's of the insurer. Apparently, not all insurers increase premiums by taking such non-fault claims into account.
Mandat said:
It's true that statistics can be skewed to show all manner of things.
WIth regard to increased risk, it is now known that the OP regulary parks in this spot, and that this parking spot has been visited/might be visited again by a third party who causes damage when parking.
However infinitesimal the increase in risk, statistically it is significant enough to change the OP's risk profile in the eye's of the insurer. Apparently, not all insurers increase premiums by taking such non-fault claims into account.
Yeah I see what you're saying, I understand that the insurers need one way or another to work out insurance costs and prices and it can't change for each single person, for some people this may work out better and some worse so it's just about making a decision and going with it.WIth regard to increased risk, it is now known that the OP regulary parks in this spot, and that this parking spot has been visited/might be visited again by a third party who causes damage when parking.
However infinitesimal the increase in risk, statistically it is significant enough to change the OP's risk profile in the eye's of the insurer. Apparently, not all insurers increase premiums by taking such non-fault claims into account.
hornmeister said:
I fear that we're missing some vital information here.
No one in their right mind would eat a kebab sober.
Therefore. OP is either not in their right mind or driving drunk.
In all seriousness hope it gets sorted ASAP. People having a lack of respect for others property really annoys me.
Oh c'mon, nothing wrong with chicken and lettuce in a pita.No one in their right mind would eat a kebab sober.
Therefore. OP is either not in their right mind or driving drunk.
In all seriousness hope it gets sorted ASAP. People having a lack of respect for others property really annoys me.
I'm sure it will, been given good advise to bear in mind when anything happens in future so I've got that I suppose.
lewishollings said:
She contacted her insurance the morning after, they told me not to get my insurers involved and they will sort it out directly so I was sort of forced into having insurers involved whether it was the right thing to do or not.
So is it already in the hands of the other insurer and they've said they'll sort it? If so, I'm confused by the whole thread, not to mention all the random suggestions for getting (or not) it fixed.
Sheepshanks said:
So is it already in the hands of the other insurer and they've said they'll sort it?
If so, I'm confused by the whole thread, not to mention all the random suggestions for getting (or not) it fixed.
It is all getting a bit confusing, the main thing I wanted to know is will I lose my no claims if she is found at fault, my feeling being I shouldn't but as I've read through this thread my insurance will still go up because a claim is made.If so, I'm confused by the whole thread, not to mention all the random suggestions for getting (or not) it fixed.
And she called her insurance the next morning, her insurance company have said they will sort it, meaning they will either tell me to get lost or say she is in the wrong.
Either way by the looks of it the insurers are going to bend me over and give me a good seeing too.
dme123 said:
it is 100% inevitable that your car will acquire scratches like that if you use it.
Only if other people are tossers IMOI never will subscribe to the theory that i must accept damage to my car as inevitable due to other peoples careless actions and just accept it with no recourse.
It's all been covered already but as much as it's absolutely piss-boiling, and you're completely justified in wanting to pursue them for the damage, you'll end up losing out by much more than the cost of the repair now insurers are involved.
It's unfair but it's how it works.
And the blind, ignorant old fker who did the damage may well be paying less than one-tenth of what you're paying for your insurance, just to rub salt in the wound.
It's unfair but it's how it works.
And the blind, ignorant old fker who did the damage may well be paying less than one-tenth of what you're paying for your insurance, just to rub salt in the wound.
PorkInsider said:
It's all been covered already but as much as it's absolutely piss-boiling, and you're completely justified in wanting to pursue them for the damage, you'll end up losing out by much more than the cost of the repair now insurers are involved.
It's unfair but it's how it works.
And the blind, ignorant old fker who did the damage may well be paying less than one-tenth of what you're paying for your insurance, just to rub salt in the wound.
I'm assuming if a claim is dropped before a result is given it's all still noted and effects your insurance regardless? It's unfair but it's how it works.
And the blind, ignorant old fker who did the damage may well be paying less than one-tenth of what you're paying for your insurance, just to rub salt in the wound.
lewishollings said:
I'm assuming if a claim is dropped before a result is given it's all still noted and effects your insurance regardless?
It's not a black and white process. Anyway, very strictly speaking, you're supposed to notify them even if you don't claim. But clearly you could take that to ridiculous lengths.You won't lose your no-claims and you won't have to pay an excess. Your base premium might go up, but it doesn't always. It didn't in either of the small claims we've made, on fault and one no-fault. In these discussions previously, some people have said their insurance went down. Anyway renewal premiums are so random it'll likely be difficult to tell.
To be honest my biggest concern would be how much a mess the repairer will make of it. But maybe they'll do a great job.
popeyewhite said:
Mandat said:
WIth regard to increased risk, it is now known that the OP regulary parks in this spot, and that this parking spot has been visited/might be visited again by a third party who causes damage when parking.
I hope you're not serious.Out of interest, why do you think it is wrong?
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff