This is why our insurance is so high!
Discussion
Further to this;
http://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&a... that's the end of that!
I've been on the phone to my insurers this morning trying to sort it out, still on and off to them now.
Put simply my car is knackered, they need to send someone to look at it, agree a value, refund whats left of my policy, job done.
I don't need a courtesy car as I have other vehicles.
Here's where the problems start.
To process as a none fault claim, my insurance company need to put this through an acident management company. Accident management company will only deal if I need/want a hire car, and they need to be able to justify this (money making scam!) to the third part insurers.
Now I clearly DON'T need and can't justify a hire car so I'm passed back to my insurers who will only pay me out less my excess and will reduce my NCD until the whole incident is resolved. Now obviously I will get my money back in the long term, but I don't see why I should be £500 down and have an open claim on the insurance of other vehicles.
So I am left with two options;
1. Make up some utter rubbish to 'justify' needing a hire car.
2. Stick to my principles and be out of pocket.
For what it's worth, I see my entire claim; car and unused policy at around £2k, which is peanuts compared to what it will be before hire cars and management fees are added.
And this is the insurance companies themselves before you consider the effects of scum with their staged accidents and faked injuries.
Am I being unreasonable?
http://www.pistonheads.com/gassing/topic.asp?h=0&a... that's the end of that!
I've been on the phone to my insurers this morning trying to sort it out, still on and off to them now.
Put simply my car is knackered, they need to send someone to look at it, agree a value, refund whats left of my policy, job done.
I don't need a courtesy car as I have other vehicles.
Here's where the problems start.
To process as a none fault claim, my insurance company need to put this through an acident management company. Accident management company will only deal if I need/want a hire car, and they need to be able to justify this (money making scam!) to the third part insurers.
Now I clearly DON'T need and can't justify a hire car so I'm passed back to my insurers who will only pay me out less my excess and will reduce my NCD until the whole incident is resolved. Now obviously I will get my money back in the long term, but I don't see why I should be £500 down and have an open claim on the insurance of other vehicles.
So I am left with two options;
1. Make up some utter rubbish to 'justify' needing a hire car.
2. Stick to my principles and be out of pocket.
For what it's worth, I see my entire claim; car and unused policy at around £2k, which is peanuts compared to what it will be before hire cars and management fees are added.
And this is the insurance companies themselves before you consider the effects of scum with their staged accidents and faked injuries.
Am I being unreasonable?
You do have a third option though, which is to claim off the other party's third party liability cover, which is what I would do in the circumstances.
Absolutely absurd that you can't make a non-fault claim without your insurance company taking a kickback, even when your car is stationary. This is either the result of a misunderstanding by the customer-facing people at the AM or insurance company, or a deliberate decision that is almost certainly going to attract attention from the regulator. What do your insurance policy documents say about non-fault claims?
Absolutely absurd that you can't make a non-fault claim without your insurance company taking a kickback, even when your car is stationary. This is either the result of a misunderstanding by the customer-facing people at the AM or insurance company, or a deliberate decision that is almost certainly going to attract attention from the regulator. What do your insurance policy documents say about non-fault claims?
Off the phone now, almost 4 hours on the phone in total!
Not really any further foward to be honest, they will be calling me soon to arrange to pick the car up.
I had a similar experience about 9 years ago believe it or not, my then insurers (just changed to this mob last year for the multi-car discount) were superb about it, complete contrast.
I had considered calling the insurers of the car which hit me, but the problem is that driver is not accepting liability as they are saying it was the fault of the other car involved. No-one is pointing the finger at me, BUT it seems my insurer are still going to be difficult about it.
The whole claims culture and adding of unneccessary cost infuriates me deeply, I am going option 2 by the way so I will be out of pocket by my excess until all is resolved. They also stated my car would be valued via glasses and that's that, which seems very unfair as being an older vehicle examples vary hugely.
My car is old and not cosmetically great, it also has 155k on the clock. However it is superb mechanically, I had the car as a company car in 2006 (know who had it before me) and my brother has owned it since until I subsequently bought it from him last year. Full VX history upto 120k, its been serviced annually at a local garage since and has always just had faults fixed as they arise unlike so many older cars. I would happily have jumped in it and driven anywhere prior to yesterday. Buying another car at this price point is a complete lottery, and just because glasses say it's worth 50p certainly does not mean I would have sold it for that which is effectively what I am to be forced to do.
Incidently I had two colleagues recently ask if I'd sell it to them when I took a company car.
Best part of a Saturday wasted, I'm now to walk my dogs then go to the gym and try and relax a little.
Not really any further foward to be honest, they will be calling me soon to arrange to pick the car up.
I had a similar experience about 9 years ago believe it or not, my then insurers (just changed to this mob last year for the multi-car discount) were superb about it, complete contrast.
I had considered calling the insurers of the car which hit me, but the problem is that driver is not accepting liability as they are saying it was the fault of the other car involved. No-one is pointing the finger at me, BUT it seems my insurer are still going to be difficult about it.
The whole claims culture and adding of unneccessary cost infuriates me deeply, I am going option 2 by the way so I will be out of pocket by my excess until all is resolved. They also stated my car would be valued via glasses and that's that, which seems very unfair as being an older vehicle examples vary hugely.
My car is old and not cosmetically great, it also has 155k on the clock. However it is superb mechanically, I had the car as a company car in 2006 (know who had it before me) and my brother has owned it since until I subsequently bought it from him last year. Full VX history upto 120k, its been serviced annually at a local garage since and has always just had faults fixed as they arise unlike so many older cars. I would happily have jumped in it and driven anywhere prior to yesterday. Buying another car at this price point is a complete lottery, and just because glasses say it's worth 50p certainly does not mean I would have sold it for that which is effectively what I am to be forced to do.
Incidently I had two colleagues recently ask if I'd sell it to them when I took a company car.
Best part of a Saturday wasted, I'm now to walk my dogs then go to the gym and try and relax a little.
It is indeed a stupid system.
I recieved a call from a company about me being able to claim up to 500 pounds from a third party insurance company due to personal injury without needing records. I said the only accident I've had never went through insurance and it was when I tapped a car when doing a turn in the road after my test. He then went to say that any passengers I had in the car should claim off my insurance?
I have never sworn at anyone quite so much!
I recieved a call from a company about me being able to claim up to 500 pounds from a third party insurance company due to personal injury without needing records. I said the only accident I've had never went through insurance and it was when I tapped a car when doing a turn in the road after my test. He then went to say that any passengers I had in the car should claim off my insurance?
I have never sworn at anyone quite so much!
This is nonsense, and if you feel there's a scam going on, simply contact the insurance obudsman.
Just like you don't have to use the insurer's repairers, you don't have to process your claim through an AM agent.
All you need to do is remain resolute that you're making a non-fault claim irrespective, or contact the other party's insurer to make the claim against their policy. No need to deal with yours in that instance, and they might be more than happy to pay out only what's necessary.
Just like you don't have to use the insurer's repairers, you don't have to process your claim through an AM agent.
All you need to do is remain resolute that you're making a non-fault claim irrespective, or contact the other party's insurer to make the claim against their policy. No need to deal with yours in that instance, and they might be more than happy to pay out only what's necessary.
PJ S said:
This is nonsense, and if you feel there's a scam going on, simply contact the insurance obudsman.
This is exactly what I will be doing.Giving the situation some more thought, I have legal obligation to minimise costs incurred as part of the claim; I think as I have other vehicles it is reasonable to say that the obligation is for me to use my other vehicles and mitigate the need for a hire car. My insurance company are not only suggesting I do not comply with the legal obligation but are also penalising me for doing so.
Will give it some more thought and put something together to email to the ombudsman.
Any thoughts gladly recieved.
And yes, the speculative 'we'll get you monies for your accident' calls raise the temperature of my urine too.
It seems morality has all but gone from the insurance industry.
I was in the same situation a couple of years back. Didn't want to use claims management as it was straight forward where the blame lied, other party had admitted fault.
I denied the management company my business and contacted my insurers claims dept direct. Instructed them to get my car repaired. Next day other parties insurer phones offering to arrange to have my car fixed, but it was already arranged.
End result was I had to pay my £250 excess to my insurer, but then wrote to Direct Line (other parties insurer) asking for the excess back - got it within a couple of weeks (before the claim was even settled).
The whole process is a joke - sadly a large part of the insurance industry in general works off kickbacks, and this is no different.
I denied the management company my business and contacted my insurers claims dept direct. Instructed them to get my car repaired. Next day other parties insurer phones offering to arrange to have my car fixed, but it was already arranged.
End result was I had to pay my £250 excess to my insurer, but then wrote to Direct Line (other parties insurer) asking for the excess back - got it within a couple of weeks (before the claim was even settled).
The whole process is a joke - sadly a large part of the insurance industry in general works off kickbacks, and this is no different.
D1bram said:
Further to this;
For what it's worth, I see my entire claim; car and unused policy at around £2k
Am I being unreasonable?
Eh? Your own profile values your Astra at £600. Even with some haggling I don't think you'll get this much out of the insurance company. Secondly, as far as I am aware you won't be getting any refund from your insurance policy if the car is written off - check the small print.For what it's worth, I see my entire claim; car and unused policy at around £2k
Am I being unreasonable?
Olivera said:
Eh? Your own profile values your Astra at £600. Even with some haggling I don't think you'll get this much out of the insurance company. Secondly, as far as I am aware you won't be getting any refund from your insurance policy if the car is written off - check the small print.
OK, firstly, go on Autotrader and tell me how much you can find a 5 door 1.7CDTI Astra for? Far as I can see the cheapest is £1250 with the rest starting around £1500.I put that value on my profile the other day as I was mucking around seeing what running costs were... I'll go change it to £10,000 now so that will be what it's worth eh?
I paid my brother £800 for it, doesn't mean I can get another for that though!!! (I will be giving him half the difference too).As for not getting the difference in unused policy back, why ever not? As far as I am concerned I paid for 12 months cover and will be losing out on 11months of it due to the actions of a third party.
marshalla said:
Really ?
Put this another way, if the third party had destroyed an item worth £400 then would you expect to get the £400 back? I have paid £400 for a years cover which I won't use, so yes REALLY I would like the £400 back otherwise I am out of pocket. Why so hard to understand? If I was claiming on my own policy should it have been my fault then I would not expect this.
Anyway, my insurance company have confirmed that I will be entitled to a refund for the portion of the policy not used. Only complication is that they will do that from when everything is settled between the two third parties, I think I should then get back dated the difference to when they take my car, as why should I lose out because of the actions of the third partys.
Anyway, my point in starting the thread was the attitude of the insurance company in trying to unneccessarily increase the cost of the claim, which I think is fraudulent.
Typical PH response though to try and pick fault with everything else.
D1bram said:
Yes, really.
Put this another way, if the third party had destroyed an item worth £400 then would you expect to get the £400 back? I have paid £400 for a years cover which I won't use, so yes REALLY I would like the £400 back otherwise I am out of pocket. Why so hard to understand? If I was claiming on my own policy should it have been my fault then I would not expect this.
Anyway, my insurance company have confirmed that I will be entitled to a refund for the portion of the policy not used. Only complication is that they will do that from when everything is settled between the two third parties, I think I should then get back dated the difference to when they take my car, as why should I lose out because of the actions of the third partys.
Anyway, my point in starting the thread was the attitude of the insurance company in trying to unneccessarily increase the cost of the claim, which I think is fraudulent.
Typical PH response though to try and pick fault with everything else.
It's not a refund, it's a loss which will be claimed back from the 3rd party.Put this another way, if the third party had destroyed an item worth £400 then would you expect to get the £400 back? I have paid £400 for a years cover which I won't use, so yes REALLY I would like the £400 back otherwise I am out of pocket. Why so hard to understand? If I was claiming on my own policy should it have been my fault then I would not expect this.
Anyway, my insurance company have confirmed that I will be entitled to a refund for the portion of the policy not used. Only complication is that they will do that from when everything is settled between the two third parties, I think I should then get back dated the difference to when they take my car, as why should I lose out because of the actions of the third partys.
Anyway, my point in starting the thread was the attitude of the insurance company in trying to unneccessarily increase the cost of the claim, which I think is fraudulent.
Typical PH response though to try and pick fault with everything else.
I suspect the criticism is because you are describing things in ways which differ from the way they actually work.
Most of your problems seem to arise from the fact that your insurer has been asked to deal with the third party's insurer - which incurs additional costs for your insurer. You have something of an unusual attitude too - you don't want to make as much as you can as a result of the incident (well done, btw. This is the correct PH attitude), but this means that your insurer's opportunities for making a wee bit of extra profit on the incident are severely reduced, so they have less incentive to move quickly and efficiently.
Edited by marshalla on Saturday 28th January 23:04
Yes I realise that by wanting to do the right thing my insurer is a little put out and is less likely to be helpfull about it.
This was the point of the whole thread; it stinks! We all complain that our premiums are too high and our insurers tell us it's because of scams and inflated claims. Yet here I find my insurer to be part of the cause!
Basically, on Friday morning I had a decent, well serviced car which was MOT'd until November and I had just insured (on the 19/1/2012) for a year, paid in full upfront. Now I don't have that.
I don't want anything other than the above back again without being out of pocket
This was the point of the whole thread; it stinks! We all complain that our premiums are too high and our insurers tell us it's because of scams and inflated claims. Yet here I find my insurer to be part of the cause!
Basically, on Friday morning I had a decent, well serviced car which was MOT'd until November and I had just insured (on the 19/1/2012) for a year, paid in full upfront. Now I don't have that.
I don't want anything other than the above back again without being out of pocket
Just got a email from them, which basically says;
'Your car is a total loss, as such we're cancelling you policy from now.
By the way, it's an offence to have a vehicle registered in your name which is not insured'
The car is still parked outside my house. Wonderfull.
So I call them and they explain it's not actually cancelled yet, but it will be when they declare it a total loss which will probably be tomorrow.
OK I said, but I really wanted to be able to clear it out in daylight over the weekend.
Tough is basically what they said.
So I said you better collect it the minute the insurance is cancelled, so I'm not breaking the law.
It will be picked up at the recovery companies convenience they say.
Fast losing my patience here.
Still no value of payout offered, though they offered (and tried to steer me towards) to let me keep the car and give me £1100 payout, less the excess at £500.
'Your car is a total loss, as such we're cancelling you policy from now.
By the way, it's an offence to have a vehicle registered in your name which is not insured'
The car is still parked outside my house. Wonderfull.
So I call them and they explain it's not actually cancelled yet, but it will be when they declare it a total loss which will probably be tomorrow.
OK I said, but I really wanted to be able to clear it out in daylight over the weekend.
Tough is basically what they said.
So I said you better collect it the minute the insurance is cancelled, so I'm not breaking the law.
It will be picked up at the recovery companies convenience they say.
Fast losing my patience here.
Still no value of payout offered, though they offered (and tried to steer me towards) to let me keep the car and give me £1100 payout, less the excess at £500.
Just to close this one out, I was offered £1850 for my car yesterday which I agreed was fair (having researched costs of replacements).
This morning I have received a response to my complaint email and it seems they have fully investigated the issue, listening to the recordings of my conversations.
They have agreed that I was clear in stating that I did not need a courtesy car and also agreed their member of staff was misplaced in trying to push me into having one. They also stated that in their opinion I was not correctly instructed into how a none fault claim would proceed.
As a result, they have immediately issued my excess (£500) and have also agreed to return my premium in full (£300).
I'm very happy with the response to this, not only is pretty quick, but they've also obviously done a thorough job in investigating the issue.
So after all, well done to them.
This morning I have received a response to my complaint email and it seems they have fully investigated the issue, listening to the recordings of my conversations.
They have agreed that I was clear in stating that I did not need a courtesy car and also agreed their member of staff was misplaced in trying to push me into having one. They also stated that in their opinion I was not correctly instructed into how a none fault claim would proceed.
As a result, they have immediately issued my excess (£500) and have also agreed to return my premium in full (£300).
I'm very happy with the response to this, not only is pretty quick, but they've also obviously done a thorough job in investigating the issue.
So after all, well done to them.
D1bram said:
To process as a none fault claim, my insurance company need to put this through an acident management company. Accident management company will only deal if I need/want a hire car, and they need to be able to justify this (money making scam!) to the third part insurers.
So your insurance company won't process your claim against the 3rd party themselves, they insist it has to be done through an accident management company who won't handle it unless you demand a courtesy car??I'd get some independant legal advice on this to be honest as something doesn't sound right here.
If you say you don't need a courtesy car are they really going to refuse to process your claim?
Edit: forget that, didn't read the last post before I posted! Doh!
Edited by Devil2575 on Thursday 2nd February 13:14
Devil2575 said:
So your insurance company won't process your claim against the 3rd party themselves, they insist it has to be done through an accident management company who won't handle it unless you demand a courtesy car??
I'd get some independant legal advice on this to be honest as something doesn't sound right here.
If you say you don't need a courtesy car are they really going to refuse to process your claim?
Edit: forget that, didn't read the last post before I posted! Doh!
No, not quite the case, that's what I was initially advised.I'd get some independant legal advice on this to be honest as something doesn't sound right here.
If you say you don't need a courtesy car are they really going to refuse to process your claim?
Edit: forget that, didn't read the last post before I posted! Doh!
Edited by Devil2575 on Thursday 2nd February 13:14
I put my complaint in writing and they have confirmed this is not the case, they have also confirmed having listened to the call recording that I was misinformed.
Not good that I was misinformed, but to give them their due they've investigated swiftly and resolved the issue. Not only have they expedited my claim and compensated me for my loss, but they have also stated they will review the issue with the persons involved via retraining.
Can't argue with that really, everyone makes mistakes, it's how those mistakes are dealt with that I personally judge by.
One week tomorrow since the incident and my car is gone, the claim is dealt with and I now satisfied they aren't out to corrupt the nation. All is well
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff