Bad Insurance Experience
Discussion
I waned to share my Insurance as I have recently been involved in a no-fault repair. Fortunately this was not with the Aston, but someone reversed into my other car (unattended) and left a note.
The company I take out a finance agreement to cover the repair; use a specific garage for the repair; make me indemnify the insurers for any loss caused by the garage. Insisted that I take out a hire car (even when none was needed) and sign up to various onerous terms in relation to any loss involving this replacement car.
The damage I had was very minor - a small dent in the wheel arch. This was a simple fill and respray. However, despite my protests, the garage insisted it was necessary to replace the whole wing!
In my view - all this has been done to inflate the claim - as much was completely unnecessary. I did look to see if I could claim for repair directly from the other insurer before embarking on this process - but this was not an option advertised by the insurance company.
Fortunately the repair seems OK. But in the end we are all losers because insurance premiums are unnecessarily high.
Has anyone else had similar experience? Are there ways to use another garage and not accept the terms the insurers imposed - I was not presented with any choice.
A frustrated customer....
ETA
No names please!
The company I take out a finance agreement to cover the repair; use a specific garage for the repair; make me indemnify the insurers for any loss caused by the garage. Insisted that I take out a hire car (even when none was needed) and sign up to various onerous terms in relation to any loss involving this replacement car.
The damage I had was very minor - a small dent in the wheel arch. This was a simple fill and respray. However, despite my protests, the garage insisted it was necessary to replace the whole wing!
In my view - all this has been done to inflate the claim - as much was completely unnecessary. I did look to see if I could claim for repair directly from the other insurer before embarking on this process - but this was not an option advertised by the insurance company.
Fortunately the repair seems OK. But in the end we are all losers because insurance premiums are unnecessarily high.
Has anyone else had similar experience? Are there ways to use another garage and not accept the terms the insurers imposed - I was not presented with any choice.
A frustrated customer....
Edited by v12uuu on Sunday 25th November 17:06
ETA
No names please!
Edited by Big Al. on Sunday 25th November 17:47
v12uuu said:
The company insisted I take out a finance agreement to cover the repair; use a specific garage for the repair; make me indemnify the insurers for any loss caused by the garage. Insisted that I take out a hire car (even when none was needed) and sign up to various onerous terms in relation to any loss involving this replacement car.
I don't understand this bit; when you say 'insisted' do you mean they wouldn't proceed without doing it? Or was it strongly suggested and you went with their suggestions? Why would you have to take a finance agreement? Presumably you have paid your premiums so you have a contract with them - they can't insist you do anything else and certainly can't force you to accept 'onerous terms'. Your contract states they'll fix your car in exchange for your insurance premium. Whole thing sounds really strange! I'd be on the phone to the ombudsman tomorrow to make a complaint if it were me... Churchill were pretty much the same with me, after someone wrote my car off after failing to give way.
They passed all my details onto Drive Assist who kept ringing and insisted I hire a car. They charge one of the highest rates in the country. Not only that when I did once discuss it, they kept exaggerating my details to make it look like I needed more than just the basic 1.0 C1 to get me by.
Then Churchill passed all my details onto an Ambulance chaser and again I kept getting phone calls off them.
Churchill were great themselves, they assessed my car very quickly, gave me a great 1st offer and I had a cheque for another car in less than a fortnight. Just a shame they spoilt it by passing all my details on.
They passed all my details onto Drive Assist who kept ringing and insisted I hire a car. They charge one of the highest rates in the country. Not only that when I did once discuss it, they kept exaggerating my details to make it look like I needed more than just the basic 1.0 C1 to get me by.
Then Churchill passed all my details onto an Ambulance chaser and again I kept getting phone calls off them.
Churchill were great themselves, they assessed my car very quickly, gave me a great 1st offer and I had a cheque for another car in less than a fortnight. Just a shame they spoilt it by passing all my details on.
offshorematt2 said:
I don't understand this bit; when you say 'insisted' do you mean they wouldn't proceed without doing it? Or was it strongly suggested and you went with their suggestions? Why would you have to take a finance agreement? Presumably you have paid your premiums so you have a contract with them - they can't insist you do anything else and certainly can't force you to accept 'onerous terms'. Your contract states they'll fix your car in exchange for your insurance premium. Whole thing sounds really strange! I'd be on the phone to the ombudsman tomorrow to make a complaint if it were me...
Yes, the finance agreement had nothing to do with premiums I pay. It was to cover late payment on any claim made against the other party's insurance company. This means that if there is a delay in payment any interest (at a profit) is paid by the insurer also. The only thing is, the contract is made in my name, so if the insurer does not honour the payment the debt becomes mine. I think Admiral must share in the profit on this agreement - somehow.Admiral did not give me any choice in not agreeing to these terms. They did seem unfair and I wonder legally if they can insist you agree. I didn't read all the small print or get legal advice - that's why I wonder if anyone else did/has.
Overall - the claim was not a pleasant process and if things had gone wrong, I would have needed to stand behind unnecessary costs.
v12uuu said:
Yes, the finance agreement had nothing to do with premiums I pay. It was to cover late payment on any claim made against the other party's insurance company. This means that if there is a delay in payment any interest (at a profit) is paid by the insurer also. The only thing is, the contract is made in my name, so if the insurer does not honour the payment the debt becomes mine.
Is your insurance TPF&T only? If so, I can see the logic in this.
After reading your post I fail to see how you were forced into signing the finance/credit agreement, especially if it was not something you were happy with. I know from experience that you would have been given the option of dealing through Albany Assistance or your fully comp policy.
As a customer of Admiral and experience of a non-fault claim I was also passed on to Albany Assistance to deal with the repairs and hire on a credit basis. I will admit I was baffled and unhappy to sign any credit agreement and was passed back to Admiral for them to deal under my fully comp policy but I had to pay my excess which will be recovered.
I understand that as part of the credit agreement you are also signed into an insurance policy that will cover any unrecoverable costs should the at fault insurers not reimburse them. The only time the customer will be held eligable for the hire/repair costs is if a) you have lied about the need for a replacement vehicle & b)you fail to co-operate with the liab enquiries and fail to provide requested details & documents.
It is a known fact that all insurers use companies such as Drive Assist, Helphire or Albany Assistance for non-fault claims & all insurances will have someform of kick back from them.
But my main point is why did you sign something you weren't happy with???
As a customer of Admiral and experience of a non-fault claim I was also passed on to Albany Assistance to deal with the repairs and hire on a credit basis. I will admit I was baffled and unhappy to sign any credit agreement and was passed back to Admiral for them to deal under my fully comp policy but I had to pay my excess which will be recovered.
I understand that as part of the credit agreement you are also signed into an insurance policy that will cover any unrecoverable costs should the at fault insurers not reimburse them. The only time the customer will be held eligable for the hire/repair costs is if a) you have lied about the need for a replacement vehicle & b)you fail to co-operate with the liab enquiries and fail to provide requested details & documents.
It is a known fact that all insurers use companies such as Drive Assist, Helphire or Albany Assistance for non-fault claims & all insurances will have someform of kick back from them.
But my main point is why did you sign something you weren't happy with???
welshdiesel said:
After reading your post I fail to see how you were forced into signing the finance/credit agreement, especially if it was not something you were happy with. I know from experience that you would have been given the option of dealing through Albany Assistance or your fully comp policy.
As a customer of Admiral and experience of a non-fault claim I was also passed on to Albany Assistance to deal with the repairs and hire on a credit basis. I will admit I was baffled and unhappy to sign any credit agreement and was passed back to Admiral for them to deal under my fully comp policy but I had to pay my excess which will be recovered.
I understand that as part of the credit agreement you are also signed into an insurance policy that will cover any unrecoverable costs should the at fault insurers not reimburse them. The only time the customer will be held eligable for the hire/repair costs is if a) you have lied about the need for a replacement vehicle & b)you fail to co-operate with the liab enquiries and fail to provide requested details & documents.
It is a known fact that all insurers use companies such as Drive Assist, Helphire or Albany Assistance for non-fault claims & all insurances will have someform of kick back from them.
But my main point is why did you sign something you weren't happy with???
Thanks for the reply - it is interesting to know that this is not unusual.As a customer of Admiral and experience of a non-fault claim I was also passed on to Albany Assistance to deal with the repairs and hire on a credit basis. I will admit I was baffled and unhappy to sign any credit agreement and was passed back to Admiral for them to deal under my fully comp policy but I had to pay my excess which will be recovered.
I understand that as part of the credit agreement you are also signed into an insurance policy that will cover any unrecoverable costs should the at fault insurers not reimburse them. The only time the customer will be held eligable for the hire/repair costs is if a) you have lied about the need for a replacement vehicle & b)you fail to co-operate with the liab enquiries and fail to provide requested details & documents.
It is a known fact that all insurers use companies such as Drive Assist, Helphire or Albany Assistance for non-fault claims & all insurances will have someform of kick back from them.
But my main point is why did you sign something you weren't happy with???
I can assure you that I was not give the choice of not using Albany Assist - and this is one reason why I was not happy. The terms of the agreement didn't limit my liability to the two circumstances you list, although you are correct, I would be liable under those circumstances.
Why did I need to have a hire car? Why did the whole wing need to be replaced - is that good for the structure of the car?
Let's hope there is not a next time, but should there be, I will hold out for dealing with Admiral directly.
v12uuu said:
I did look to see if I could claim for repair directly from the other insurer before embarking on this process - but this was not an option advertised by the insurance company.
"Advertised"? Seriously? What often happens these days is the 3rd party's insurer contacts you as soon as their policyholder reports the incident (which is why it's important to notify any potential claims against you ASAP) and tries hard to get you to deal with them directly as this prevents them being totally screwed by accident management companies.v12uuu said:
Why did I need to have a hire car? Why did the whole wing need to be replaced - is that good for the structure of the car?
In simple terms your insurer profits from screwing the other party and that helps them keep premiums down for everyone else.I have been discussing with Admiral about my claim since shortly after a non-fault accident on July 3rd. The day after the accident my car was difficult to start, I had been passed to Albany who told me to take it for a diagnostic check. The check showed there to be a catalytic converter issue and the garage who did the check said that would be caused by the accident and causing the poor starting issue. I didn't expect any issue with this but I am still trying to sort the issue with Admiral, this week they offered me £350 for replacing the cat, the cost of the only one available is £1050+VAT so I have declined their offer so far.
In the meantime I have had the bodywork repaired and did need a hire car. Under the like-for-like scheme I ended up with an S-Class Merc for a week at a cost of £410 per day. I asked if I could have a really basic hire car and the difference to be used to fund the replacement cat, or a cash equivalent settlement. My offer was refused as that wasn't possible. Pretty sure it wasn't possible due to the lost revenue and kick-backs for the hire costs etc. but obviously that is just my own view.
In the meantime I have had the bodywork repaired and did need a hire car. Under the like-for-like scheme I ended up with an S-Class Merc for a week at a cost of £410 per day. I asked if I could have a really basic hire car and the difference to be used to fund the replacement cat, or a cash equivalent settlement. My offer was refused as that wasn't possible. Pretty sure it wasn't possible due to the lost revenue and kick-backs for the hire costs etc. but obviously that is just my own view.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff