Insurer's lawyers want TP to pay my excess
Discussion
I had an accident, not my fault (I think the insurer is still deciding whether they agree, but they've paid up for the repairs). The other car drove off, then told my insurer she hadn't realised we'd collided. Insurer paid for repairs, I paid the excess.
Now the insurer's authoried solicitors wrote, they'll help me claim back the excess from the other party. I can't be bothered with it, I want to move on. Is there any negative implication to me ignoring the solicitor?
Now the insurer's authoried solicitors wrote, they'll help me claim back the excess from the other party. I can't be bothered with it, I want to move on. Is there any negative implication to me ignoring the solicitor?
I can't see any problem with not trying to claim the excess. Politely refuse, explaining your reasons, and that's it.
However, you say you can't be bothered; I claimed an excess and all I was asked to do was complete a proforma. It took 15 minutes. I was asked if I had any other costs, but I just let it go.
However, you say you can't be bothered; I claimed an excess and all I was asked to do was complete a proforma. It took 15 minutes. I was asked if I had any other costs, but I just let it go.
DIW35 said:
That's not my definition of no win, no fee.
you would think so.https://www.legalombudsman.org.uk/publications/no-...
''The Legal Ombudsman has begun to see cases where the fundamental promise which underpins the marketing of both CFAs and DBAs – that the consumer will not have to pay for losing cases – is being broken. Our cases show that people who have entered into ‘no win, no fee’ agreements have been hit with significant and unexpected costs when cases have failed. On occasions, we have also seen consumers who have won their case end up out of pocket. ''
DIW35 said:
Thesprucegoose said:
No it will be no win no fee type, but if they lose you still have to pay them.
That's not my definition of no win, no fee.Pinkie15 said:
Isn't there usually some clause that you have to co-operate with Ins Co/their lawyers when recovering from tp, otherwise you could be liable for the costs
Probably but this is just about recovering my losses, not the insurer's.montecristo said:
I had an accident, not my fault (I think the insurer is still deciding whether they agree, but they've paid up for the repairs). The other car drove off, then told my insurer she hadn't realised we'd collided. Insurer paid for repairs, I paid the excess.
Now the insurer's authoried solicitors wrote, they'll help me claim back the excess from the other party. I can't be bothered with it, I want to move on. Is there any negative implication to me ignoring the solicitor?
Why would you not bother. They're doing you a favour. The insurers solicitors are claiming back your insurers outlay from the tp, and so they are telling you it's not big deal to add your excess on to the claim, and they just need your excess receipt. Now the insurer's authoried solicitors wrote, they'll help me claim back the excess from the other party. I can't be bothered with it, I want to move on. Is there any negative implication to me ignoring the solicitor?
Christ, even if you're a billionaire, and your excess is £100, why not just cooperate and get your money back. If you're genuinely not bothered about the money, give it to charity if/when they are successful.
TwigtheWonderkid said:
Why would you not bother. They're doing you a favour. The insurers solicitors are claiming back your insurers outlay from the tp, and so they are telling you it's not big deal to add your excess on to the claim, and they just need your excess receipt.
Because I don't know how insurance claims work, one hears stories about claims going wrong, so I don't want to be more engaged with the process than I need to be. "Wrong" how? I don't know, that's the problem (and why I came here asking). How some people get nervous dealing with computer issues that seem really simple to others.montecristo said:
TwigtheWonderkid said:
Why would you not bother. They're doing you a favour. The insurers solicitors are claiming back your insurers outlay from the tp, and so they are telling you it's not big deal to add your excess on to the claim, and they just need your excess receipt.
Because I don't know how insurance claims work, one hears stories about claims going wrong, so I don't want to be more engaged with the process than I need to be. "Wrong" how? I don't know, that's the problem (and why I came here asking). How some people get nervous dealing with computer issues that seem really simple to others.Just cooperate with them, they are on your side.
montecristo said:
KungFuPanda said:
Contact TP insurers yourself and ask them for your excess back. Should be easy enough if liability is not in dispute.
I'm guessing it *is* in dispute since TP said there was no collision.Pica-Pica said:
In a collision, assuming that you want a repair, you will pay the excess, and your insurer would pay the extra and claim the excess back from the third party. That is normal, and what you are being told is normal.
Both times we've claimed through our insurer (LV=) for no-fault accidents they've waived the excess, so it was never an issue. I assumed that was normal.martinbiz said:
That isn’t quite what you said earlier, you said the TP said they didn’t realise there’d been a collision, now you are saying they said that there had been no collision, not the same thing. Which is it?
The insurer didn't tell me exactly. "Didn't realise" might be my spin on it, linking the fact that a collision did happen with some version of denial from the TP.Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff