Bizarre Insurance Situation with fault / non-fault status.
Discussion
Wondering if any other PH'ers have had a similar experience as I'm currently having and whether you managed to resolve it / how.
Back in Feb 2024, I was stationery at some traffic lights and a white van drove into the back of my car. I got out, he agreed to pull to the side of the road to ensure we didn't hold up traffic, and then immediately fled the scene, overtaking on a pedestrian crossing.
As it happens, the car behind the van that hit me had a dashcam, stopped at the scene and was happy to provide me with the dashcam footage and provided his details as a witness. All very fortunate. I reported this to the police, who gave me a crime reference number and stated that the owner of the can was known to the police and generally a bit of a wrong'un and they'd be sending someone out to visit. There wasn't a lot of damage to my vehicle, but due to the age and mileage it was uneconomical to repair and was written off Cat D. I kept the vehicle and was paid out from my insurer, I supplied them the crime reference number and dashcam footage, all sorted, or so I thought.
Roll on 2 years and 2 months and I've just had a mighty increase on my renewal and low and behold the quote details an at fault claim for Feb 2024.
I've contacted my insurer, and they are stating that they're trying to recoup their costs but the other drivers insurer are refusing to provide the drivers details, which seems mental to me, surely that's a legal requirement. I've contacted the police and I'm awaiting a response to see if they can provide the drivers details to my insurer, I understand they won't be able to provide them to me with GDPR etc. My insurer is apparently trying to contact the DVLA to request driver details, however they've said if they can't get the driver details, the upshot is that the claim will go down as an at fault claim to me on my driving record.
So in essence:
Hit and Run offence, reported to the police, crime ref obtained
My car written off and paid out
Other drivers insurer refusing to supply driver details
This will result in the claim going as my fault, despite providing video evidence of the other vehicle driving into the back of my stationery vehicle and a crime reference number.
It seems to stupid to be true to me, but here we are. Surely there has to be some sort of action I can take here, I understand that there will be grey area accidents etc but this was literally me stopped at a red light and someone drove into the back of my car and fled the scene, on video
Back in Feb 2024, I was stationery at some traffic lights and a white van drove into the back of my car. I got out, he agreed to pull to the side of the road to ensure we didn't hold up traffic, and then immediately fled the scene, overtaking on a pedestrian crossing.
As it happens, the car behind the van that hit me had a dashcam, stopped at the scene and was happy to provide me with the dashcam footage and provided his details as a witness. All very fortunate. I reported this to the police, who gave me a crime reference number and stated that the owner of the can was known to the police and generally a bit of a wrong'un and they'd be sending someone out to visit. There wasn't a lot of damage to my vehicle, but due to the age and mileage it was uneconomical to repair and was written off Cat D. I kept the vehicle and was paid out from my insurer, I supplied them the crime reference number and dashcam footage, all sorted, or so I thought.
Roll on 2 years and 2 months and I've just had a mighty increase on my renewal and low and behold the quote details an at fault claim for Feb 2024.
I've contacted my insurer, and they are stating that they're trying to recoup their costs but the other drivers insurer are refusing to provide the drivers details, which seems mental to me, surely that's a legal requirement. I've contacted the police and I'm awaiting a response to see if they can provide the drivers details to my insurer, I understand they won't be able to provide them to me with GDPR etc. My insurer is apparently trying to contact the DVLA to request driver details, however they've said if they can't get the driver details, the upshot is that the claim will go down as an at fault claim to me on my driving record.
So in essence:
Hit and Run offence, reported to the police, crime ref obtained
My car written off and paid out
Other drivers insurer refusing to supply driver details
This will result in the claim going as my fault, despite providing video evidence of the other vehicle driving into the back of my stationery vehicle and a crime reference number.
It seems to stupid to be true to me, but here we are. Surely there has to be some sort of action I can take here, I understand that there will be grey area accidents etc but this was literally me stopped at a red light and someone drove into the back of my car and fled the scene, on video
WTDMM said:
There is zero GDPR reason for the Police not to provide details to your insurer.
That's what I was thinking, appreciated.Also regards the above poster, I've raised a complaint with the insurer and gathered some more info, I've asked what date they requested the other drivers details from the DVLA, amazingly that date would be today
WTDMM said:
There is zero GDPR reason for the Police not to provide details to your insurer.
Do the Police know who the driver was? They weren't at the scene and only told the OP that the they knew who the owner (presumably registered keeper) was.The OP can't claim off the van owners policy if the driver of the van has not been identified.
The advice by another poster to refer to the ombudsman is odd. Based on the information given by the OP, I can't see what his insurer has done wrong. Also, there is a common misconception about the fees payable to the ombudsman - insurers will have an annual budget for these and won't be assessing each complaint to see if it is cheaper to settle than have the ombudsman review it. An insurer will be happy for complaints to go to the ombudsman where they are comfortable that the complaint is unlikely to be upheld.
ralphrj said:
Do the Police know who the driver was? They weren't at the scene and only told the OP that the they knew who the owner (presumably registered keeper) was.
The OP can't claim off the van owners policy if the driver of the van has not been identified.
The advice by another poster to refer to the ombudsman is odd. Based on the information given by the OP, I can't see what his insurer has done wrong. Also, there is a common misconception about the fees payable to the ombudsman - insurers will have an annual budget for these and won't be assessing each complaint to see if it is cheaper to settle than have the ombudsman review it. An insurer will be happy for complaints to go to the ombudsman where they are comfortable that the complaint is unlikely to be upheld.
I'd like to think that what my insurer has done wrong is not bother to approach the DVLA for the other drivers details for 26 months until today when I queried why nothing had been done? Surely you'd have pursued these avenues before now, instead they appear to be happy to just let it get chalked up as a fault claim to myself.The OP can't claim off the van owners policy if the driver of the van has not been identified.
The advice by another poster to refer to the ombudsman is odd. Based on the information given by the OP, I can't see what his insurer has done wrong. Also, there is a common misconception about the fees payable to the ombudsman - insurers will have an annual budget for these and won't be assessing each complaint to see if it is cheaper to settle than have the ombudsman review it. An insurer will be happy for complaints to go to the ombudsman where they are comfortable that the complaint is unlikely to be upheld.
I was told the police knew who the driver of the vehicle was, I provided a description at the time and the officer who dealt with it stated that he was known to them.
D4MJT said:
I'd like to think that what my insurer has done wrong is not bother to approach the DVLA for the other drivers details for 26 months until today when I queried why nothing had been done? Surely you'd have pursued these avenues before now, instead they appear to be happy to just let it get chalked up as a fault claim to myself.
I was told the police knew who the driver of the vehicle was, I provided a description at the time and the officer who dealt with it stated that he was known to them.
DVLA won't know who the driver was. DVLA will only know the name of the registered keeper.I was told the police knew who the driver of the vehicle was, I provided a description at the time and the officer who dealt with it stated that he was known to them.
It's been a while since I worked in insurance, but is there still an obligation for the last known insurer to pay out in this circumstance?
OP, look up "RTA insurer", i think that will point you in the right direction to investigate if there is a possibility of recovering outlay that way. If you had motor legal cover at the time of the claim it might be worth giving them a call.
OP, look up "RTA insurer", i think that will point you in the right direction to investigate if there is a possibility of recovering outlay that way. If you had motor legal cover at the time of the claim it might be worth giving them a call.
budgie smuggler said:
It's been a while since I worked in insurance, but is there still an obligation for the last known insurer to pay out in this circumstance?
OP, look up "RTA insurer", i think that will point you in the right direction to investigate if there is a possibility of recovering outlay that way. If you had motor legal cover at the time of the claim it might be worth giving them a call.
You need to know who the driver was to be able to make an RTA Insurer claim (see Cameron v Hussain judgment by the Supreme Court).OP, look up "RTA insurer", i think that will point you in the right direction to investigate if there is a possibility of recovering outlay that way. If you had motor legal cover at the time of the claim it might be worth giving them a call.
ralphrj said:
budgie smuggler said:
It's been a while since I worked in insurance, but is there still an obligation for the last known insurer to pay out in this circumstance?
OP, look up "RTA insurer", i think that will point you in the right direction to investigate if there is a possibility of recovering outlay that way. If you had motor legal cover at the time of the claim it might be worth giving them a call.
You need to know who the driver was to be able to make an RTA Insurer claim (see Cameron v Hussain judgment by the Supreme Court).OP, look up "RTA insurer", i think that will point you in the right direction to investigate if there is a possibility of recovering outlay that way. If you had motor legal cover at the time of the claim it might be worth giving them a call.
Edited by budgie smuggler on Tuesday 14th April 12:01
D4MJT said:
ralphrj said:
DVLA won't know who the driver was. DVLA will only know the name of the registered keeper.
Surely if the vehicle you own and insure is involved in a road traffic accident, if you can't provide the drivers details is that not an offence? budgie smuggler said:
ralphrj said:
budgie smuggler said:
It's been a while since I worked in insurance, but is there still an obligation for the last known insurer to pay out in this circumstance?
OP, look up "RTA insurer", i think that will point you in the right direction to investigate if there is a possibility of recovering outlay that way. If you had motor legal cover at the time of the claim it might be worth giving them a call.
You need to know who the driver was to be able to make an RTA Insurer claim (see Cameron v Hussain judgment by the Supreme Court).OP, look up "RTA insurer", i think that will point you in the right direction to investigate if there is a possibility of recovering outlay that way. If you had motor legal cover at the time of the claim it might be worth giving them a call.
budgie smuggler said:
ralphrj said:
MIB would only cover the OP's uninsured losses. It won't pay for insurable losses. If the OP had a comprehensive policy then they would have to claim the value of the car from that.
Thank you Ralph, but man, what an annoying and unfair situation to be in for the OP. 
ralphrj said:
You need to know who the driver was to be able to make an RTA Insurer claim (see Cameron v Hussain judgment by the Supreme Court).
That's interesting. But in this case where there is evidence that the van was involved in an accident and at fault, then the van insurer doesn't have to pay out if they can't (or don't) ascertain who was driving?BertBert said:
ralphrj said:
You need to know who the driver was to be able to make an RTA Insurer claim (see Cameron v Hussain judgment by the Supreme Court).
That's interesting. But in this case where there is evidence that the van was involved in an accident and at fault, then the van insurer doesn't have to pay out if they can't (or don't) ascertain who was driving?ralphrj said:
BertBert said:
ralphrj said:
You need to know who the driver was to be able to make an RTA Insurer claim (see Cameron v Hussain judgment by the Supreme Court).
That's interesting. But in this case where there is evidence that the van was involved in an accident and at fault, then the van insurer doesn't have to pay out if they can't (or don't) ascertain who was driving?ralphrj said:
Yes, that's my understanding.
I'm absolutely not having a go at you at all, your input is appreciated and helpful, but I find this situation absolutely mind blowing.As a driver for 23 years now, I've never made an insurance claim until this point and I have a clean licence, it seems absolutely mad that in an accident situation where the other vehicle is insured and is on video crashing into the back of my stationery car and making off, that regardless of who pursues who, it appears I'm going to ultimately be found "at fault" and pay for that through increased premiums.
Something is sadly wrong with the system if that's the case. In the case of speeding or drink driving failure to supply details ultimately ends up with the registered keeper being pursued if they can't prove who else is driving doesn't it, it seems a large loophole for someone to be able to crash and then just refuse to confirm who was driving to avoid any comeback on their insurance record.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff