Car insurance claim

Questions:
1. Whose insurance counts - mine as vehicle owner or his as driver?
2. If it went 50:50 what does that actually mean in terms of cost? Insurance companies speak to you as if you know, but I don't. I've never made a claim.
3. Presumably if it went 50:50 then he would lose his no claims bonus AND have a higher premium next year? But if was found in our favour then he wouldn't be affected?
4. Is there any arbitration/come-back if I'm not happy with the insurance companies' joint decision?

Thanks.

[quote="GeoffM" post=21178]

Questions:
1. Whose insurance counts - mine as vehicle owner or his as driver?
2. If it went 50:50 what does that actually mean in terms of cost? Insurance companies speak to you as if you know, but I don't. I've never made a claim.
3. Presumably if it went 50:50 then he would lose his no claims bonus AND have a higher premium next year? But if was found in our favour then he wouldn't be affected?
4. Is there any arbitration/come-back if I'm not happy with the insurance companies' joint decision?

Thanks.

1 I'd say it depends on who's insurance he was driving, his as 3rd party or yours as named driver (any driver). Tough I can see that if you weren't moving then that might be akin to being hit while parked- again the issue might be who parked the thing. Hmm not much help there after all....

Getting over this first hurdle would be a start! Seems I can't even lodge a claim until these two companies decide who should do the investigating. He's not named on our policy but he is "insured 3rd party to drive other vehicles", whatever that exactly means - though his insurers have said he's only insured for damage to other vehicles and people, not his (mine). It really would make a mockery of insurance if my vehicle wasn't insured at all at that time, which seems to be what is being implied.

As others have said- I've always been under the impression that normally the following car is held liable even in cases where they are not (e.g. roll back) unless you have witnesses. From what you say though I get the impression you were turning left and the car hit your right wing, in which case I can't see that lane switching would be relevant as the logic would be that had you not been switching the car would have been rear-ended in full! Had it been the other way round then I could see the bette case for your friend being at fault.

What does the policy say about appeals?

I think that's the wrong thing to do. If she's backing out, that implies she thinks her case is weak, which implies yours is stronger. So write to her insurance company claiming for the full repairs to reinstate the car to the state it was in before the accident. Include the pictures and diagrams and point out that your car was stationary at the time of the accident.

If they resist, you write one "letter before action" and then file a claim at the small claims court. It's cheap for you and will show them you're serious - many companies will make you an offer at that point rather than pay the expense of defending it.

Perhaps at the time of the accident you activated the cloaking device ? :ohmy:

" said:

I think that's the wrong thing to do. If she's backing out, that implies she thinks her case is weak, which implies yours is stronger. So write to her insurance company claiming for the full repairs to reinstate the car to the state it was in before the accident. Include the pictures and diagrams and point out that your car was stationary at the time of the accident.

If they resist, you write one "letter before action" and then file a claim at the small claims court. It's cheap for you and will show them you're serious - many companies will make you an offer at that point rather than pay the expense of defending it.

By apologising in text form she has almost admitted liability but if the insurance companies won't listen then there is little point in continuing. Yes, my case might be stronger - but is it worth it? Small Claims costs £150 and I'm not sure that can be recovered, and no guarantee of success. Friend does it up for the cost of a can of paint and I can put all this behind me. Too much effort for little gain. However, I will be writing to all three insurance companies involved with the facts including drawings and photos just to cover my back.

" said:

" said:

I think that's the wrong thing to do. If she's backing out, that implies she thinks her case is weak, which implies yours is stronger. So write to her insurance company claiming for the full repairs to reinstate the car to the state it was in before the accident. Include the pictures and diagrams and point out that your car was stationary at the time of the accident.

If they resist, you write one "letter before action" and then file a claim at the small claims court. It's cheap for you and will show them you're serious - many companies will make you an offer at that point rather than pay the expense of defending it.

By apologising in text form she has almost admitted liability but if the insurance companies won't listen then there is little point in continuing. Yes, my case might be stronger - but is it worth it? Small Claims costs £150 and I'm not sure that can be recovered, and no guarantee of success. Friend does it up for the cost of a can of paint and I can put all this behind me. Too much effort for little gain. However, I will be writing to all three insurance companies involved with the facts including drawings and photos just to cover my back.

You could still make the claim and keep going until the point that you would incur real costs.

As Clive has said, as she has all but admitted liability (presumably after advice from someone - perhaps her insurers) then they may well settle straight away rather than incur time disputing it, especially if the costs are relatively small.

I think that would be my view as well Geoff. Particularly as, in the absence of a successful claim, your insurer might decide to load your premium even more than they otherwise will anyway . As others have said, insurance companies are pretty much a law unto themselves - and the law is, in any case, heavily stacked in their favour - so it's no bad thing to do whatever you can to avoid them taking you to the cleaners.