Insurance question

[morsing]

Ok, thanks for that advice.

I am actually insured through Footman James, a broker, should my formal complaint be to them or the actual insurer?

Another thing is that, because this incident happened in September and the insurer basically didn't repond till February this year and my insurance with them ran out in March, I decided to insure elsewhere. This means that I am no longer a paying costumer with this still ongoing case. Is that likely to cause this attitude as well, do you think?

P.S. Can my legal cover company be of any assistance in this?

[michael769]

I am actually insured through Footman James, a broker, should my formal complaint be to them or the actual insurer?

I depends on the T&Cs of the policy. Some of the big brokers have their own standard policy which the insurers underwrite, and technically your contract is with the brokers, while smaller brokers are often just middlemen selling the insurers policy on. You will be best to follow the complaints process detailed in the policy document.

Another thing is that, because this incident happened in September and the insurer basically didn't repond till February this year and my insurance with them ran out in March, I decided to insure elsewhere. This means that I am no longer a paying costumer with this still ongoing case. Is that likely to cause this attitude as well, do you think?

I doubt that anyone has actually thought that deeply about your case. I suspect that you have a claims handler trying to impose a fixed menu response to your case regardless of how well it fits.

P.S. Can my legal cover company be of any assistance in this?

Possibly. You do have the right to take legal action against the insurer, the question is what your chances of success would be which is something only your and your solicitor can asses. The cover that comes with home contents insurance does extend to consumer contract disputes (which is what this is), so there would be no harm in asking them if they would be prepared to underwrite your the legal costs, their decision is based on how likely any action is to succeed, which is something that can only be decided in consultation with the solicitor that they ask to look at the matter. But whatever the outcome of that decision was it would give you some independent legal advice on your position.

if you are thinking of the legal protection that comes with your car insurance that usually only covers uninsured losses and is unlikely to be of much help if your insurer put it down to 50:50.

[morsing]

I have now received a letter from them saying "...we're closing the claim under our subrogated right to do so, see page 22 of the policy booklet..." I've never received a booklet from them...

Looking up sobrogated on wikipedia, this doesn't seem like the right term for them to use or something they can do with it?

I don't have legal cover under my home insurance. Where can I find a decent motor knowledgable solicitor to discuss the case with?

I've sent a formal complaint to both my broker and the insurance company.

[waremark]

The booklet could be something they invited you to download from the internet.

I think the term subrogated is probably appropriate - it refers to their entitlement to take over management of a case on your behalf, which is standard insurance practise which any insured party is bound to agree to.

In spite of these comments, I think you are entitled to feel aggrieved, and hope you manage to take the matter forwards successfully.

[michael769]

I don't have legal cover under my home insurance. Where can I find a decent motor knowledgable solicitor to discuss the case with?

I've sent a formal complaint to both my broker and the insurance company.

Your best bet is to pursue the formal complaint avenue as it is free and there is no risk of you getting a big legal bill if you are unsuccessful. Once they issue their final response,(or if they fail to issue one within 13 weeks), if you are not happy with it the next stage is to go to the Financial Ombudsman who (after a final informal attempt to resolve the issue) will appoint an adjudicator, who will probably be a specialist solicitor, to rule on the matter. Be prepared to stick to your guns and keep pushing to get the matter taken all the way and companies quite often will seek to stall to see if you will give up and go away.

The ABD have a list of solicitors who specialise in Road Traffic cases here. Many of these are criminal solicitors but aften also have experience of civil claims work or will be able to redirect you to a solicitor who does. Be aware that specialist solicitors can be very expensive, but many will give you a free initial consultation. Another option would be to discuss your options with a local non specialist civil solicitor first. they will still be able to give you advice on the legal avenues you can go down and may be able to refer you to someone with experience of motor claims who is local to you.

TBH most reputable solicitors will probably advise you to pursue the FO complaint first as the lowest risk option, and to come back if the FO cannot resolve things satisfactorily.

[morsing]

YESSS!!!!!

Finally finally finally, just twelve days short of a full year after this incident with the lying bastard, after countless long and mentally exhausting letters, I finally got this:

http://www.morsing.cc/RSA/RSA_final_non-fault.pdf

I'm so happy! Only slight problem is that Bansal still got away with it but at least I got my non-fault

I was planning to call both the Ombudsman and a traffic specialist solicitor today to discuss but I'll settle for this

I'll be having beer tonight

[redrobo]

Is that Tony Carter ex Thames Valley?

My IAM Group had an excellent talk this week from a former Police Accident Investigator, now a Solicitor's Accident Investigator who is regarded as an "expert witness" by the Courts on road collision matters.

His talk was enjoyable and enlightening about the difference between police and civil crash investigations.

He offers to speak to any IAM or RoSPA Groups (he is a RoSPA Examiner), and also offers free initial advice by telephone.

So, although he usually deals with serious, i.e. fatal, matters, it is probably worth a chat with him.

He is Tony Carter, of McMillan Williams solicitors, tel. 01689 848311 tony.carter@mwsolicitors.co.uk

[gfoot]

I'm so happy! Only slight problem is that Bansal still got away with it but at least I got my non-fault

Wow, it's great to see your persistence paid off! I don't have much faith in the claim resolution process, especially bearing in mind the lack of neutral representation at less serious accident scenes, but this has restored some of my faith.

Presumably Mr Bansal didn't exactly get away with it - the 50/50 will still be marked as at least partially his fault, so he's lost his excess and perhaps some of his NCB - his premiums will be rising. I'm not sure how it would have been any worse for him if the matter had never been declared 50/50 - unless you think he'd also get points on his license or something like that?

[jbsportstech]

In these cases there is no independent witness evidence and/or police report the other party can accuse you of all sorts and vice-versa. So your statement and the third parties statement are all any insurance companies have to go on and they can’t rule anything but 50/50 as they have no evidence to disprove your account or the 3rd parties. Their hands are tied and a court would be of the same opinion 6 of one and half a dozen of the other.
My friend has just got £80,000 pay out on a crash where he was riding his motorbike and someone turned right across his priority causing him to hit the side of their car. He now at 25 has a permanent limp and was disable for 9 months and has not worked since losing his job. There was no witnesses and no question my friend was speeding. The car driver has been prosecuted for driving with due care and still the settlement was 20% his fault and 80%. He only got 60k as the rest was fees and medical experts costs.

Get your head around that.

[MGF]

In these cases there is no independent witness evidence and/or police report the other party can accuse you of all sorts and vice-versa. So your statement and the third parties statement are all any insurance companies have to go on and they can’t rule anything but 50/50 as they have no evidence to disprove your account or the 3rd parties. Their hands are tied...

...and a court would be of the same opinion 6 of one and half a dozen of the other.
My friend has just got £80,000 pay out on a crash where he was riding his motorbike and someone turned right across his priority causing him to hit the side of their car....the settlement was 20% his fault and 80%. He only got 60k as the rest was fees and medical experts costs.

Get your head around that.

Well if no witnesses means 50/50 then he did well to get 80/20 in his favour.

[morsing]

Speaking to the insurance company, you do indeed lose no-claims bonus on a 50/50 so yes, he would get a slight penalty for what he did.

I think they finally agreed with me that Bansal's statement and "drawing" (*) was so un-believably poor that they should have continued the investigation and at a very minimum asked him for a more detailed statement. In my last letter to them I also asked them for the details of his repairer, something I was surprised to find out they would have given me, as the damage to his car would have shown that he was lying. Why don't insurance companies per default send someone out to look at the damage in these cases and it can tell so much?

(*) His statement was a drawing consisting of a circle with a line through it and an X at the end of the line. By the margin was a note "X = accident". Nothing indicating my presence in the drawing.

On page two where he was asked to write down the circumstances he'd written something like "I have always been a careful driver and was using my indicators" and at the bottom where it said "Are you at fault?" he'd ticket "No". Again, no mention of my involvement whatsoever.

[Jonathan]

This all sounds depressingly familiar. I've been having a similar dispute with Admiral (mentioned in an earlier thread) who've ducked all my questions and been very reluctant (I feel) to investigate a relatively minor incident properly, and my premium even through IAM Surety has risen out of all proportion this year. I'm surprised they insist on doing everything over the phone and not in writing.

For the amount of effort and inconvenience it says a lot for avoiding the situation in the first place, although that's getting increasingly difficult on today's overcrowded roads.

[Porker]

I count myself fortunate not to have been in this situation but my wife's car was struck by someone reversing rapidly out of a parking space that they'd just driven into (presumably to line the car up differently).

The reversing car hit Mrs P's ("MP" for short from here on) car on the offiside rear quarter, with clear "drag" marks where Mrs P's car had been proceeding slowly forward when it was hit from the side.

Despite this the reverser claimed that MP had managed to slide her car sideways into the rear of her vehicle (as in oversteer). While the insurers accepted that the other driver's version of events "lacked credibility" this still took nine months to resolve.

Still, as in the case which opened this thread, perseverance paid off in the end, with full recovery and no-fault recorded against MP's insurance record.

(Edited to add) The guilty party also gave an incorrect (albeit by only one digit) telephone number and a partial address, which necessitated me chasing her down using local phone books and allied means. We would have been without the ability to identify the other party otherwise.

P.