I require some advice with regards to an insurance claim, for an incident that my girlfriend was involved in.
The incident happened on a roundabout and after nearly a year now the insurance compnies representatives have asked if she would be happy to go 50/50.
This was agreed by both parties. However a letter has no arrived saying "if you wish to claim for damage to your vehicle here are the other parties insurance details"
I have looked at previous threads on here and thought that each party should be responsible for their own damage?
Also, my girlfriend is not sure how to claim for her old vehicles damage from the other insurers if need be, because she no longer has it and was t/p only. If both party is responsible for own damage she will write off the cost of repairs etc.
It was an m reg cavalier and sustained damage to the door, wing, bumper and grill. Obviously uneconomical to repair, she sold it to her ex boyfriends brother who was in the trade for next to nothing.
Insurers are now saying she will have to provide a receipt for the sale and request a copy of the new owners v5 to prove she owned it and sold it on, and how much for.
What should she do?
should she even have to pursue the third party for damages, if she agreed to settle 50/50?
If so how is the best way to go about things from here?
|
btt. Can anyone help Matt?
No Do$h - Alfa-driving Backroom Moderator
mailto:moderators@honestjohn.co.uk
|
|
|
A couple of things here either don't make sense or I have misunderstood.
Firstly, your sister has third party insurance so her insurance company weren't going to be paying out anything for her car anyway. So where does the 50/50 come in ?
Secondly it is extremely surprising for an insurance company to ask the insured for approval on the settlement basis. Its nothing to do with the policyholder, its decided by the insurer and, in any case, it is always done without prejudice and without admitting liability. So it is a matter of pragmatism, and not guilt/liability.
I really need to know a little more to be able to offer comment;
Who did your sister receieve the offer of 50/50 from and who did she believe the agreement was/could be between ?
50% of what ? The blame, the bill or what ?
Did your sister agree to the "deal" ?
If your sister was to claim for the other party what, other than damage to her car, would she claim for ?
What, if anything, has happened to her NCD ? Has she been through a renewal since the incident ? Was it since the 50/50 offer ?
Why does she have to prove the sale ? Its got absolutely nothing to do with anything or anybody. Which insurer is askign her for details of the sale ?
Why does she have to prove she owned it ? I could understand circumstances where she would need/want to prove that she did not own it and was not involved in an accident, but to need to prove that she did own it and was in an accident ?
And any other details which might be of relevance. The more detail you can give, even if you think it irrelevant, the likely that I can offer some meaningful comments.
|
She has t/p/f&f cover with NU.
The other driver has claimed against her insurance and she has claimed against his insurers.
The claim is being dealt with by a company, I presume claims assessors or the like, acting on behalf of NU (her insurers)
The 50/50 was a proposed way of settling the matter between insurers. This is 50/50 on liability.
The company dealing with the claim on behalf of my girlfriend’s insurers asked her to confirm she would be happy for them to settle on this basis. Each person would accept 50% blame/liability.
She agreed to the deal in order to see an end to it.
She was only claiming for damage to the vehicle, no injuries are claimed for.
Her NCD has been reduced by 2years by her insurers
I think the other parties’ insurers (cornhill) want her to prove the sale because they have never seen the damage to the vehicle and it was not inspected at any point.
They want to know how much she sold vehicle for, I presume to deduct this amount form any settlement.
If you require any further details, please advise.
|
zxrmatt,
Sorry to be difficult, but something is not right here.
She has lost her NCD. Where you NCD is concerned it doesn't matter whether or not you are 1% or fault, 100% at fault or anything in between. You lose 2 years bonus.
It is not her decision as to whether or not it case is settled between the insurers at 50%. Even if she insisted it was 100% nto her fault, her insurer can still make a without prejudice payment if they wish.
The point being that I don't understand the agreement. If the plan is for her insurer to pay her damage (£0 as it was TP insurance) and for the other insurer to settle their problem, then her insurance has made no payment, and therefore her bonus should be reinstated.
And if that was the case, why would the other insurer have *ANY* interest in her car, the damage to it or anything else ?
And the other parties insurers want to discount the sale of the vehicle from the cost of settle ment ? 1) What settlement 2) its not relevant anyway. The damage to the car was £500 and she sold it for £100 so they'll pay £400 ??? What about if the car was originally worth £1000, surely they should pay £900 ?
You need to get all the paperwork together and get it and your girlfriend sat in front of the NU and find out what has happened.
The story you have at the moment is either not complete or it is a complete nonsense.
Sorry. But someone needs to look at the documentation/letters you've got *and* speak with your girlfriend to get to the bottom of this.
|
mark isnt it because she has not got comp insurance
if she has only 3rd party bonfire and nicked insurance, then she presumably has paid out of her own money for damages or loss in value of car
therefore it would be her (and not her insurance company as it would be in fully comp case) that is due some cash from whoever is liable, and it is also therfore her that is able to say if she is prepared to do a deal (accept 50/50 or anything else istead of full loss)
etc
|
by the way even if both drivers are fully comp it if you feel it was genuinely the other parties 100% liablity and you have evidence/witness etc, then it can be worth notifying but not claiming from insurance company pending your chasing the other driver, your insurance company will not pay out until proven one way or other in court (or other side accepts)
Quite easy to do this for amounts which are small enough to be handled in smalls claims courts
Saves you no claims money in the long term
|
|
|
She's lost her bonus. Therefore her insurer has paid someone. Who ?
She is going to be paid out 50% of what ? And why is however much she sold the car for relevant ? And certainly I have no idea why a new copy of the V% is neccessary. Are they saying she hasn't sold the car ? Why would that matter ? And culd you trace someone you had sold a car to and would you be prepared to go and ask them for a copy of their V5 to help your insurance claim from before it was sold ?
If the TP Insurer is paying her, then who is her insurer paying and why ? And it they're not, then why is the bonus disallowed ?
If they are paying out the other guy and Cornhill are paying her, then how on earth has that worked ? If the other guy is comp, then they would have paid for his car whatever. If the other guy is TP then both insurers would have stone-walled until one or other paid. Under what circumstances would they both pay something ?
It makes no sense. Which, I admit, is not unknown. And if it makes sense, then I am missing something pretty substantial.
But it certainly doesn't make sufficient sense for me to be able to offer any meaningful advice.
I'm not even sure what the question is.
|
well i agree its not crystal
maybe
insurers agree 50/50 liability is appropriate, they will settle each others claims, or all claims will be split 50/50 between them (after settling each others claims)
her insurer pays out to other party, she looses NCB
she needs to claim from the other insurer
insurance companies will settle between themselves to bring about 50/50 split
|
>>insurance companies will settle between themselves to bring about 50/50 split
They don't actually do that on a damage only motor claim.
|
Sorry about the confusion.
I have had a look through correspondence, and I admit they do confuse me.
FYI the collision was coming off a roundabout and the van and my girlfriends car had a side impact with each other. My girlfriend says that the van driver scraped along the side of her car and he says she went wide and connected with his van.
With no witnesses it has been one persons word versus another person, hence has been dragging on for some time.
The van driver has either claimed through his insurers who are trying to recover their loss or if not he has contacted NU himself to pursue the claim. Either way he is claiming for own damage from my g/f. She has also put in claim to his insurers for damage to her car.
There is a party representing NU (my g/f insurers) who were the people who advised they would be agreeing to deal on a “50/50” basis, and they DID ask her to confirm this was ok. (why, I do not know?) She presumed this would be, she deals with her damage and t/p deals with his.
It now transpires that this “50/50” agreement means NU will pay for 50% of his damage and Cornhill will pay for 50% of her damage. This means each person has accepted 50% responsibility? And hence loss of 2yrs NCD?
The problem now is Cornhill are querying how much they should be paying 50% of. The vehicle has not been inspected and has been sold on. I think they are trying to say because she has sold vehicle how can they be sure how much damage was sustained and how much cash they should be paying out.
I agree that the whole thing about the V5 makes no sense. I do not understand what this will show. Also you are right, she is not prepared to try and trace the new owner.
Facts:
1)Car was bought for £1000.
2)Damaged by t/p on door, wing, bumper and grill.
3)Obvious economical write off due to labour costs alone with repainting etc
4)Car sold on for next to nothing as could not keep on drive and needed new transport (may or may not have been repaired by new owner as only cosmetic damage)Cornhill never requested an inspection
5)Have no way of confirming amount of damage to Cornhill as repair estimate not obtained.
Cornhill want
1) proof she owned vehicle and has now sold it?
2) How much she sold it for
I think cornhill are trying to get out of paying by saying she sold car and therefore did not get any repair done, therefore no claim. and/or will pay 50% of market value (probably about £400, less what she sold car for)
My questions were
1) Does "50/50" usually mean each person settles own damage or each insurer pays 50% of others claim
And
2) As it looks like each insurer is paying 50% of other persons claim, what is she entitled to claim for as she has had to sell car on at a loss?
|
The deal is unusual, but not unheard of or impossible.
This is horribly difficult to do in a forum so the best advice I can give is that she should go back to the people who recommended the deal and ask them to sort it out.
I'll write the following comments since you've gone to so much effort to try and explain, but really you need face to face contact with an expert;
Really, really, really bad advice from the advisors in the first place. She would have been better off refusing the deal, sticking to her word of what happened in the incident, withdrawing the claim from her insurer and recovering her NCD.
I would also be hammering whoever the advisors are and referring it to the NU and generally causing as much problem as possible.
And do point out to your girlfriend the potential pitfalls in agreeing to something without fully understanding it.
The fact that she has sold the car is not relevant. How much she was paid for the vehicle is not relevant. If you end up dealing with this mess yourselves, write to the Cornhill, explain that the vehicle has been sold, you are not able or willing to trace the new owner, that you understand that they are able to check anything they wish to know directly with Swansea, that the vehicle was in average condition and had a reasonable value of £x. Explain what the damage was and that a reasonable estimate for repair would be £y. Explain then that this would mean the vehicle was written off. A written off vehicle of this type and agree would have a theoretical salvage value of £z and you would really be looking at £50 or thereabouts. Therefore you look forward to receiving;
1) a cheque for (market value - salvage value) * 50%
2) a written explanation as to why this is not / will not be forthcoming for you to use in a small claims court
I would also get hold of your insurance company and find out if they have settled the claim. If they have not, I would ask them not to and explain the situation to them.
If your g/f had not agreed to the 50/50 deal then at this point I would withdraw the claim, ask for reinstatement of my bonus and then stick to my story and hit the other insurer with a small claims court notice. Sadly you are greatly limited by the acceptance of that deal.
And finally the fact that she had to sell the car on at a loss is not relevant.
Did I cover everything ?
|
Think everything is covered and apreciate the trouble you have gone to trying to give me some advice.
As you can see the whole thing is a bit of a mess.
Will follow your advices and also contact insurers as soon as possible.
Cheers
|
|
|
|
