Recommendation for Aviva who helped me with an insurance fraud problem.
I was driving my wife's Mercedes when I was accused of damaging another car (an old BMW parked next to ours) in the car park. I denied causing the damage and demonstrated that the heinous damage could be cleaned away with a wet finger. The owner insisted on calling the police. The police and a specialist car inspector employed by our insurers, Aviva, concluded there was no damage and no case for a claim.
The BMW's insurers Direct Line's claim was rejected by Aviva so Direct Line then wrote to me demanding a personal payment of about £2000. I replied that Aviva had determined there was no evidence that I was liable. Direct Line's solicitor then wrote the same letter but on their notepaper, and I sent the same reply. I then received a small claims court demand for payment.
I have never complimented an insurance company but Aviva were marvellous. They paid for a solicitor to defend the action, provided practical advice, and incurred quite a lot of costs. Direct Line backed down three days before the hearing - and their solicitors paid Aviva's solicitor's costs. The whole thing took almost two years. Why do we have insurance if they cannot decide these things for us? An action that should have ended with the police visit has cost the industry many hundreds of pounds - and guess where that comes from?
The BMW's insurers Direct Line's claim was rejected by Aviva so Direct Line then wrote to me demanding a personal payment of about £2000. I replied that Aviva had determined there was no evidence that I was liable. Direct Line's solicitor then wrote the same letter but on their notepaper, and I sent the same reply. I then received a small claims court demand for payment.
I have never complimented an insurance company but Aviva were marvellous. They paid for a solicitor to defend the action, provided practical advice, and incurred quite a lot of costs. Direct Line backed down three days before the hearing - and their solicitors paid Aviva's solicitor's costs. The whole thing took almost two years. Why do we have insurance if they cannot decide these things for us? An action that should have ended with the police visit has cost the industry many hundreds of pounds - and guess where that comes from?
Asked on 12 January 2013 by RT, via email
Answered by
Honest John
This is a victory of common sense (by Aviva) over avarice and stupidity. Most insurers say that fighting cases against this sort of exploitation costs them more than it saves. That policy merely encourages fraud. Happily, the courts take a much dimmer view and are now sentencing such fraudsters for perjury and fraud. One bloke recently got nine months. I hope the fraudster with the BMW was also severely admonished for attempted fraud.
We give you the low down on how to save on insurance, little-known tricks and tips, what insurance groups mean and how to use insurance aggregators to beat insurers.
Insurance group finder and how to save on insuranceSimilar questions
My friend had a very minor car accident. No damage was done to either car and no one was hurt in any way. Both drivers say it was the others' fault. There were no witnesses. The other driver was the only...
I come up to a T junction and stop. I look left and right, there is a car coming from the right with his left-hand indicator on. I assume he's going to turn left into the road I'm exiting so I pull out...
My daughter received an email from her insurance company, but addressed to a different person. She deleted this thinking it was spam. She then received a letter saying she needed to reply to them urgently...
.jpg)
