Claiming against someone else car insurance the process

[Rolo]

Was parked up today in my car, when another car reversing off his drive drove into me, not major damage just bumper mainly to both cars. The person who hit my car totally admitted it was fault and said he wanted to go through insurance as he had damaged his car as well and it was a company car and we exchanged details.

I never had to make a claim against another driver before what do I need to do, just call up my insurance company and get them to do the work and claim off him, or do I wait for his insurance company to contact me ?

Cheers

 

[Spark123]

I'd say call your own insurance company and let them sort it out. I wouldn't advise you to sit around waiting, what if he hasn't even reported it to his insurance company?

 

[MrTurner]

So long as you have all his details you're fine. Tell your insurance, give them all his details, they'll get in touch with his insurers and get it all sorted on your behalf.

When you do, they'll ask if there is a particular garage you want to go to, or they'll give you a list of recommended ones to choose from.

What you have to watch for though is the excess. Usually when you pick your car up, you'll have to pay your exess then your insurer will claim it back (plus any 'expenses' you've had to pay out).

Give your insurer a ring though, some are different, and it'll depend on your policy!

 

[MrTurner]

I'd say call your own insurance company and let them sort it out. I wouldn't advise you to sit around waiting, what if he hasn't even reported it to his insurance company?

If he's not reported it to his insurer, technically he's breaking the law. When you tell your insurer, they'll get in touch with his. Only issue would be if he has no insurance!

 

[Softus]

If he's not reported it to his insurer, technically he's breaking the law.

Er, no, he very much isn't.

To clarify some things that are starting to get muddled, there are several issues to consider:

1. Statutory obligation;
2. Contractual obligation;
3. Claiming insured losses;
4. Claiming uninsured losses.

Legal obligation
If your vehicle is involved in an accident on the public highway then you are obliged to give your personal contact details, and your insurance details, to anyone who reasonably makes a request for them. If you can't do it at the roadside then you must do so within a period (which I believe to be 24 hours) afterwards, or you must report the accident to the police instead of contacting the third party. If anyone is injured then you must report the accident to the police anyway.

Contractual obligation
The terms of your insurance policy will, without doubt, require you to report any accident to them where you are involved as a driver, whether or not it's your fault, whether or not there was any damage, and whether or not you have comprehensive insurance. They usually impose a time limit, if you're claiming, and it's usually 30 days.

Claiming insured losses
If you have comprehensive insurance then you have a choice:

a) Let your insurance company handle everything.
Since you'll be reporting the accident to them this is what most people do, but be aware that can increase the risk of you incurring an uninsured loss, i.e. any policy excess that you have - see below.

The risk increases in small incidents because the two insurance companies involved might agree to cover their own losses - this is known as a knock-for-knock arrangement - in order to minimise the administrative overheads. If you are confident that the other driver can be shown to be culpable, and you want to eliminate this risk, then don't claim through your insurance company - simply notify them and tell them that you will be handling the claim for damage to your car.

b) Act as though you didn't have comprehensive insurance, and see below for claiming uninsured losses.

Claiming uninsured losses
If you don't have comprehensive insurance, or if you decide to go it alone, then immediately write to the other party holding them fully liable, and request details of their insurers (if you haven't already been given them). From this moment onwards put everything in writing, keep copies, stay polite, but be prepared to go to court.

If you lose a civil claim then be aware that you'll probably expire the time limit within which you may claim through your own insurance company, so only choose this route if you are confident.

 

[Steve]

When you do, they'll ask if there is a particular garage you want to go to, or they'll give you a list of recommended ones to choose from!

In general, insurers have their own list of companies they deal with. I cant see them wanting you to book it into "Smith and Sons" round the back of your local pub - however reputable and good they may be. The insurers prefer to deal directly with main dealers / authorised service centres.

When I had to have accident damage repaired, an hour after the accident, my insurers had picked up the car and booked it into my local Ford dealer for the next morning! Given the accident was about 5pm, this was pretty good. The garage in question is actually just round the corner from my house, which was pretty damn convenient!

 

[Rolo]

I rang my insurance company and there dealing with it now

What I thought was a bit cheeky was the if I went with 'their' choosen repairer I wouldnt have to pay anything up front, yet if I wanted it to go to an Audi dealer I would have to pay and then get the money back. The garage they picked seems to have a good reputation according to their web site Has anyone used this lot before Autohaus in Perivale http://www.autohausgroup.net/about.html I need new front bumper and light etc, main concern is the colour match as Ive got ming blue perl-set.

Cheers

 

[Softus]

In general, insurers have their own list of companies they deal with. I cant see them wanting you to book it into "Smith and Sons" round the back of your local pub - however reputable and good they may be.

They might not want to, but it's not a matter of their choice - the car owner is entitled to choose who carries out the repairs.

What I thought was a bit cheeky was the if I went with 'their' choosen repairer I wouldnt have to pay anything up front, yet if I wanted it to go to an Audi dealer I would have to pay and then get the money back.

How can this be cheeky? It's nothing to do with what the insurance company wants - if you use an approved repairer then it's the garage that's giving you credit because they have an account with the insurer and they know that they'll get their money. Why would any repairer that doesn't have an account with your insurer not want paying when you collect your car?

 

[Rolo]

In general, insurers have their own list of companies they deal with. I cant see them wanting you to book it into "Smith and Sons" round the back of your local pub - however reputable and good they may be.

They might not want to, but it's not a matter of their choice - the car owner is entitled to choose who carries out the repairs.

What I thought was a bit cheeky was the if I went with 'their' choosen repairer I wouldnt have to pay anything up front, yet if I wanted it to go to an Audi dealer I would have to pay and then get the money back.

How can this be cheeky? It's nothing to do with what the insurance company wants - if you use an approved repairer then it's the garage that's giving you credit because they have an account with the insurer and they know that they'll get their money. Why would any repairer that doesn't have an account with your insurer not want paying when you collect your car?

Ok when you put it that way I see what you mean.

 

[MrTurner]

If he's not reported it to his insurer, technically he's breaking the law.

Er, no, he very much isn't...


...Contractual obligation
The terms of your insurance policy will, without doubt, require you to report any accident to them where you are involved as a driver, whether or not it's your fault, whether or not there was any damage, and whether or not you have comprehensive insurance. They usually impose a time limit, if you're claiming, and it's usually 30 days.

So breach of contract is not breaking the law then? A guy who run me over and didn't tell his insurer got in to a fair amount of stick when my solicitor told them (after the ABH of course).

The police aren't going to chase a lack of notification to the insurance, but fraud or something of that type could be cited.

When you do, they'll ask if there is a particular garage you want to go to, or they'll give you a list of recommended ones to choose from!

In general, insurers have their own list of companies they deal with. I cant see them wanting you to book it into "Smith and Sons" round the back of your local pub - however reputable and good they may be. The insurers prefer to deal directly with main dealers / authorised service centres.

When I had to have accident damage repaired, an hour after the accident, my insurers had picked up the car and booked it into my local Ford dealer for the next morning! Given the accident was about 5pm, this was pretty good. The garage in question is actually just round the corner from my house, which was pretty damn convenient!

I didn't say any Tom dick or harry could do the work, but some people have their preferences. Knowing how shoddy the majority of main dealers are, I'd not be taking mine to one to be repaired should it need it. Usually if you have a preference and you get 3 quotes to prove your garage is not over-charging you'll be fine, and get a better job.

 

[Softus]

So breach of contract is not breaking the law then?

It's open to interpretation, but IMHO you're in a tiny minority of people who would regard breach of contract to be classed as "breaking the law" - the latter is commonly used to describe a statutory offence; a crime, if you prefer that term. Some example of breaking the law would be: theft; murder; rape; fraud. The serious stuff.

On the other hand, a plumber who fails to turn up as agreed to install a toilet on a particular date would be breaching a contract, without doubt, but most people would not describe such a failure as "breaking the law". That would quite ludicrous.

A guy who run me over and didn't tell his insurer got in to a fair amount of stick when my solicitor told them (after the ABH of course).

Stick? Do you mean that they refused to indemnify him, as indeed they would be entitled to refuse to do?

The police aren't going to chase a lack of notification to the insurance, but fraud or something of that type could be cited.

It would be difficult to support an accusation of fraud where there has simply been an omission, whether willful or otherwise, to notify an insurance company of a notifiable incident. It would, however, be deceptive to later omit to tell an insurance company, when questioned, that the incident had happened. Such a deception would not only be deemed to nullify the contract, but could be argued to be a criminal act - an attempt to defraud.

When you do, they'll ask if there is a particular garage you want to go to, or they'll give you a list of recommended ones to choose from!

In general, insurers have their own list of companies they deal with. I cant see them wanting you to book it into "Smith and Sons" round the back of your local pub - however reputable and good they may be. The insurers prefer to deal directly with main dealers / authorised service centres.

I didn't say any Tom dick or harry could do the work, but some people have their preferences.

No - it's me who's saying is that any Tom, Dick or Harry could do the work - it's the choice of the car owner who repairs the car, not the insurer. (BTW this changes in the case of a total loss accident, because the insurer becomes the car owner.)

Knowing how shoddy the majority of main dealers are, I'd not be taking mine to one to be repaired should it need it.

And to what reference material do you attribute your belief that most car dealers do shoddy work?

Usually if you have a preference and you get 3 quotes to prove your garage is not over-charging you'll be fine, and get a better job.

You're correct, but for the wrong reason. The car owner has a duty to mitigate losses, and generally to act as if he/she weren't insured (i.e. as if having to pay for the repairs themselves). One way, but not the only way, to demonstrate that this has been done is to obtain more than one quotation.

 

[MrTurner]

Arguing for the sake of it is seems then! One minute it seems like you're saying to not report is not breaking the law, then you're saying it is. I only said "technically", there is a difference between common and criminal law.

In regard to the comment about car dealers doing shoddy work, you will often find that as dealers are not specialists, more a jack of all trades, their work will not be up to that of an independant bodyshop. I have seen first hand a lot of repair work from main dealers, the worst of which was actually a Ford Fiesta I had repaired by Dagenham Motors in Gillingham. Do you really want me to quote all the cars I've seen repaired? Those dealers which are good are usually those who outsource to a decent specialist. A good bodyshop is very hard to find, and unfortunately you can only tell once you've seen some work.

And for the guy who got the ABH, his insurance company were in the process of making investigations last I heard, but as it's going to cost them a fair bit in legal fees alone, they're going to want to try and gain some of their expenses back. I can let you know when I do though?

 

[Softus]

Arguing for the sake of it is seems then!

If that's how you want to describe me telling you where you're wrong, then so be it.

One minute it seems like you're saying to not report is not breaking the law, then you're saying it is.

No - you said that breach of contract is breaking the law, and I said that you're wrong. I said not declaring it to a new insurer (or the same one at renewal time) is breaking the law, because it's deception. These are two distinct concepts.

I only said "technically", there is a difference between common and criminal law.

Well perhaps you'd like to explain what you mean by "technically", and at the same time explain your very odd understanding of common and criminal law, since they're not mutually exclusive (as you appear to think).

I have seen first hand a lot of repair work from main dealers, the worst of which was actually a Ford Fiesta I had repaired by Dagenham Motors in Gillingham. Do you really want me to quote all the cars I've seen repaired?

If that's what you have to do to justify your comment, then go ahead, but I have a hunch that you haven't experienced enough repairs to know "how shoddy the majority of main dealers are", which is what you claimed. By all means retract your claim - I won't bear any grudge; but if you continue to claim that you know something that I think you can't possibly know, then you may expect me to keep asking you to justify it.

And for the guy who got the ABH, his insurance company were in the process of making investigations last I heard, but as it's going to cost them a fair bit in legal fees alone, they're going to want to try and gain some of their expenses back. I can let you know when I do though?

You said "stick" - I was merely asking what that meant.

 

[MrTurner]

What a to55er. If you read my own OP, you'll see that I offered information based on my experiences, which is what Rolo asked for. I also said to give his insurer a ring.

You really need to get out more. I work as an analyst so 'could' sit and strip your posts to pieces and point out exactly where you have mis-informed, or, where you have mis-read what I have written, but I won't. I'll stick by my OP on this thread and leave it at that.

Good friendly forum, love it.

 

[Softus]

What a to55er.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/ad hominem

If you read my own OP, you'll see that I offered information based on my experiences, which is what Rolo asked for. I also said to give his insurer a ring.

I don't have, and never have had, any issue or disagreement with your first post on this topic.

You really need to get out more.

Thank you. I've been out today between 9.00am and 7.30pm, met several new people and had an enjoyable lunch, which would appear to have nothing to do with the fact that many of your claims and assertions are wrong and/or groundless.

I work as an analyst so 'could' sit and strip your posts to pieces and point out exactly where you have mis-informed, or, where you have mis-read what I have written, but I won't.

Oh, I think we all know the real reason for you avoiding answers to any questions about your comments.