Looking like a result with Swiftcover, and if it goes through OK, full marks to them. Latest quote now without the courtesy car and legal expenses is back to £210 which is only £4 more than the original renewal notice. A result ..... but whew it must have taken several hundred quidsworth of my time. Mike

Perhaps Mossy, but the owner of the other Lexus has listed the parts replaced, and the list is identical to my quote and since these all needed painting on both cars, I can't see that the cost to fix his should be 137% more expensive. But I will see if he can get a detailed breakdown from UK Assistance By the way mine was fixed for much less than £1600. The 3rd party who hit me was a garage employee and they got the parts at trade discount and used a cheaper body shop. Did a very good job too. Mike

My Lexus LS was slid into and the 3rd party paid for the complete repair. The quote from the Lexus main dealer was £1600 including parts labour and VAT. Coincidentally a member of the Lexus forum had an accident resulting in exactly the same damage and I mean exactly the same. But his went through insurance and was handled by a company called UK Assistance who ordered all the parts from the same Lexus dealer who I got my quote from. The total bill to this guy was £3,800 - paid for by his insurer. What are our insurance companies up to - surely they are in a position to ensure that they (and therefore 'we') don't get ripped off. Mike

Hey I might be getting somewhere. This is from Adam in the claims department: "Thank you for your email I have spoken to the file handler of your claim and advised that all repairs have been completed privately. They have now closed the claim for you. " I'll give them a few hours then check if the file has been updated. Hopefully the renewals department will be just as efficient. Mike

Mossey - hope you are still reading this. I have been trying to get alternative quotes prior to the Swiftcover renewal on 19th Feb, and despite me explaining what has happened other insurers say they can only quote me on the basis of the 3 yrs ncd that Swiftcover have got me logged as. So it looks like they have got me over a barrel, and their plan (if they are that clever) is not to remove this spurious 'fault claim' until after the renewal date. If I am being extremely generous and warm hearted I can see that it is possible that they may think I'm lying and that a 3rd party claim may drop through their door any minute. But .... and this is the question for Mossey ... might they have internal systems that allow them to believe me, close the supposed claim, but re-open it if indeed a 3rd party does attempt to claim. Of course they might argue that it would be difficult to get the extra money out of me, but surely they would be in the position of power and be able to cancel the policy unless I paid up. And a connected question - if they wished to be cynical, could they keep open the 'claim' indefinitely? Mike

Hope I'm not boring you guys but I'm using this thread to record the sequence of events as this unfolds (as well as inviting your valued opinions of course) OK - got confirmation of the ncd rates from Swiftcover for each of the years, and using the same arguments I have used in the post above means they used an undiscounted premium of £515 first time round, and £640 after I had informed them of the accident - in other words they seem to want to load my basic premium by £125 for a not-my-fault accident. Also they have 'kindly' confirmed that I won't be able to take out protected ncd bonus as I don't have 4 or more years ncd on my policy .... you've got to laugh haven't you Mike

It's no help to you now Jim, but it's why I'm insisting (or trying to) that everything is done by email. I have been trying to report an accident that did not result in a claim (the other party fixed my car) to Swiftcover and it's turning into the kind of nightmare that yours has. In the meantime I reported it to my mortorbike insurer and during the course of the to-and-fro emails it was obvious that they had not covered my bike properly. They told me so in a rather high-handed fashion until I pointed out that all the original negotitaion had been done by email and they had agreed to all the stuff I'd told them. It just wouldn't have been corrected if we were both relying on telephone conversations. Another thing - don't know whether you found this - but at least 3 people at Swiftcover have rung me to go through the details of the accident (fair enough) but on each occasion they have insisted on asking me every question related to the original insurance (eg any motoring offences, any accidents any other cars, is it garaged) .... I am convinced they are hoping I'll contradict myself in one of their recorded conversations and can later point to this in a refusal of a claim. I'm thinking of getting a financial journalist involved in this scandal - keep posting your story on here, as the more examples we have the better case we may have to make to the ombudsman. Apart from the extra money this is costing me, it's the waste of my time that is frustrating. Mike

Thought y'all might be interested in the following calculation. There is an understanding that a not-at-fault accident might affect your premium because there is evidence that people who are involved in such an accident are more likely to be in an at-fault accident in the next 12 months. Well - as you can see Swiftcover have hiked my renewal from £206 to £357 and implied that it's because (for now) they have reduced my NCD from 5 to 3 years. BUT .... from what I can find NCD is typically 30% for the first year, 40 for second, 50 for 3rd, 60 for 4th and 65% for the 5th and subsequent years. If you plug these figures into a simple calculator you can work out what the undiscounted premium is. So before they knew someone had bumped me my undiscounted premium was £588 but now it's £714. If this is true - apart from being a scandal - surely if insurance is aimed at putting me back into the same position I was before the event, I need in effect 5 years of this difference in premium from the guilty party. In my case as well as him fixing my car he should have given me about £600 cash to pay for my increased premiums. Mike

I'm afraid the story is getting worse: This is what my space in Swiftcover is now showing: Claim Number: 12345 Policy Number: 123456 Incident Date: 29/12/2009 Insured: Mike Vehicle: Lexus Registration: ABC 250 Claim Type: Accident (hit) Current Status: Open Liability Position: Fault (Admitted) - NCD affected Excesses Compulsory: Voluntary: £250.00 £250.00

Thanks Sam ... I'm taking the view at the moment that they aren't being dishonest and that it's just their debatably stupid systems that are creating this. From their point of view - I could be lying and a claim from a 3rd party might drop through their door after I had paid the lower premium. This is what their claims guy has now said by email: "Your file clearly states that you are not claiming and that the repairs have been completed, privately, between your self and the third party. We need to keep the file open for a limited duration in case there is any claim made against you, again this is standard practice for every incident involving a third party. Once the file has been allocated to a file handler, they will review it and decide if they can close the file. " .... so I'll give them the benefit of the doubt for now. Best scenario is that they send me a revised revised renewal form prior to 20th Feb, which reverts back to the original premium. Worst scenario is that they continue to regard it as a claim, in which case after escalating it within Swiftcover, I will indeed take it to the ombudsman. Mike

I feel like a bit of a rant: If insurance companies behave like this when innocent parties try to comply with the terms and conditions of their policy, then they will encourage people not to comply. Surely it's in their interest to encourage the reporting of no-fault bumps by guaranteeing that the owner will not get penalised (or bogged down in administration), because this will encourage people to keep minor bumps completely out of the insurance system. Of course there is another more cynical explanation. If the insurers penalise people for reporting no-fault accidents, it will encourage the owner to breach their insurance contract which will mean that insurers will be able to wriggle out of any subsequent claims if they discover the first bump. Mike

ha ha - guess what - a new renewal notice has just come through from Swiftcover reducing my NCB from 5+ years to 3 and increasing the amount I need to pay from £206 to £357. Mike

The insurer has quoted a ridculously low refund value for cancelling a policy on a motorcycle we have sold. There's about 3 months to run, and the extra year NCB would be worth having if we leave it to run it's course. But are we allowed to do this? Thanks Mike

can I ask a related but more general question. we all hear of claims being denied because someone hadn't told the insurer that they had fitted (say) an aerofoil body kit, and I think I'm interpreting the posts on here to mean that damage to the owner's property might be denied, but if the guy slammed into someone else, the 3rd party's costs would be paid by the insurer. If this is what happens, how often does your own insurer come after you for what they have had to pay out for the 3rd party? Mike

Just sent this to Adam: "Hi Adam, I realise that the text you have sent me below is from a template but I am not sure how many times I need to repeat this, my report is not a claim. The information is provided to you for RECORD PURPOSES ONLY because I am obliged to under the terms and conditions of my policy. The matter has been dealt with by the 3rd party and they have organised and paid for the repairs to my car. Could you talk to your claims manager and point out that as of tomorrow (28th January) the accident will have been 30 days old, and you should be able to close your file. Kind regards"