Thank you, that's what I had thought.

Some developments - the accident management company offered to settle by paying 50% of their assessor's repair quote (which was almost exactly the same as the quote I had obtained). I would obviously have refused this offer, but when the confirmation letter arrived it appears that the vehicle operators are now claiming several hundred pounds for time off the road and repairs to their vehicle, which is a nonsense. There was already obviously old and unrepaired minor damage to their vehicle's bumper from more than one incident (I took photographs) and the impact simply dented my car, with only the tiniest amount of paint transfer from their vehicle. It's disappointing that someone would behave like this. Does anyone know if I am I able to start legal action without repairing my car, or do I need evidence of a financial loss to recover?

Thanks very much for the responses, it's most helpful. I will request the insurance details from the accident management company and make a request for the CCTV evidence.

Thanks. I'll request the driver's name from his employer (he refused to give it after driving into me).

Thanks for the advice. Re a counterclaim, there was no damage to the other vehicle and nobody was injured - should I still be concerned? I assume I should be taking action against the driver's employer directly, rather than the driver personally or the claims management company.

I'm currently in dispute with a previous insurer who voided my car insurance policy after an accident and am wondering how to proceed without their representation. The accident happened when my car was driven into whilst stationary at a busy junction - I was unable to stop a witness and the driver of the other vehicle has refused to accept liability. The driver's employers are represented by an accident management company who I have been corresponding with. They have details of the accident (I explained that I strongly refute their client's version of events and would be accepting no responsibility), together with a written estimate for repairs to my car. An assessor has inspected the damage to my car (which is still not repaired after five months) on their behalf. The accident management company are still maintaining that their client is disputing any liability. The client's vehicles are fitted with video cameras which should show clearly that my vehicle was stationary at the time of the accident, but I have been told that footage is not available for the date of the accident (they were unable to explain why). Should I be instructing a solicitor to take the vehicle operating company to court? Are any other options available to me?

My current underwriters in respect of the vehicle have agreed that the situation will not lead to either a cancellation or a voiding of my policy (although they cannot provide cover at the "linked" address). I hope that this will strengthen my case in the complaint that I'm preparing. I'm also quite surprised that the underwriter who has voided my previous policy is in part basing their decision on incorrect information sourced from a well-known public directory website ...

Thank you, that's very useful. The most annoying issue about all of this is that I'm not even trying to claim from my own insurance ...

The car is insured for Social, Domestic and Pleasure - no commuting or business use at all. After reading around, I'm far more concerned about the fact that I have had cover voided and will be punished by future insurers accordingly, rather than the minor damage to the car.

Thanks for the quick response - my broker has told me that they can't (and won't) help, I will have to try to speak to someone more senior. If this is such an important issue you would think that it would be a simple matter of course for any broker or insurer to enquire about linked addresses before taking your money.

A car of mine was recently driven into whilst stationary. Although the damage is minor, I had comprehensive cover for the vehicle and (after various wild goose chases with the recommended accident management companies - not interested in my business as I didn't want a hire car) instructed my insurers to pursue the 3rd party at fault so that I could repair my car. I took out the policy via a broker, but they apparently do not correspond with the insurer on my behalf. On sending in the usual documents, the insurer queried the fact that the address on my driving licence was different to the address where the car is insured. As I split my time backwards and forwards between the two addresses and have various correspondence going to each, I explained this and thought no more of it. It now appears that the insurers have retrospectively voided my policy (I'm currently covered by a different company) because I failed to disclose a so-called "linked" address. I have never previously been asked about any other addresses I am "linked" to, and insure the car at the address where it is usually kept, as I was asked to when taking out the policy. This is understandably very worrying - not only are the insurers refusing to deal with the claim, it appears that I may incur higher insurance costs in future because of their decision. As I have never withheld any information and have always answered all questions asked fully and accurately, is it not unreasonable for the insurer to behave in this way? Should the broker have asked me about any linked addresses when I first took out a policy with them several years ago? This is my first contact with insurers in respect of a claim and hasn't been a pleasant experience - any advice is gratefully received.