Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 162 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like

Highways Agency Claim On Car Insurance


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5543 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

Briefly, my daughter drove up a roadside barrier one night.

:eek:

A passing motorist called an ambulance (thankfully she was unhurt) and the police also attended and took her insurance details to call out her breakdown company, who recovered the car.

No other vehicle was involved, and there was no prosecution - in fact the police officer told her not to feel bad about it - it was 'always happening' along this stretch of road.

As the car was an old banger, it was only insured third party, so she made no claim on the insurance.

 

Three months down the line, the insurance company have written to her informing her that the Highways Agency are claiming the cost of repairing the barrier and therefore she has lost her no claims bonus.

 

Has anyone any advice on whether this can be challenged?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest Old_andrew2018

No IMHO it is a perfectly acceptable levy on your daughters insurance.

My own brother was billed after he caused damage to a motorway barrier as the result of a blow out, as with your daughter he escaped injury.

 

Andy

Edited by old_andrew2007
spelling
Link to post
Share on other sites

The Agency have had their property damaged by negligent driving. Why should it be challenged?

 

It will have to go as a claim on your daughter's policy. You could pay the costs back, but I would think the amounts involved will be quite substantial and prohibitive.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest Old_andrew2018

I agree with gyzmo costs for repair should come from the person/individual involved in the incident, it will come from insurance, so the only penalty in the case of your Daughter is a loss of NCB.

 

Andy

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the replies suggest that responders feel my daughter should shirk her responsibility for damage she might have done to the barrier.

 

I would draw attention to the fact that four months after the event, the barrier is damaged in 6 seperate places along this 8/10ths of a mile stretch of road, and to the words of the attending officer as quoted in my original post.

 

Who is to say who damaged the barrier and how much of it is to be repaired at my daughter's expense?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Due to financial constraints, the vast majority of Highway Authorities have been seeking reimbursement for damages to their infrastructure no different to, for example, a householder who may have their garden wall demolished.

 

There doesn't appear to be any dispute that your daughter caused some damage but you appear to be querying the extent. Either way, the Insurance company would end up paying something and it would still mean your daughter losing her NCB.

 

Also, it's worth bearing in mind that a large proportion of the costs would involve traffic management and these wouldn't be substantially reduced (if at all) if the repair was for 1 metre or 10.

If you feel I've helped then by all means click my star to the left...a simple "thank you" costs nothing! ;)

 

Restons MBNA -v- WelshMam

 

MBNA Cards

 

CitiCard

M&S and More

Link to post
Share on other sites

The way I see it, she has two choices - pay out of her own pocket or claim through the insurance. As for how much, that's something she's arguing and if she took no details or pictures of the damage she caused at the time, she will have a hard time proving what costs she alone is/was responsible for. Live and learn, life's a school of hard knocks I'm afraid.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest Old_andrew2018
I think the replies suggest that responders feel my daughter should shirk her responsibility for damage she might have done to the barrier. On the contrary I cant see any post suggesting your daughter should not pay, all state quite the opposite she should pay, although this is through her insurance.

 

I would draw attention to the fact that four months after the event, the barrier is damaged in 6 seperate places along this 8/10ths of a mile stretch of road, and to the words of the attending officer as quoted in my original post.

 

Who is to say who damaged the barrier and how much of it is to be repaired at my daughter's expense?

 

I did not see any reference in your first post to your Daughter being billed directly, I read it that the loss of NCB was the problem.

I suppose it is possible for your Daughter to be billed however IMHO it is unlikely, if she is then you would need to take advice.

 

Andy

Edited by old_andrew2007
typo spotted
Link to post
Share on other sites

Your daughter was in charge of the car when it collided with a barrier, liability rests with your daughter for any damage she caused by her negligent driving.

 

The Council are quite correct and within their rights to look to your daughter (or her insurers) for compensation.

 

Your best course of action is to let the insurers sort it out and then if you or your daughter wants to preserve the NCB you pay back to the insurer what they have paid the Council.

 

Any comments made at the roadside by the Police about 'it always happening' does not in any way alter the fact that your daughter is liable for the damage she caused.

 

Mossy

Link to post
Share on other sites

Any comments made at the roadside by the Police about 'it always happening' does not in any way alter the fact that your daughter is liable for the damage she caused.

 

I agree. The Police are renowed for blaming accidents in winter on black ice as soon as they see any frost on parked cars when infact, the road temperature is considerably higher than air temperature!!

If you feel I've helped then by all means click my star to the left...a simple "thank you" costs nothing! ;)

 

Restons MBNA -v- WelshMam

 

MBNA Cards

 

CitiCard

M&S and More

Link to post
Share on other sites

If it's any help I have a relative who works for the HA and it's part of his job to go out checking the barriers on their territory every day. This means they troll the motorways looking for damage on a regular basis. It's unlikely that your daughter would be billed for the damage caused by others as they'd probably already have a record of it. If in doubt maybe the police would have a record of exactly where the damage she caused occurred.

 

As far as we're aware they don't bill you for everything they possibly can but if damage has been done it has to be repaired to protect other road users, therefore whoever caused the damage should pay. Also it's like the other post said, to protect the guys fixing it they have to put traffic management into place, cones trucks etc and this costs money too. It's not a case of ripping you off or anything, but it could well be more than you'd want to pay yourself as opposed to losing the NCB.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...