Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • I would say so yes but ofcourse only in the years the charged it not running till today.
    • please complete this:     and scan up the PCN bothsides to one multipage pdf read upload   dx  
    • Must satisfy POFA if they want to ground Keeper Liability, so no Keeper liability, their RoboClaims always try to sue both as if they can jointly and severally, but the Courts should be looking at the was Driver or Keeper and chuck the claim out for being vague, but they don't  They might if POFA fails and they know they are onto a loser, might have a last gasp and try to rely on Elliott v Loake a criminal case so not applicable to a Civil claim, and CPS v AJH Films, again not applicable as is about employer/employee, they will do this to try to get someone to cough up before a case they know they are going to lose to salvage what they have already paid ou to go to court.  I would delete the  line   As the keeper of the vehicle, I decline as is my right to name the driver (s) at this time"  That is an oblique reference to the duty to name driver in a Criminal case, and is the Elloitt v Loake scenario.   Others will have better ideas, but lloking decent.
    • Good morning request sent off yesterday to moriarty law  but today got this load of tosh  Combine Jul 17, 2019.pdf
    • In response to your question, I have a copy of the title deeds showing ownership and also the leases. No idea what to do with that info though!   I should be most grateful if you would review the attached brief draft defence on page 1. The page 2 thoughts are a work in progress.   The POFA point is weak in my opinion, but having read a lot of analysis of the requirements, I haven't managed to come up with anything beefy.   I should be grateful for any ideas on that, as it seems like a failure to follow procedure would be a strong defence.   Also it asks for the driver's details on the PCN and then the claim states the Defendant was the registered keeper and/or driver, but I don't really understand whether there's a point of defence there.    DRAFT DEFENCE 1)      The claimant has failed to prove that VCS had a contract with the landowner (The West London Property Corporation Ltd.) in August 2015, and therefore failed to show either a legitimate interest in controlling parking at the Berkeley Precinct, or the authorisation to make charges on their own behalf, for any overstay in the carpark, including for first-time offenders (relevant to Tesco lease). (no response to CPR 31.14 request delivered and signed for at 10.32a.m. on 9th July) 2)      The claimant has failed to prove that VCS obtained a planning permit from the Sheffield Planning Department under the Town and Country Planning Act 2007 (also requested in my CPR 31.14 letter) and that there were prominent signs in existence at that time, showing clearly the terms and conditions for parking and the charge payable for any breach. Therefore, the three elements of offer, acceptance and consideration required for a contract were not met, and no contract existed. 3)      The claimant failed to issue the PCN in the timescale required under the Protection of Freedoms Act 2012 for keeper liability and, allowing for the 2 day delivery time afforded to Royal Mail, it arrived a day later than the 14 day deadline. The parking company has not met the keeper liability requirements and therefore keeper liability does not apply. The parking company can therefore only pursue the driver. As the keeper of the vehicle, I decline, as is my right, to provide the name of the driver(s) at the time. As the parking company have neither named the driver(s) nor provided any evidence as to who the driver(s) were, I submit I am not liable to any charge.    
  • Our picks

unclebulgaria67

Discussion thread - non fault accidents, who to claim from ?

style="text-align:center;"> Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 878 days.

If you are trying to post a different story then you should start your own new thread. Posting on this thread is likely to mean that you won't get the help and advice that you need.

If you are trying to post information which is relevant to the story in this thread then please flag it up to the site team and they will allow you to post.

Thank you

Recommended Posts

I suspect you are right. It seems to me that there is a political campaign here.

 

You are required by law to insure a motor vehicle you drive on the public highway. That, of course, involves an assessment of risk but it is surely unfair to take into account anything that does not represent a risk.

 

If you were insuring the car you and your wife drive you might accept a perceived additional risk without details of the two incidents in which your wife was involved. Was it entirely the 3rd party's fault? etc. But on a vehicle only you drive and you have had no incidents or accidents, it seems to me that they are including a risk that does not exist merely in order to increase their revenue. I think they should be forced by law to justify their increased premium. But that's something Parliament would have to address.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We should start a petition.

How many signatures do we need to force a discussion in parliament?

500k?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

At 10,000 signatures you get a response from the government. At 100,000 signatures your petition will be considered for a debate in Parliament

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Need to get started then.

How many active members do we have on cag?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

i appreciate your comment anyway Aitken, lawyer or not, something you may have tried that i have not may help, but i spoke to soon, insurance company were on the phone today, driver that hit me, their insurance wants me to accept a 50/50 grrrrrrrr is their no end in sight lol, so now i will send an email to my insurance giving them 2 weeks to sort this out, or i want it to go to court

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you want it to go to County Court (Sheriff Court in Scotland) you will probably have to take it over yourself.

 

If your claim is less than a certain amount, £5000 in England last time I looked, you can use the Small Claims procedure and in England do it via an on-line procedure called Moneyclaim online.

 

If the defendant wishes to challenge your claim, it will probably end up actually in a court before a District Judge (Sheriff in Scotland), no jury.

 

You will need to gather and assess all your evidence but the decision will be made on the “balance of probability” not “beyond all reasonable doubt “ as in a criminal trial.

 

The last time I was in court claiming for damage and injury in a head-on collision (I was stationary on my side of the road too) the insurance company solicitor was so pathetic I burst out laughing.

That really impressed "The Beak”.

He was a pompous old fart but I won anyway although not at that hearing.

 

If you are not confident in that environment you might care to use a solicitor

– solicitor's fees and out of pocket expenses are added to the amount you claim

– assuming you win of course.

 

 

If you chose a solicitor, chose carefully, you don't want to end up with the insurance company's chap from my case. Good luck.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Need to get started then.

How many active members do we have on cag?

 

Not sure how many CAGers we have but put the word out. The petition has to be placed on the Government website.

https://www.gov.uk/petition-government

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm in the throes of claiming compensation following an accident in December 2015, when a 'kid' drove out of a side road and hit me. He immediately got out and said 'sorry, that was all my fault'. My car, an Alfa, was classed a write-off so I bought it back and had it repaired.

 

Since the accident, I've suffered severe back pain and spent 2 months bed-bound. I've had an interim payment of £1,000 but it seems to be taking an extremely long time to reach a settlement. I am insured for legal fees so hope all this won't affect either my premiums or no-claim bonus.

 

It's my first accident after 52 years of driving and, having lost my husband of 50 years, I have nobody I can discuss this with. Am I wrong in thinking this is taking a very long time and is there any way I can speed things up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'm in the throes of claiming compensation following an accident in December 2015, when a 'kid' drove out of a side road and hit me. He immediately got out and said 'sorry, that was all my fault'. My car, an Alfa, was classed a write-off so I bought it back and had it repaired.

 

Since the accident, I've suffered severe back pain and spent 2 months bed-bound. I've had an interim payment of £1,000 but it seems to be taking an extremely long time to reach a settlement. I am insured for legal fees so hope all this won't affect either my premiums or no-claim bonus.

 

It's my first accident after 52 years of driving and, having lost my husband of 50 years, I have nobody I can discuss this with. Am I wrong in thinking this is taking a very long time and is there any way I can speed things up.

 

A claim with injury I pursued, to which I referred earlier, took three years to be settled but then I'm a snotty nosed, persistent nuisance when I don't get what I want and I know I'm right. I can't say whether that was typical or no and part of the time was taken up arguing about Diminution of Value (they started saying it didn't apply - I said it did and wanted £1300 – I eventually had to settle for only £1295), however, a lot of it was arguments over the injuries suffered by my wife and me.

In injury claims the losing side pays all the legal fees so your insurance company will not be out of pocket.

However I would be careful about legal expense coverage, it is usually cost limited so insurance companies can sometimes try to limit activity and that can be to the litigant's (your) disadvantage. Just keep an eye on them and demand to be kept informed of what is happening. Lawyers are very good a spending other people's money. Win or lose – they get paid unless you have a no-win, no-fee deal but you only get one of these if it's a dead cert.

Good luck

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This is very helpful. Thank you.

 

I have posted a copy of this on the forum front page as well. Please let me know if that is not OK with you.

 

Is that where I've just been ? Slightly annoyed to see the same post here as it means you've made me do unnecessary work :(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just to clear up a few points.

When you make a claim your claim is against the other party NOT his/her insurer.

You are almost certainly required to report the incident to your insurer - it will be in your terms and conditions.

Accident management companies might well be of assistance but remember they are commercil organisations and their objective it to make money and it will probably be from you.

 

To be clear - Please note I am not a lawyer - just an ordinary "OIK" who wonn't let the them grind me down. The following is from my personal experience.

 

I have delt with traffic accidents myself a few times. The most important thing to do is record everything from the moment the accident happens onwards. Time, date, location, 3rd party name, address, vehicle make, model, colour and registration mark. Record what happened with as many pictures as will show the aftermath and the location.

Report the incident to your insurer stressing that "THIS IS NOT A CLAIM". Take copies of any documentation you send. If you report via the telephone try to record the call (you can get good recording aps for your smartphone) - follow it up with a confirming e-mail or letter.

1 Get 2 or 3 estimates for the repair of your car. Use repariers you trust if you can. You are NOT obliged to use their repairer - remember they might be pressured to cut costs in your repair which might result in low quality work.

If you need a car - hire one but keep to a car of equivalent standard. You will be required to keep expenses reasonable - if you don't and end up in court you might be accused of "milking" the claim and have it reduced. If you can do without hiring a car do so as you will have to fund it until you claim and that will demonstrate your committment to keeping the costs down.

2 Write to the third party and tell them you intend to claim from them. Include what you intend to claim (money) but explain that it might rise if/when other "heads of claim" become clear.

 

You might have to communicate with their insurance company or even solicitor. That's ok and if you keep rocords of EVERTHING and are being reasonable you have little to fear. Once the initial flurry of activity is over, which you would be faced with even if you claimed through your insurer or a Claim Company, the activity will die down.

 

Be persistent and consistent, you are already being fair - they will try to wear you down with delays and objections. Remember that the job of a "loss adjuster" is to save the ompany money which means reduce your claim.

 

If things are going on too long then give them a deadline for agreement/payment before you issue a claim in the County Court. If they continue to prevaricate - do it.

 

One word of warning. If your "claim" goes past your insurance renewal date, be careful that your insurance company does not attempt to reduce your No Claims Discount on the basis that you have made a claim - you know - the claim you made when you stressed "This is not a claim". I personaly think that this is fraud - demanding money (higher premium) on the basis of a falsehood (you made a claim when you didn't).

The did this to me and I was a day away from reporting the fraud to the prosecution authorities when they capitulated. The Ombusdman was on no use at all - they supported the insurance companies in their fraud.

 

Sorry it's a bit long winded - I hope it helps someone. Please excuse any typos.

 

Remenber I am NOT a lawyer so this is NOT legal advice - if in doubt consult a solicitor but choose carefully and be clear about what you want them to do.

 

Sounds pretty spot on to me.

 

TOTALLY agree with contact the driver rather than ins co. first (BH what a horrible pun !) Prob. keeping ins cos out of it on both sides would benefit both !

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
King

 

What you should do in that situation is shop around, but away from the internet and Insurers. If you call Insurance Brokers with all of the information, they tend to have access to a wider selection of underwriters. Also they might not have the same IT systems with all of the extra loadings applied.

 

With Internet business you tend to see Insurers taking a more basic cautious approach, with these 2 non fault accidents attracting a largish loading being applied. Also if you phone insurers directly, they are likely to take the same approach applying a loading. If you manage to find brokers who are able to quote you a better deal, then it is worth the cost of a few phone calls. There was a consumer programme on awhile ago, where out of about 10 quote examples, in more than half of them, it was Brokers who obtained best priced option. People are so fixated on internet ways of saving them money, that they forget the old high street Brokers.

 

Insurers do apply loadings for non fault accidents, because they believe that this is an indication of the risk that the person is attracting. Whether it is bad luck or the area where they are living being more risky, the Insurers use this sign of a higher risk to charge a higher premium.

 

I've 'forgotten' brokers on purpose - having paid them (Time to Insure, southampton) for insurance I never got ! Got the cover note but never the full insurance :(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Such it the nightmare of dealing with Insurance companies stewieboi. They will always / often reduce their payout by wearing you down After all they have nothing to lose and everything to gain. I'm afraid it demonstrates the value of gathering as much evidence as posible and a witness if you can.

 

Having done that it still took me 3 years to settle a head on collison claim. I missed a bit though - I forgot to include interest - you live and learn. I now have a dash-cam on my car. Staggering what it picks up - makes your toes curl sometimes.

 

If you have accepted the settlement as "full and final" you are probably screwed. If not I would go back and claim "diminution of value". I like to call it worsement - goes nicely with the insurance companies' claim lowering "betterment" (not the banking one). "Diminution of value" is the difference between the value of your vehicle immediately before the collision and after it is repaired. Even if it is expertly repaired its value is still lower.

 

I am not a lawyer so cannot give legal advice.

 

Also claim for 'loss of use' - this on top of hire car costs !

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Need to get started then.

How many active members do we have on cag?

 

Road to nowhere methinks.

 

I think the govt likes ins cos [causing problems] us. All part of the whole financial structure of the country - in paying millionaires lots.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If you want it to go to County Court (Sheriff Court in Scotland) you will probably have to take it over yourself.

 

If your claim is less than a certain amount, £5000 in England last time I looked, you can use the Small Claims procedure and in England do it via an on-line procedure called Moneyclaim online.

 

If the defendant wishes to challenge your claim, it will probably end up actually in a court before a District Judge (Sheriff in Scotland), no jury.

 

You will need to gather and assess all your evidence but the decision will be made on the “balance of probability” not “beyond all reasonable doubt “ as in a criminal trial.

 

The last time I was in court claiming for damage and injury in a head-on collision (I was stationary on my side of the road too) the insurance company solicitor was so pathetic I burst out laughing.

That really impressed "The Beak”.

He was a pompous old fart but I won anyway although not at that hearing.

 

If you are not confident in that environment you might care to use a solicitor

– solicitor's fees and out of pocket expenses are added to the amount you claim

– assuming you win of course.

 

 

If you chose a solicitor, chose carefully, you don't want to end up with the insurance company's chap from my case. Good luck.

 

My story/ies later - but I got a solicitor involved - who got me a crap settlement offer - then I noticed the big ad on his wall was for the other's ins co ! The full entertaining story in a bit...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My story...

 

Driving home from work, ahead of me a significant hill with a side road on it. Getting speed up for the hill (I was in a Sherpa minibus - not great on hills!). Noticed car at the side road wanting to join main road. I was held up by car in front of me. Got to bottom of hill, car was still waiting to come out of side road. I was trying to go as fast as I could - and catching the car in front of me. By the time we got to the junction, I was almost on his bumper - as he turned off onto the side road. I looked up and the waiting car had just pulled out less than a car length in front of me and I hit the rear o/s door.

 

No personal injury. I got his details and let him leave the scene. Police informed & attended. His excuse was that he thought I was going to turn off too. !!! My Dad came and we towed the van back home. Dad repaired it at a cost of £1760. Sent bill to other driver - who refused to pay. Got solicitor involved. Eventually sol got me an offer of £1250 and asked re his bill: £200 while I 'thought about' the offer.

 

I left the area (180 miles). I met someone who said : forget sols - use the courts - so I did.

 

I put a claim in for cost of repairs, loss of use, interest & sols fee totalling £2200

 

His insurer wrote back asking for me to prove it was his fault. The next day, got another letter asking how much I wanted - clearly the firm had checked and realised it had already made an offer - hence had accepted fault.

 

I got the £2200.

 

That was my first case in the county court.

 

My next case in the County Court was my solicitor suing me for his bill - which had miraculously now more than doubled to 420.

 

However, a week before the hearing he withdrew his claim.

 

I then reported him to the Office for the Supervision of Solicitors (now SRA) - so I didn't pay him and he got a bollocking from the OSS - re undisclosed conflict of interest - as he was advertising the oppo's insurance co !

 

Conclusions:

  • Claim for all your losses - include loss of use & interest @ 8% (enforceable via the court)
  • Don't use lawyers, you just can't trust them
  • Do everything yourself
  • Communicate with the driver at fault prior to his insurance co
  • Involve the courts quickly - after warning other drive & ins co of deadlines you've set they've missed

 

It's a bit of effort but I think well worth it.

As for notifying your ins co. ? well, doesn't seem like a good idea does it !

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Also claim for 'loss of use' - this on top of hire car costs !

 

Loss of use (of your car) is a perfectly acceptable head of claim but I suspect it is usually either loss of use or car hire. Of course you can have both if the car hire does not cover all the time you are without your own car. It's in the "gift" of the judge if it goes to court.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
My story...

 

Driving home from work, ahead of me a significant hill with a side road on it. Getting speed up for the hill (I was in a Sherpa minibus - not great on hills!). Noticed car at the side road wanting to join main road. I was held up by car in front of me. Got to bottom of hill, car was still waiting to come out of side road. I was trying to go as fast as I could - and catching the car in front of me. By the time we got to the junction, I was almost on his bumper - as he turned off onto the side road. I looked up and the waiting car had just pulled out less than a car length in front of me and I hit the rear o/s door.

 

No personal injury. I got his details and let him leave the scene. Police informed & attended. His excuse was that he thought I was going to turn off too. !!! My Dad came and we towed the van back home. Dad repaired it at a cost of £1760. Sent bill to other driver - who refused to pay. Got solicitor involved. Eventually sol got me an offer of £1250 and asked re his bill: £200 while I 'thought about' the offer.

 

I left the area (180 miles). I met someone who said : forget sols - use the courts - so I did.

 

I put a claim in for cost of repairs, loss of use, interest & sols fee totalling £2200

 

His insurer wrote back asking for me to prove it was his fault. The next day, got another letter asking how much I wanted - clearly the firm had checked and realised it had already made an offer - hence had accepted fault.

 

I got the £2200.

 

That was my first case in the county court.

 

My next case in the County Court was my solicitor suing me for his bill - which had miraculously now more than doubled to 420.

 

However, a week before the hearing he withdrew his claim.

 

I then reported him to the Office for the Supervision of Solicitors (now SRA) - so I didn't pay him and he got a bollocking from the OSS - re undisclosed conflict of interest - as he was advertising the oppo's insurance co !

 

Conclusions:

 

  • Claim for all your losses - include loss of use & interest @ 8% (enforceable via the court)
  • Don't use lawyers, you just can't trust them
  • Do everything yourself
  • Communicate with the driver at fault prior to his insurance co
  • Involve the courts quickly - after warning other drive & ins co of deadlines you've set they've missed

 

 

It's a bit of effort but I think well worth it.

As for notifying your ins co. ? well, doesn't seem like a good idea does it !

 

100% agree well done pmailkeey.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just to clarify a few points about some recent posts.

 

Of course if a third party driver is at fault for an accident, then any legal action regarding liability is normally against them. Sometimes the third party is very helpful in assisting with a claim against their Insurance. This was the point of the original thread post. People are confused when they have a decision to make, when there are two choices. A third party Insurers willing to help with their claim or claiming against their own policy.

 

BUT quite often the third party is not very helpful, even if they had admitted at the scene of an accident that it was their fault. On reflection the third party might decide that it was not 100% their fault. This is why it is so important to collect as much imformation as possible at the scene of an accident. Most people have a phone with a camera, so get taking as many pictures as possible. Not just taking pictures of your car damage, but also the third parties car, the road layout from both directions. If there are independent witnessess, see if you can get their contact information. Check for any CCTV or road traffic cameras at the location, as you might be able to get hold of any video footage. If anyone is injured or refusing to provide their details, then the Police should be called to attend. ( if you check your Insurance policy, there is normally information about what to do in the event of an accident).

 

There will also be situations where the third party driver becomes uncontactable, but you have other vehicles registration number. Using Askmid, you can obtain the third parties Insurance details. You can just leave it to your own Insurers to handle your claim or you can make direct contact with the third parties Insurers. Where fault it is not in dispute, the third parties Insurers can decide to deal with your claim. Also it is possible to issue a court claim against the third party Insurers.

 

Another point has been made about not advising your own Insurers of an accident. Firstly this is a breach of your own Insurance contract. Secondly, if a claim is paid out by a third parties Insurers, your own Insurers may get to find out about the accident via Insurance databases such as Claims underwriting Exchange (CUE). Thirdly, if you tried to avoid Insurers, there is a slight risk that a third party changes their mind after say a few months, that they were not at fault and that they have a personal injury claim they want to pursue. Not sure how your Insurers will feel about dealing with such a claim, if you did not want to involve them previously.


We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Indeed - if there's the slightest chance they will claim it was partly your fault then your insurance needs to know.

 

Loss of use (of your car) is a perfectly acceptable head of claim but I suspect it is usually either loss of use or car hire. Of course you can have both if the car hire does not cover all the time you are without your own car. It's in the "gift" of the judge if it goes to court.

 

From what I remember, no ! (Of course, things may have changed now.) A hire car may only serve the basic purpose and not have features you use - perhaps yours had a tow-ball and the hire car didn't - and what if it did - the reg on your trailer would be wrong - so the hire car cannot be assumed to be a complete alternative as it's so unlikely to be an exact match but more what an ins co gives you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just to clarify a few points about some recent posts.

 

Of course if a third party driver is at fault for an accident, then any legal action regarding liability is normally against them. Sometimes the third party is very helpful in assisting with a claim against their Insurance. This was the point of the original thread post. People are confused when they have a decision to make, when there are two choices. A third party Insurers willing to help with their claim or claiming against their own policy.

 

BUT quite often the third party is not very helpful, even if they had admitted at the scene of an accident that it was their fault. On reflection the third party might decide that it was not 100% their fault. This is why it is so important to collect as much imformation as possible at the scene of an accident. Most people have a phone with a camera, so get taking as many pictures as possible. Not just taking pictures of your car damage, but also the third parties car, the road layout from both directions. If there are independent witnessess, see if you can get their contact information. Check for any CCTV or road traffic cameras at the location, as you might be able to get hold of any video footage. If anyone is injured or refusing to provide their details, then the Police should be called to attend. ( if you check your Insurance policy, there is normally information about what to do in the event of an accident).

 

There will also be situations where the third party driver becomes uncontactable, but you have other vehicles registration number. Using Askmid, you can obtain the third parties Insurance details. You can just leave it to your own Insurers to handle your claim or you can make direct contact with the third parties Insurers. Where fault it is not in dispute, the third parties Insurers can decide to deal with your claim. Also it is possible to issue a court claim against the third party Insurers.

 

Another point has been made about not advising your own Insurers of an accident. Firstly this is a breach of your own Insurance contract. Secondly, if a claim is paid out by a third parties Insurers, your own Insurers may get to find out about the accident via Insurance databases such as Claims underwriting Exchange (CUE). Thirdly, if you tried to avoid Insurers, there is a slight risk that a third party changes their mind after say a few months, that they were not at fault and that they have a personal injury claim they want to pursue. Not sure how your Insurers will feel about dealing with such a claim, if you did not want to involve them previously.

 

Excellent points UncleBulgaria but it is always the third party you sue because it is the third party not you who has the contactual realationship with his/her insurance company. It usually is the case that the insurance company will accept service of the court documentation and act on behalf of their client but the defendant is the insured not the insurer. The insurer will be financially liable unless they can find a "get-out" in which case it is the other party who is liable.

Excellent advice otherwise.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
From what I remember, no ! (Of course, things may have changed now.) A hire car may only serve the basic purpose and not have features you use - perhaps yours had a tow-ball and the hire car didn't - and what if it did - the reg on your trailer would be wrong - so the hire car cannot be assumed to be a complete alternative as it's so unlikely to be an exact match but more what an ins co gives you.

Yes good point. Whatever necessary expense you incur is claimable so if you have to hire a car with a tow hitch then it goes into the claim pot. Claiming loss of use for some convenience features e.g. built in satnav etc might prove an up-hill struggle unless you can show it was a necessary for you. You are however expected to keep claims to a reasonable level.

Your good point demonstrated the necessity of keeping good records.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Excellent points UncleBulgaria but it is always the third party you sue because it is the third party not you who has the contactual realationship with his/her insurance company. It usually is the case that the insurance company will accept service of the court documentation and act on behalf of their client but the defendant is the insured not the insurer. The insurer will be financially liable unless they can find a "get-out" in which case it is the other party who is liable.

Excellent advice otherwise.

 

Please read this thread linked to, in regard to an EU law that can be applied.

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?457871-EU-Law-Rights-of-the-consumer-against-Insurance-Companies

 

Until i was made aware of it, i had a similar opinion to yours.


We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Please read this thread linked to, in regard to an EU law that can be applied.

 

http://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?457871-EU-Law-Rights-of-the-consumer-against-Insurance-Companies

 

Until i was made aware of it, i had a similar opinion to yours.

 

Interesting - I'd didn't know about that.

 

Do you know if there is an equivalent UK statute? I guess it's a moot point whether you can sue the insured or the insurer provided the risk you are claiming against is covered. The difference would be if the risk was not part of the cover. In RTAs it almost certainly would be but it makes an interesting point.

 

Thanks for the info - you live and learn.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Interesting - I'd didn't know about that.

 

Do you know if there is an equivalent UK statute? I guess it's a moot point whether you can sue the insured or the insurer provided the risk you are claiming against is covered. The difference would be if the risk was not part of the cover. In RTAs it almost certainly would be but it makes an interesting point.

 

Thanks for the info - you live and learn.

 

Many of these EU rules are just implemented via a statutory instrument, not an actual bill of Parliament. Bur i don't know which SI is relevant.

 

The person who posted the EU rules deals with the legal side of things and would probably know more about it in terms of current usage,

 

If you think about it, there is a logic to it. Say you had an accident, where the third party was at fault. The third party died a week later due to something unrelated or they left the UK. You were therefore denied the opportunity in suing the third party, but the third party Insurers were still the Insurers under RTA law. The third party Insurers would be the party responsible for dealing with the liability for the accident.


We could do with some help from you.

PLEASE HELP US TO KEEP THIS SITE RUNNING EVERY POUND DONATED WILL HELP US TO KEEP HELPING OTHERS

 

 Have we helped you ...?         Please Donate button to the Consumer Action Group

 

If you want advice on your thread please PM me a link to your thread

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...