Insurrance voided from inception during the claim

[el foul 0]

Hello There,

I wonder if anyone out there had similar experience and how you dealt with it. I appreciate your help in this matter

I was hit by a car that was reversing onto the main road. It was clearly his fault. he did not see me driving passed him.

I called my insurance and give them his details which they checked on MID insurance and confirmed that he was insured. They contacted his insurance and submitted the claim. my car was written off due to extensive damage. After few days, the third party insurer got back to us saying that the driver disputed the claim and that his car was parked properly on parking bay, unattended and no one was in the car. But I had evidence in photographs showing that he is lying and what he reported to his insurer was misleading . And we submitted the proofs.

Midway the claim, for some reasons, his insurer voided from inception his cover and they wont pursue my claim saying that he has got no insurance despite we have proof that he had at the time of the accident. I am confused what to do as my insurance company is saying the same thing as his insurer and they won't pursue the claim either.. Even though I have update emails that they were talking to them.

I really appreciate your help if anyone can shed some light on this. if you want I can give more back ground on the above

Many thanks

 

 

[BankFodder 1,448]

I don't understand why your insurer won't pursue it. Are you insured for this kind of risk? Presumably they will pay you the value of your vehicle because that was insured?

So I understand that in fact they are saying that because the other driver was not insured, they will pay you the cost of your written off vehicle that you will have to bear the entire loss of excess and no claims bonus. Is this correct?

Please will you tell us who your insurer is and also the name of the other parties insurer.

[Ethel Street 1,394]

If you have comprehensive cover which covers you for the damage to your vehicle then your insurer should pay you the value of your car. It's irrelevant whether the third party has valid insurance. Has your insurer paid you? 

 

What's likely to have happened is that the insurer of the other car driver discovered that the driver had lied when they took out their policy, didn't disclose convictions or something. So they have voided the policy. 

 

However, in principle if it is established that the other driver was fully responsible and liable for the damage to your car you should be able to recover your excess from the MIB (Motor Insurers Bureau). You can research that here:

 

https://www.mib.org.uk/making-a-claim/claiming-against-an-uninsured-driver/

 

The MIB rules for uninsured driver claims mean that if your insurer pays you for the value of your car it cannot recover that from the MIB.

Edited July 3 by Ethel Street

[el foul 0]

Thank you for the reply. Much appreciated.

I have a third party insurance and no claim bonus - I lost my 15 NCB as I did a two years taxi driver and apparently you loose them all once you revert back to no business insurance.

When I reported the accident to my insurance company they forwarded me to another claim company which took it upon themselves to collect the cost of the written off of my car plus any other cost. They were talking to his insurance (the driver who hit my car) through email, phone etc. but refused to admit liability as the driver said that he was not reversing at all and was not even there. However after sending photographs proving otherwise, his insurer (for reasons unknown to us) decided to void his insurance from the day he purchased it before the collision happened and ignore the claim. they refuse to tell us why they took this decision to void his insurance.

another thing is when the accident happened, after few days I received a letter from police saying that I committed hit and run offence but after submitting my evidence, they exonerated me and give me all his details and his insurance details to pursue a case against him.

 

I hope the above make sense. please let me know if you want more info

Thank you so much for your help

[BankFodder 1,448]

Of course you could bring an action against the other driver. You have his details and you could begin by searching the land registry to see whether his house is owned by him. That will only take you 10 minutes or so online and you can come back here with the answer.

The second thing is that if his insurer has simply withdrawn cover only because he lied to them then I would say that they are acting unfairly to you and that gives you a way of taking action against them if you wanted.

[el foul 0]

Thank you for your help.

I have checked and the house is only rented unfortunately. I will try to get more info as to why/reasons they voided his insurance and I will definitely keep you updated. Much appreciated

[Ethel Street 1,394]

You won't be told why they voided his insurance. His insurers would breach GDPR/Data Protection Law if they told you. You aren't entitled to know. There's no reason why you need to know anyway, it's irrelevant to your claim against the third party driver. In any case the answer would almost certainly be because he did not disclose relevant information when he took out the policy, non-disclosure of claims and/or convictions probably. You have an alternative route, via the MIB uninsured drivers claims procedure.

 

You could as suggested by BF take out a small claims court action against him. In this case it shouldn't matter whether he has any money, you'd secure the judgment to enable you to recover it through the MIB scheme. 

Edited July 3 by Ethel Street

[BankFodder 1,448]

Yes – very good point. Obtaining a judgement would assure you of making a claim against the MIB. It's probably a fairly necessary first step.

I think you should probably start preparing a letter of claim now. Don't get involved in any other negotiation but simply send a 14 day letter. However you really should check that he and his residential address. If he doesn't then although at least you will have your judgement and that will give you access to the MIB, it does mean that it is unlikely that you will be to enforce against him

[BankFodder 1,448]

In terms of suing somebody else's insurer under ICOBS because they have treated you unfairly, even though they wouldn't be entitled to provide you directly with information about their client, if they were hauled into court under ICOBS, they would soon provide the information you needed to the court and also in the core bundle. It would only be necessary to sue them for a very modest amount to make it all happen.

I suppose it may sound a bit excessive to do this – but it is a highly realistic but unconventional route to getting compensation. However, I suppose that the MIB is set up for this kind of thing so you may as well use it. Don't expect it to be straightforward or quick. But I'm sure that the suggestion from @Ethel Street to begin by bringing a claim against the driver is a very important first step.

[el foul 0]

Thank you all for your help and I will take actions as recommended. Much appreciated.

Best wishes

[BankFodder 1,448]

If you bring an action against the driver then we can help you draft the papers and advise you on issuing the claim.

As I have already said, check out his address on the land registry, also you should make sure that you have at least a proper couple of good valuations for the vehicle and also that you keep a detailed account of your reasonable expenses/losses caused by this accident because you will be claiming for all of that.

 

[el foul 0]

Thank you BankFodder. I checked the land registry but no details are available for that particular house. I will  make further investigation as I know exactely where it is as I live in a small town and my friend lives just around the corner.

I have a letter from  a garage with a valuation of my car but I guess I need another one.  I will ask for your help once I am in the process of claiming. Appreciate your support.

 

[king12345 410]

On a separate note, you said that because you had a couple of years of business cover, you lost all of your ncd.

This is the first time i hear this and i used to have business cover which i then changed to personal as i wasn't self employed anymore; i kept my ncd.

[BankFodder 1,448]

11 hours ago, el foul said:

Thank you BankFodder. I checked the land registry but no details are available for that particular house. I will  make further investigation as I know exactely where it is as I live in a small town and my friend lives just around the corner.

I have a letter from  a garage with a valuation of my car but I guess I need another one.  I will ask for your help once I am in the process of claiming. Appreciate your support.

 

 

In your case, this is not a fatal problem because the objective is simply to get a judgement. If the papers are served on the address which has been provided to the police and he fails to respond and you get a default judgement then that would be sufficient for the MIB

[el foul 0]

6 hours ago, king12345 said:

On a separate note, you said that because you had a couple of years of business cover, you lost all of your ncd.

This is the first time i hear this and i used to have business cover which i then changed to personal as i wasn't self employed anymore; i kept my ncd.

it is true. when I come off the taxi insurance, all the insurers would not consider the two years that I did as NCB. the worst is when they told me that I lost all my previous years when I started driving as a Taxi driver. I would not believe it first but it is what it is. Thank you

6 hours ago, BankFodder said:

 

In your case, this is not a fatal problem because the objective is simply to get a judgement. If the papers are served on the address which has been provided to the police and he fails to respond and you get a default judgement then that would be sufficient for the MIB

Thank you for the additional info. much appreciated

[unclebulgaria67 28,921]

If the third parties policy was in force at time of accident, they are still the Insurers responsible under Road Traffic Acts to deal with third party claims. The voidance of the Insurance does not change this.

 

You can approach third party Insurers with proof of any liability of their driver and see how they respond. If they are not helpful, MIB may get involved.

 

You should attempt this approach before Court claim against the driver.

[Yorkyclaims 26]

What Uncle Bulgaria said. They are still the Insurer. If they have obtained a "Declaration" through the courts they are an Article 75 Insurer, otherwise an RTA Insurer. Either way they are still the Insurer, but the MIB will be the best route.. They will either deal or get the Insurer to deal.

 

If you do commence proceedings against the driver then add the Insurance company as a Second Defendant

 

[el foul 0]

Thank you to everyone for your advice and help.

I contacted his insurers and had a law thrown at them but still refused to take the claim forward saying that they needed to protect their driver and that his word is against mine even though the evidence show otherwise. They seems there are buckets full of negative reviews about them so I am not surprised about their response. They first say (First central or 1st central) that his insurance is voided and cannot pursue the claim, then they come up with the other version of event to say that it is my fault and then they say that he was not even there when he reversed...mind bugling..so if they believed his version of events so why they had to void his insurance if they trusted his word...

I contact MIB, filled the form etc. and all what they sent me is a letter stating that his insurance was in force at the time of the accident and that I need to follow the claim by myself ...Now I am thinking to take next steps as kindly suggested

Thank you for your support once again

[king12345 410]

Pass all of these letters to mib when you start the claim.

Eventually they will have to pay up.

[Ethel Street 1,394]

So they've back-tracked on their original statement that his insurance has been voided. If it's not been voided and was in force at the time of the accident there is no role for MIB. MIB gets involved if a driver was uninsured at the time of the accident, but 1st Central are now telling you he was insured. In the response you have had from MIB that is what they say, he was not uninsured. Whoever it was who told you that the policy had been voided was, by the sound of it, telling you something that simply wasn't true.

 

I've never heard of 1st Central but from their website it's clear they are an insurance broker not the actual insurance company https://www.1stcentralinsurance.com/who-we-are  As a broker they are acting for their client, the driver, and have no duty to be impartial in considering whose fault it was.

 

So looks like you have no option now other than to start a small claims court action against the driver.

Edited July 16 by Ethel Street