@SwintonGroup - deny deny deny - Insurance Mistake - ***Won***

[Mwynci]

 

16 hours ago, ericsbrother said:

there is case law that is on your side thought eh circumstances are not identical.

Basically a person cannot rely on an unlawful activity to negate their responsibility.

an example was a car hit a parked car that was on double yellow lines.  it was claimed that as the parked car was there illegally no payout. Court decided that wasnt the case.

 

there are others, your problem si swimming through custard to get the insurer to do the right thing. you might  well have to sue the person wo rear ended you to ake all of the others wake up

 

Yep, bottom line is the Op's property was damaged as a result of a negligent party, the op needs to challenge them on this bases, not just leave this to the mercy of Swinton, the FOS or the courts. 

 

The third party insurers challenge is based on the fraud challenge, - i.e. if you think you have a case stand up in court and say it, leave a court make the decision.

 

I'm sure if the info is as simple as presented a judge would not even take into consideration the lack of insurance, as long as the vehicle was roadworthy and road legal and there was no other evidence to suggest fraud. 

 

The OP needs to make politely clear to the third party insurer that they are looking into the insurance issue, however regardless of this, they still require settlement for their vehicle which was damaged by their negligent customer, and will accrue costs (even if it's just loss of use) until settlement. 

 

The potential to prompt this into action may get this issue resolved, the claims handler may be just having a quick challenge, knowing there's not much chance, the customer can then look into the policy issues without the pressure of the timescales. 

 

People uninsured for whatever reason get their (non  fault) claims settled all the time. 

 

 

Edited January 8, 2020 by Mwynci
errors

[Mwynci]

1 hour ago, Foxy100474 said:

Thank you, i will contact the third party insurer and see what they say

 

 

Ok, good luck,  be assertive, from your perspective,  in your honest opinion, you had every right to be on the road, your mistake or no mistake about cover (it's not their business to know the ins and outs) made no difference to the fact their customer hit your vehicle.  

 

 

[Mwynci]

12 hours ago, BankFodder said:

2 minutes ago, Foxy100474 said:

Could it have been from the motor insurance database?

 

 

Yes. Motor claims are not very complex and neither are their processes, it’s just the human interaction that fails. It will resolve, I think bank fodders approach is right here (not the SAR, bit in my opinion that just gives licence to be slow), it’s time to get grumpy and legal. 

[Mwynci]

2 hours ago, BankFodder said:

Yes. Well done. I'm afraid I wouldn't leave it there. They've caused you extreme amount of distress and difficulty and I would be putting in a claim for compensation.

I would have thought getting a gesture of goodwill out them will be child's play – and pushing the figure up won't be extremely difficult.

I would propose that you get them to focus by beginning an ombudsman claim on the basis of their admission. I believe that for them, every ombudsman claim which is made against them – they have to pay £400 to the ombudsman service. Somebody can correct me on this.

 

first 3 free and £550 after that i think it still is. 

 

great result.