Jump to content


Axa taking other party to court


Recommended Posts

My former insurance company Axa, is taking the other party to court to reclaim their outlay 

This will be in My name because legally the claim has to be in my name?

Axa said it was 50/50 claim, so Axa paid me out.

 

Can this be done in my name without my permission?

Axa said it was 50/50 why are Axa going after the other driver? i thought Axa would pay me, the other party paid by their insurance company? 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

no you refuse 

they cant do that without your permission.

 

arent arguing over hire car costs are they?

 

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

 

if everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's tomorrow

the biggest financial industry in the UK, DCA;s -  would collapse overnight.

 

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs - that's why they will never tell you they are not bailiffs and have absolutely zero legal powers on any debt.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

They can ask you to help them.

 

The reason for doing this is that the accident was between two private citizens with the Insurance companies covering the risk.  The Insurance company need your assistance to claim directly against the other driver, as the other drivers Insurance are not paying the claim.  Each Insurers pays 50% of the claim costs.  

 

If you don't help the Insurers, I am not sure what they can do about this, as you are no longer a customer of theirs.

 

Perhaps ask whether they will cover your costs. e.g. time. 

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

i can claim for my excess and loss of earnings as i was self employed and cost for hire of van,

solicitors have asked for uninsured losses, if losses are not included in claim i cant recover them at later date the letter states.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, dx100uk said:

no you refuse 

they cant do that without your permission.

 

arent arguing over hire car costs are they?

 

 

Do they need the insured's permission?  Won't the insured have agreed for the insurer to have conduct of any claims and to assist in any court case(s)?

 

I don't understand why the OP is reluctant to assist their former insurer?

Link to post
Share on other sites

not if they want to make the OP the named claimant no!!

let them take the other party to court themselves!!

the op can be a witness then..

 

one bitten...read this thread..

 

 

 

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

 

if everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's tomorrow

the biggest financial industry in the UK, DCA;s -  would collapse overnight.

 

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs - that's why they will never tell you they are not bailiffs and have absolutely zero legal powers on any debt.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

So if this is a claim for all losses including your uninsured losses I am not sure why you would not be assisting. The court claim in your name as you are the party looking to recover losses as a result of the accident. The Insurers or their legal people will do all of the work.

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

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, unclebulgaria67 said:

So if this is a claim for all losses including your uninsured losses I am not sure why you would not be assisting. The court claim in your name as you are the party looking to recover losses as a result of the accident. The Insurers or their legal people will do all of the work.

 

This is what I don't understand.  Why wouldn't the OP co-operate?

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, dx100uk said:

not if they want to make the OP the named claimant no!!

let them take the other party to court themselves!!

the op can be a witness then..

 

one bitten...read this thread..

 

 

 

 

Surely the insurer's are operating on behalf of their insured?  The insurers have made some sort of payout to the OP, and the OP ought to be assisting them in recovering it?

 

(Apologies if I've missed something obvious - I may have done! - but it seems pretty clear to me...)

Link to post
Share on other sites

yes but let the insurers raise the claim then not use a member of joe public as the claimant...

if the case is lost, do you really think the insurers will pay the costs against a joe public as claimant?

 

not saying dont assist which is why i said they can appear as a witness, 

 

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

 

if everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's tomorrow

the biggest financial industry in the UK, DCA;s -  would collapse overnight.

 

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs - that's why they will never tell you they are not bailiffs and have absolutely zero legal powers on any debt.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

The letter states this.

Whilst it will be a claim for what my insurers have paid out, legally the claim has to be in my name? as i was the owner of the vehicle.

why cant Axa just take the other insurance company/other party to court.

A van hit my van on a single track, the other party was going too fast and couldnt stop in time, my insurance company said right away 50/50, lose your NCB and insurance goes up.

Link to post
Share on other sites

If I remember correctly from when I was a law student 40 years ago, your insurance would be able to sue the third party in it's own right if something called the doctrine of subrogation(?) applied.  This means that the insurance company would be using "subrogation" to itself enforce your legal rights against the third party.

 

But if subrogation does not apply, then the third party would have to be sued by you in your own name because the insurance company has no other legal rights it can enforce against the third party.

 

I'm assuming that in your case any claim against your third party cannot be subrogated by your insurer?

 

(Whether all this which I think I can remember from 40 years ago still applies I don't know!  I'm sure unclebulgaria or dx100 do).

Link to post
Share on other sites

Suggest that you contact AXA and discuss this with them.

 

Believe what @Manxman in exile has just posted sounds familiarly correct and AXA will be able to answer this.

 

Better to get it from the horses mouth ( AXA), rather than continue a debate on here.  AXA may be able to provide more information. 

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

Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah - ask AXA.  You don't want to rely on 40 year old shaky memories from me!

 

Try asking something like:  "Why do you need to bring the claim against the third party in my name?  Doesn't the contract of insurance between us work in such a way that after you've made a payout to me, any legal rights I may have against the third party transfer to you, and you, Axa, can sue them in your own name?"

 

You mentioned "uninsured losses" in #4 (and unclebulgaria did in #7) and it may be that AXA are telling you that for you to recover those from the third party (because those losses are not covered by AXA) that you (or AXA?) need to sue the third party in your own name.  Do you follow?  If that's the case, you probably want them to go ahead for you...

 

It does sound a bit strange and perhaps not what you would expect to be happening - especially if 50:50.  You need to ask AXA for a full explanation as to why they need to proceed this way.  Ask what happens if you don't consent.  If they can't give you any answers that make sense, come back here.

 

See what others say about my suggested question to AXA.

 

IMPORTANT - Ask them the question dx100 asks.  If the claim is brought in your name but the claim is lost, who picks up both sides costs?  (I think it has to be between AXA and the third party insurers, but ask to be sure).

Link to post
Share on other sites
On 15/08/2020 at 14:37, dx100uk said:

yes but let the insurers raise the claim then not use a member of joe public as the claimant...

if the case is lost, do you really think the insurers will pay the costs against a joe public as claimant?

 

not saying dont assist which is why i said they can appear as a witness, 

 

It's not just a random Joe Public though, it's their own customer. 

 

I would imagine the OP agreed in the insurance T&Cs to allow the insurers to bring a claim in his/her name and to cooperate with them. 

 

At the end of the day, if the OP wants his excess, load of earnings and hire back then just go along with it. 

 

The insurance company will cover the legal fees if the case loses. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...