Leaving the scene of an accident?

[colour-me-happy]

No, it's not.

 

It is however automatic liability in terms of insurance so the poster is fully covered.

 

However *DO NOT* contact your own insurance company in the first instance. Your policy rate is affected by your claim history *REGARDLESS OF NO CLAIMS DISCOUNT* and *REGARDLESS OF LIABILITY* (well not strictly regardless as the amount it will be affected will change with the amount of liability involved in claims). Painful but true. In some circumstance a single "No liability" claim won't make any difference to your premium, with some combinations of factors, it can add hundreds.

 

If there is a no liability claim, contact the other parties insurer in the first instance. TNT will likely be "self insured" (this means they handle their own claims below a certain value, which will be quite high, £50k or £100k standard in large fleet policies). They should provide you will transport while your car is off the road from the moment it is reported to either being returned to you or being declared a write off *and* allowing reasonable time to purchase a new car.

 

Of course if the other party disputes the claim you will need to go through your won insurer. If its a write off your courtesy car (if applicable) will be withdrawn (with most insurers) so you need to get the other insurer to provide until you can get a replacement.

 

Regards,

Eduin

 

 

Unfortunately we have already gone through our own insurer, the other party wern't being very helpful, so it kind of left us with no choice, but thank you so much for the advice.

[Eduin]

Eduin is totally wrong. You must always inform your insurance company in the

event of an accident-even [as in this case] where it is not your fault.

 

 

Your insurance company request this, indeed it is a policy requirement. However, it *will* affect your premium but an unspecified amount and a legal test of the validity of this contract term is not available.

 

Bottom line, if the other insurer accepts liability you are a mug if you report it to your own insurer.

 

You did the right thing by informing your insurance co. It is especially important that you do every thing by the book when such a sum of money is involved.

Some Insurance cos. will try and avoid their legal responsibilities, and a failure on your part to inform could have given them a possible get out.

 

Insurers are generally very scared of the GISC, they require absolutely cast iron guarantees that they can invalidate a claim. And again the example was for a non liability claim where the other insurer accepts liability. The claim *will* cost you money in increased premiums, as such you are foolish to report it to your insurer.

 

(btw there are slight complexities in being able to report with *some* insurers as a "notification only" which should never affect premiums but 1. I wouldn't trust all insurers not to "rate" on this and 2. Some numpty teletubby could "close" the claim incorrectly meaning it is rated as a non liability claim which again costs money.)

 

Regards,

Eduin

[dw190]

Your insurance company request this, indeed it is a policy requirement. However, it *will* affect your premium but an unspecified amount and a legal test of the validity of this contract term is not available.

 

Bottom line, if the other insurer accepts liability you are a mug if you report it to your own insurer.

 

 

 

Insurers are generally very scared of the GISC, they require absolutely cast iron guarantees that they can invalidate a claim. And again the example was for a non liability claim where the other insurer accepts liability. The claim *will* cost you money in increased premiums, as such you are foolish to report it to your insurer.

 

(btw there are slight complexities in being able to report with *some* insurers as a "notification only" which should never affect premiums but 1. I wouldn't trust all insurers not to "rate" on this and 2. Some numpty teletubby could "close" the claim incorrectly meaning it is rated as a non liability claim which again costs money.)

 

Regards,

Eduin

 

It is a condition of all insurance policies that you inform your insurers if the insured vehicle is involved in an accident.

 

It is however possible to inform them "For Information Purposes Only" which is commonly used if the T/P insurers have accepted liability.

[funkyparott]

Trust me, Insurance have access to Police records of accidents reported. You may well decide not to report something - just wait til you make a claim next time.

 

You have a legal responsibility to inform your insurance company of any material facts.

 

Are you aware of the Criminal Offence; Obtaining a pecuniary advantage by deception?

 

FP

[Eduin]

Trust me, Insurance have access to Police records of accidents reported. You may well decide not to report something - just wait til you make a claim next time.

 

You have a legal responsibility to inform your insurance company of any material facts.

 

Are you aware of the Criminal Offence; Obtaining a pecuniary advantage by deception?

 

Insurance companies provide quotes based on trust, you tell them what you want, remember what you tell them and you get a quote. If a claim is extant you will be extremely unlucky for any misinformation to come to light. They don't search the PNC, they don't have access, they have a couple of pooled systems specifically for stolen vehicles, write offs and outstanding HP which may be checked if a claim is made where these databases are relevant but a third party insurance company reporting a write off against a vehicle you no longer own will *not* be found. *THERE ISN'T EVEN A CENTRAL DATABASE FOR NO CLAIMS DISCOUNT*!

 

And here's the rub. Even if the insurance company *do* discover an "error" the most they can do in the majority of cases under the GISC rules is to charge the difference in premium had the correct facts been reported. They still have to honour the claim.

 

Here's a few examples from my own personal experience (working in insurance not actually claiming) :-

 

Vehicle was modified. "It was like that when I bought it". Claim honoured, no additional premium charged.

 

Lied about employment. Claim honoured, additional premium charged.

 

Previous claim not reported when policy taken out. "I forgot about that". Claim honoured, additional premium charged.

 

Report made 6 months after accident having previously been dealing with the third party insurer before running into problems no "Notification" made to their own insurer. Claim honoured.

 

The vast majority of claims are never investigated at all other than to establish that the damage and cost of repair match up. Insurers don't have the manpower or the resources and its not cost effective. The only claims that I ever came across being repudiated all involved theft and even then it was very rare the insurer would risk a complaint to the GISC.

 

Regards,

Eduin

[funkyparott]

A growing, large number of insurance details *are* held on PNC; fact. It's not always the the Insurance who would instigate a prosecution. The Police do not even need the permission of an aggrieved party to commence a prosecution (ie the insurance company).

 

I can tell you for a fact, many insurance companys do contact the Police for records of accidents.

 

The point is, you have a duty to share any material facts with your insurers. This is a point that has been held in law. It may not affect you or come to light over your average small prang in Tesco's car park. What do you think happens when the claim involves many thousands ?

 

It is true, that the offence of 'obtaining a pecuniary advantage by deception' is not

one that is used everyday; but is it really running the risk of this indictable offence?

 

There are stated cases in relation to this offence and insurance.....

 

FP

[Eduin]

A growing, large number of insurance details *are* held on PNC; fact.

 

Where was that disputed? What was stated was that insurance companies have no access to the PNC. Fact.

 

My post is based from experience working *in* insurance claims. The details are laid out and people can make their own decisions. As stated earlier, only a mug will inform their own insurer of a no liability claim where the other insurance company is accepting liability. In fact currect practise in the industry *compels* the TP insurer to deal directly with the aggrieved party and they face stiff penalties for anything that can be considered a hindrence to doing so.

 

Regards,

Eduin

[funkyparott]

Hmm. One of the questions I was asked on my motor insurance quotations was and I quote , "Have you had any accidents in the past three years regardless of blame ? ".

 

Why shouldn't a person 'not at fault', not tell their insurance company what they have been involved in? Is it perhaps because they (insurance company) will factor this into the insurance renewal price and you may see an increase? Surely, if the insurance company does this, perceives there is an additional risk, then they are right to charge additional monies.

 

It follows then, that there is an implied right for the insurance company to be aware of all material facts.

 

Perhaps I am a mug, but I would always prefer to be honest and upfront about any no blame accidents having occured. If the insurance company want to charge me more, I will look elsewhere.

 

What happens further down the line once you have approached only the other party's insurer, in what you consider to be a straight forward claim.

After you have exchanged letters directly, and then you receive a letter stating that they allege you are to blame in some way? I don't think when you go running back to your insurer's to use their third party insurance they will be best pleased at you having kept them out of the loop. Your initial letters may have done untold damage in regard to the legal particulars for your claim.

 

FP

[Eduin]

What happens further down the line once you have approached only the other party's insurer, in what you consider to be a straight forward claim.

After you have exchanged letters directly, and then you receive a letter stating that they allege you are to blame in some way? I don't think when you go running back to your insurer's to use their third party insurance they will be best pleased at you having kept them out of the loop. Your initial letters may have done untold damage in regard to the legal particulars for your claim.

 

Why on earth would you waste the time writing letters? If my car has been damaged I want it fixed now and a replacement car already if it is not useable.

 

The GISC sets industry practise in insurance. Where a policy holder has notified an accident to an insurance company of which it is clear they will have liability, the onus is on *THEM* to immediately contact the other party and offer to make ammends. With the current rate of personal injury claims this also has the added benefit of quickly identifying any likely additional liabilities which means they get a benefit too. Claims handlers are trained to identify their liability. The nature of the business (what goes around comes around) means there is absolutely no point in *any* insurer playing silly buggers. Liability is determined quickly in 99% of cases and majority of them will be clearly identified as one insurer handling full liability. I.e. in well over 50% of motor claims, one of the two insurers decides to take full liability when they are contacted by their policy holder in the first instance.

 

If you have an accident, contact the other insurer by phone identifying yourself as the third party. They will tell you then, immediately, if they intend to defend the claim. If they don't they will transfer you to their in house claims handler who will 1. arrange repairs of your vehicle, 2. issue a hire car immediately if your car is not useable or while it is being repaired, arrange for any other loss to be compensated and medical assessment to be made in the case of injury.

 

If they are going to contest, sure go to your own insurer. If they aren't you are only wasting your own money by reporting, even as "Notification Only". As I said earlier, at least one major UK insurer "rates" (i.e. determines premiums) based on the inclusion of Notification Only events.

 

As I also said earlier, even if the other insurer decides to contest later :-

 

1. They cannot do *anything* about any costs they have expended on you (i.e. ask you to repay hire costs).

2. Your insurer still has to treat your claim normally, even if months have passed since the event. And these are *never* questioned.

 

Actually "repudiating" (refusing) a claim is extremely difficult for an insurer. The burden of proof required by the GISC is very high, certainly well beyond anything put forward as a counter against using the above guideline in motor claims.

 

Regards,

Eduin

[Eduin]

Perhaps I am a mug, but I would always prefer to be honest and upfront about any no blame accidents having occured. If the insurance company want to charge me more, I will look elsewhere.

 

BTW, something FYI.

 

Although there are hundreds of insurance brands in the UK there are *very* few actual underwriters which means when it comes to "shopping around" for the best price, although there is some leeway for how much a broker or brand will discount, they are still basing the cost off a very small number of underwriting providers (Base Quotes). IIRC, there are less than 10.

 

Regards,

Eduin

[colour-me-happy]

This topic was closed on 10 March 2019.

If you have a problem which is similar to the issues raised in this topic, then please start a new thread and you will get help and support there.

If you would like to post up some information which is relevant to this particular topic then please flag the issue up to the site team and the thread will be reopened.

- Consumer Action Group