But it just makes me ever so more angry towards my shit insurer who were all ready to take the repair excess off me first thing this morning.

If it was obviously the fault of the third party then I’d be claiming directly off their insurance and only informing my own of the incident. If they accepted that it was their customer’s fault there would be no excess for you to pay, they would provide a courtesy car, etc.

It does seem to be standard practice – presumably it makes business sense for them.

I’d have thought so. I expect it’ll be the default response unless someone complains – it’s faster (and thus cheaper) than getting dragged into a “he said / she said” argument with three other parties. That’s why I suggested pushing back, they’ve probably not even looked at it properly, let alone come to any ruling over it.

There’s even more upside to it for them than that – they get to take the excess off both parties and make both parties pay increased premiums, which wouldn’t be the case if they allocated responsibility to one side or the other.

oh they will get increased premiums ….

wrightyson can no longer click the box ” no accidents in last 2-3-4-5 years” because he has- albe it by proxy.

IdleJon – Member
But it just makes me ever so more angry towards my shit insurer who were all ready to take the repair excess off me first thing this morning.
If it was obviously the fault of the third party then I’d be claiming directly off their insurance and only informing my own of the incident. If they accepted that it was their customer’s fault there would be no excess for you to pay, they would provide a courtesy car, etc.

In the incident I referred to above, my own insurer wouldn’t give me a courtesy car (as apparently I’d already made a claim that year – I hadn’t) and I got the admission of liability from the TP’s insurers, and they offered a) a courtesy car and b) to repair my car at their cost.

My insurers got a flea in the ear, and TP’s insurers got my business come renewal.

His insurers are dealing fully with the claim, **** direct line! Courtesy car, full collection and repair service and an email from the lease company being adhered to stating only genuine parts used via fully authorised garage etc etc. Now awaiting time and date for damage assessor to visit our house/car. Regarding the courtesy car, they’re trying to find me a big estate with roof bars. I said I’d happily accept a vw transporter especially as it’ll help me fit in on my Cornish holiday…

Glad you’ve got the result you fully deserved wrightyson.

I had a very similar experience a good few ago now. It was only my persistence of refusing to settle for a 50/50 claim that it ending up going to court.

It went in my favour and I’m glad I pursued. The insurer was all too happy to settle for 50/50.

Makes business sense

Back when I used to do this ” loss of no claims bonus” was an element of the claim against the at fault driver,paid for by his insurers.

Direct line via a car hire company will offer you a matiz or even fiesta, they did with me, after a bmw rammed me.

I had a van off them after telling them i needed a van, got it for 6 weeks,ast they made slow repairs, Direct line where very good, but expect hike in insurance costs as youve made a claim.

A question on named drivers having accidents, presumably at renewal time the op has to declare a claim (even if non fault) and also has to declare the named driver has been involved in an accident. Does this get treated differently to if op had an accident as they could then declare one claim/accident?