I have a mate who has only been driving cars about 2 years. His insurance is very high but he went for fully comprehensive.
A couple of months back he was approaching a roundabout, the left hand lane being reserved for buses etc until just before the roundabout, where people turning left then had to move over to the left lane when the bus lane terminated. Unfortunatly an 18 year old driver had decided to ignore the bus lane restrictions and just drive up it. My mate moved to the left lane and the 18 year old driver ran into the side of his car.
The insurance companies have deemed it to be the fault of my mate as he should have taken more care looking to see if anything was coming up the lane. However, despite his being fully comp his insurance are now refusing to pay out any repairs whatsoever to his vehicle, saying they will only pay for the 18 year olds car repairs.
Is this normal with fully comprehensive?
If so, there is no benefit to having it and 3rd Fire and Theft is surely the better option as it costs less and does the same? He was not told there was no ‘own car’ cover at the time of purchase. He has not checked the small print yet.