Car accident insurance question. Admiral in too good to be true offer

Over the weekend Mrs Beaker was involved in a low speed accident at a roundabout, where she was shunted from behind at low speed. We have informed our insurance and have been contacted by the other party’s insurance (Admiral) who are offering to sort the claim out entirely without involving our insurance. They will sort a hire car and the repair out directly with us. I am a little sceptical as they are pushing this option quite a lot saying how it won’t affect our no claims or mean we have to pay an excess. Am I being over suspicious and has anyone had the same offer?

Maybe they’re touting for business when you want to renew?

they’re trying to keep costs down and once you sign something ‘in full and final settlement’ they’re in the clear.

your insurer will have to be told so Id’ go through them – if the other party have admitted fault then you’ll get the excess back in any event.

I said no to a similar offer in my shunt. I really regret not having accepted the offer.

Just make sure you get in WRITING their statement of what they will do/cover and do not under any circumstances waive any rights to future claims for injury.

It means they control the repair and hire costs, which ultimately would be down to them anyway, so looks to me like a sensible proactive approach that generates goodwill and PR.

Would never happen in my day….

Looking to save money by using there own repairs/hire firm. It’s done all the time and often does make things a tad quicker.

It’s up to you. This way you avoid paying your excess up front.

Thanks for the quick replies! As ever STW comes up trumps. @scrumfled, Why did you regret not accepting the offer? I assume you had a bad experience with your insurer?

do not under any circumstances waive any rights to future claims for injury.

This is the important bit – you don’t want them wriggling out of any whiplash claim you may want to make.

2 I am a little sceptical as they are pushing this option quite a lot saying how it won’t affect our no claims”

really wrong – and they know it .

Dont ask me how i know , admiral insurance are a bunch of lying ****. NEVER EVER AGAIN

really wrong – and they know it .

Are you sure?

A few years ago I was “shunted from behind”. Completely the other drivers fault. It never effected my insurance at all.

the question when you buy insurance today is “have you been in an accident – fault or non fault”

any excuse to screw you – just try taking out an admiral policy and find out what they say when you tell them you have been in a non fault accident vs a fault accident – both will push your price up over someone who has had no accident – statistically even a non fault accident claimee is more likely to have another accident than someone whos never had an accident.

once its on the National insurance DB your screwed – they cross search and if you dont declare it your screwed.

you will keep your ncb that much is right – but it will still cost you long term as the NCB is a percentage discount of your risk assessed price (which will increase)

Are you sure?

A few years ago I was “shunted from behind”. Completely the other drivers fault. It never effected my insurance at all.

It won’t effect your no claims that is true. It will however be reported as an accident. You are required to report any incident whether you are claiming or not to your insurer – this then tags you as having an accident and your premiums will rise.

You could always not tell them and carry on, but each time you take out insurance you will be asked “have you been in an accident fault or not within X years”. For X years you have to say yes, and again you get tagged as having an accident.

You could always not tell the ins company, and never mention it with on renewal and new policies – but this is getting harder with the ins companies sharing info.

Having been in an accident (which you have been) you are statistically more likely to make a claim again, its just the stats.

I had this when I was hit twice in car parks within 2 months, both times I was just parked there and idiot drivers reversed into me – but I got hit with a significant increase in premiums for the next few years. You could see the cost by taking out the accident (claim free accident) on the quote, cost was always loaded.

It’s completely unfair, but legally the only alternative is to lie to the ins co’s

legally the only alternative is to lie to the ins co’s

Brilliant! 😀

I’m insured with Admiral and they are the most unprofessional outfit I have ever come across! Was involved with some wildlife early this year and had to have some repairs (new bumper) used their approved garage and its been back 3 times to get the job done properly (over a month without my car) last time they returned my car they were caught speeding in it!!! To put it mildly I wasn’t best pleased!!

What ever you do don’t let Admiral repair your car!!!!

It’s completely unfair, but legally the only alternative is to lie to the ins co’s commit insurance fraud

FTFY

question when you buy insurance today is “have you been in an accident – fault or non fault”

Thats true, but you wont lose ncb. Also if you go thru’ your insurance and it come up for renewal before its all settled you’ll pay much more.

“Also if you go thru’ your insurance and it come up for renewal before its all settled you’ll pay much more.”

as you will if you go through their insurance – you have to declare it as an unsettled claim.

But if they have accepted responsibility its a non fault claim surely?

not until its signed sealed delivered apparently…..

im in an on going claim with someone elses insurance at the moment AND my insurance WAS admiral.

Arse.. ever day is a school day. Does highlight the need to get it all done as quick as possible.

Three calls from Admiral this morning apparently, they are very keen for us to use their service and not involve our company.

Admiral are just trying to manage the repair cost which is reasonable as a they’ll be picking up the bill eventually and if someone else does it it will include referral fees.

Tell them they can do it on condition:

Theres no final settlement condition.
They pay a sum equivalent to the increased premium for the next 3 years when disclosing a non fault claim.
You choose the repairer.
They confirm liability immediately.

Tell them they can do it on condition:

^wilburt makes sense. Good suggestion.

What I don’t understand is the parasitic nature of insurance company trying to increase the premium even when the accident is non fault. I think this is utterly wrong.

edit: I am with Admiral for my car insurance as they have quoted me reasonably while others gave me some parasitic quotes. 😯

in my case my insurer dragged their heels. utter shower of shite, the other party was motivated to move fast. Elephant were slow, incompetent and thoroughly unpleasant to deal with.

Liability has been admitted to by the other driver and Admiral no less. All good points though, thanks for your input.

Make sure you choose the repairer and get it done at a main dealer. Some of the authorised repairers are shocking. Mine went to sapphire in manchester and they didnt even bother to unscrew the headlights, they just snapped the tabs off that held them on. Terrible job and lesson learnt!

When my wife had a bump I made sure hers went to a Mazda dealer and it was an immaculate job as you would expect, plus they did extra bodywork repairs for a nominal fee.

What I don’t understand is the parasitic nature of insurance company trying to increase the premium even when the accident is non fault. I think this is utterly wrong.

I’m afraid it’s based on valid statistical analysis – if you’ve been involved in a non-fault accident then that has shown that you are a higher risk than somebody who hasn’t. Because the next time your insurance company might have to pay up even if it isn’t your fault. We have discussed this on here a few times.

On the repair issue, I agree with the advice to insist on a main dealer rather than an authorised repairer from my experience of poor quality of work from the latter.

aracer – Member

I’m afraid it’s based on valid statistical analysis – if you’ve been involved in a non-fault accident then that has shown that you are a higher risk than somebody who hasn’t. Because the next time your insurance company might have to pay up even if it isn’t your fault. We have discussed this on here a few times.

Link to the thread(s)?

Yes, they are classified as “higher” risks by comparison to someone who hasn’t because insurance companies simply want to grab free money. Yes, yes I over simplified …

Link to the thread(s)?

Fill your boots
http://singletrackworld.com/forum/search.php

What I don’t understand is the parasitic nature of insurance company trying to increase the premium even when the accident is non fault. I think this is utterly wrong.

People who drive fast and rely on hard braking / emergency stops (for example) are more likely to get hit from behind – not their fault, the other driver should leave enough space – but statistically it does make them more of a risk. (And of course if you rely on late braking you’re leaving yourself less room for manoeuvre, which in turn means more risk…)

“they are classified as “higher” risks by comparison to someone who hasn’t because insurance companies simply want to grab free money”

you must have huge blind spots to the left and the right with those blinkers on. its not rocket science – its not right but its not rocket science to see why they charge more for higher risk. its a racket.

Racket? Should I have to pay more for my insurance to cover the cost of claims from people who live in high risk areas and are more likely to put in a claim than I am?

no the racket is that they dont act in your interest when involved in a claim – they purely act in their own (admiral)

I got sideswiped on my motorbike, and as someone who has as little to do with insurance companies as possible I was immediately depressed thinking what a nightmare it could turn into.

A guy visited me, we spoke about the damage, he agreed to let me do the labour for the repairs myself (a bit unusual, I did it to avoid a financial write off of a mint 1996 fireblade) and it was all sorted quick smart.

I did tell my insurance company, and when I told them I’d made full recovery from the 3rd party they left my no claims intact. They didn’t even ask for proof!

In conclusion, it seems that insurance companies can be pretty decent about this sort of thing.

I don’t think its suspicious they want to take on the repair/hire etc.

They know an accident management company probably have you in their sights who will give you a hire car costing hundreds of pounds which will then get charged to the insurance company, whereas they can offer you one at a realistic price to themselves.

My wife had a similar accident and she was asked if she wanted our insurance to deal with her repair or the third party, before she replied they then withdrew the offer as the third party was a taxi driver on a professional policy and apparently this means our insurance had to deal with it.

Fault was admitted and the repair completed, issues were apparently the small print states we are liable for the excess even in non-fault accidents (some arguing from the wife got that removed as they’d failed to advise us). If we’d been able to go with the third parties insurer, there would be no excess anyway.

But the big issue came when we renewed the insurance on our camper with a different insurance broker, our quote suddenly became invalid as the non-fault accident was still due to be settled between my wife’s insurance company and the third party’s, so even though all agreed in terms of fault, she had to be removed from the camper policy until the companies settled the financial side. I then had to barter with them to avoid paying a fee to modify the camper policy two months later to add her back on! If we hadn’t involved our insurance, presumably this situation wouldn’t have occurred either.

Go with Admirals offer 🙂