A few words of warning about Insurance and Repairs

[Alex M Grieve]

the courts take the view that adults know what they are agreeing to and construe this within very narrow limits.

This may be true but seemed not to apply in the case of Tessa Jowell and her husband's mortgage arrangements, or Harry Rednap and his tax affairs? :neutral:

 

[snail]

So basically you are telling me that an insurance company can force you to have your car repaired where they say it has to be repaired

Nope. I never said that and never have. Neither did @pipmk.

You need to read for comprehension. Read what is written, not what you think is written. If (and it's a very big if) an insurance co. wanted to force repairs at certain garages then it could write that in the policy. Most, if not all, don't do that. If they did they would sell fewer policies. They recommend approved repairers because it saves them time and money - engineers visit the premises, or they have video links; they will have agreed labour rates in advance - and they can pre-authorise work. That saves the customer time.

If the policy doesn't state explicitly that a car has to be serviced at a particular place then you are free to suggest somewhere of your own choice. What you are not free to do is force the insurance company to pay higher repair rates than would be considered reasonable. If you tried taking an insurer to court because they won't fit original parts at a higher price it would be up to the court to decide if they are being reasonable within the terms of the insurance contract. That's how "legal rights" work.

If you do that it will likely take longer to get quotes and invoices agreed. *You may be asked to make a contribution to the repair if, say, you want original parts instead of reasonable generic parts. *That isn't changing the terms of the policy, it's applying them.

A simple example is the MB branded insurance, operated by Aviva. They 'guarantee' that MB approved parts will be used, unlike a regular Aviva policy which says nothing. If a repair under the MB policy does not use approved parts you have a written contract to show what you are entitled to. You pay more for the MB policy than the Aviva policy because they know repairs will be more expensive overall.

 

[pipmk]

Hi pipmk,

Trust me you can have your car repair where you want, you have paid the annual premium and it is your choice - from a legal point view i.e. the insurer does have recommended repairers - BUT you can however row you own boat.

I have a statement of do's and don't's on my desk form the ABI "it is the customers legal right to choose the repairer, if they so wish".

I'm afraid the ABI, like the Home Secretary has no right to alter or interpret the law, that is what we have courts for. You may know a great deal about insurance but believe me law is a totally different ball game. The cobbler should stick to his last.

 

[Xtractorfan]

The only argument I made here was that A policyholder/car owner has a right to take his car to any garage of his choice..
No one can force him to do otherwise.. In a court of law his right would be upheld.
You can talk all day about legal issues that may be, or are not written into policies,
Why are you attempting to make an argument on my behalf and then argue against it ..

 

[Xtractorfan]

Nope. I never said that and never have. Neither did @pipmk.

You need to read for comprehension. Read what is written, not what you think is written. If (and it's a very big if) an insurance co. wanted to force repairs at certain garages then it could write that in the policy. Most, if not all, don't do that. If they did they would sell fewer policies. They recommend approved repairers because it saves them time and money - engineers visit the premises, or they have video links; they will have agreed labour rates in advance - and they can pre-authorise work. That saves the customer time.

If the policy doesn't state explicitly that a car has to be serviced at a particular place then you are free to suggest somewhere of your own choice. What you are not free to do is force the insurance company to pay higher repair rates than would be considered reasonable. If you tried taking an insurer to court because they won't fit original parts at a higher price it would be up to the court to decide if they are being reasonable within the terms of the insurance contract. That's how "legal rights" work.

If you do that it will likely take longer to get quotes and invoices agreed. *You may be asked to make a contribution to the repair if, say, you want original parts instead of reasonable generic parts. *That isn't changing the terms of the policy, it's applying them.

A simple example is the MB branded insurance, operated by Aviva. They 'guarantee' that MB approved parts will be used, unlike a regular Aviva policy which says nothing. If a repair under the MB policy does not use approved parts you have a written contract to show what you are entitled to. You pay more for the MB policy than the Aviva policy because they know repairs will be more expensive overall.

I have never said any different or argued any of the points you have made..In fact at one time I was gonna add some of the clauses you have just noted ..

We could write all day about insurance companies and thier rules and regulations and not make one blind bit of difference .So I shall leave it there.. Having established that my posts were factual and correct. thank you

 

[JEZ.S320L]

JEZ, I can understand your graphic, that's the type of thing they do in Spain

Not far from the truth there - but my next door neighbour says that it is legal, although his mother knows it is not. So they are both going to ask the bartender tonight for a definitive ruling.!

 

[mutleyomels]

No he didnt have to make a claim ..being involved in an accident is classed as having an accident..

Sir may I thank you.You are correct. In my case I phoned the Insurance again and posed this question." If you drive home tonight park your car in your driveway,then overnight a Scallaywag steals your wheels ,are you responsible for the theft" ?.And would you then lose your no claims bonus ?.

 

[Xtractorfan]

Sir may I thank you.You are correct. In my case I phoned the Insurance again and posed this question." If you drive home tonight park your car in your driveway,then overnight a Scallaywag steals your wheels ,are you responsible for the theft" ?.And would you then lose your no claims bonus ?.

With any big company it would depend on whom you speak to. some within all companies have that modicum of reason that will take into account common sense,
I have dealt with them for many years, and find on face to face meetings they are quite reasonable people, but at the end of a phone or email they are a different breed..
You should remember that you can always make a complaint to the Insurance ombudsman

 

[snail]

So I shall leave it there.. Having established that my posts were factual and correct. thank you

Yes, I give up too. Some people just don't read what's written. Or write what they think they have written.

 

[mutleyomels]

With any big company it would depend on whom you speak to. some within all companies have that modicum of reason that will take into account common sense,
I have dealt with them for many years, and find on face to face meetings they are quite reasonable people, but at the end of a phone or email they are a different breed..
You should remember that you can always make a complaint to the Insurance ombudsman

And so.It boils down to Insurance Company's are a Law to themselves,we pay our money and then take the chance that we are never involved in an accident.

 

[pipmk]

And so.It boils down to Insurance Company's are a Law to themselves,we pay our money and then take the chance that we are never involved in an accident.

It's not quite that bad,twice I have taken Insurance companies to court and both times they have folded at the courts door. They usually play fair if you insist.

 

[Shezbo]

It's not quite that bad,twice I have taken Insurance companies to court and both times they have folded at the courts door. They usually play fair if you insist.

Err, is'nt that what me (and others) have been saying "They usually play fair if you insist"???

 

[pipmk]

Err, is'nt that what me (and others) have been saying "They usually play fair if you insist"???

Is this the 5 minute argument or the full half hour?

 

[Alex M Grieve]

Is this the 5 minute argument or the full half hour?

or just "Abuse"?

 

[snail]

Err, is'nt that what me (and others) have been saying "They usually play fair if you insist"???

No.

 

[pipmk]

Err, is'nt that what me (and others) have been saying "They usually play fair if you insist"???

I don't recall having made any comment on your input,it was the people who fail to understand the legal force of a contract, thinking they could impose conditions post agreement and also those who fail to appreciate that the legal requirement for 3rd party cover is entirely separate from the cover for your own vehicle. There was some very misleading comments made which could lead to difficulties.
As I have said, insurance companies, as most other companies, will stick to the terms one agreed to when the contract was formed, why should they not? Taking out insurance is a legally binding contract on both parties and you are bound by the terms you agreed as indeed are the other party, wishing doesn't make it otherwise.
If an expensive vehicle is repaired with what you believe to be substandard parts, IF you can prove that they are inferior,not just think they are, you would have an arguable case that you have suffered detriment

 

[d215yq]

Err, is'nt that what me (and others) have been saying "They usually play fair if you insist"???

NO! You basically gave us a list of bad practices all the "cheap" (later retracted to "bad") insurers do and said they NEVER play properly and that is why we should all hold our heads in shame at insuring our "pride and joy" for as cheaply as possible.

The argument seems to have gone into some technical point about rights and approved repairers or not but from all these enlightening posts I am still in the same train of thought as I would hope anyone else is:

Buy the cheapest insurance and in case of a crash just use the damn approved repairer...life's too short and the different possible outcomes in the minefield that is insurance/repairers is too abstract to comprehend.

If you really want to care about your P+J and safety of your family rather than wasting all the time worrying about this and taking insurers to court i'd suggest just driving 5mph slower everywhere and thus reducing the chance of an actual accident and increasing your chance of avoiding one (afterall accidents, not insurance cos cause death/damage). If the accident rate really is 18% and yet almost everyone i know repeatedly never crashes year on year then there is plenty of room for improvement for people who need to claim regularly, and by that i don't mean buying more expensive cover...if anything perhaps they need to buy cheaper 3rd party cover to further incentivise themselves not to crash!

 

[Xtractorfan]

Actually buying the cheapest insurance isnt always a bad thing...Insurance companies will always roll out a simiar product but to differnt brokers for different prices..
One thing you do have to be careful of is the limitations of a policy. and the comparason websites where a product has been trimmed to make it cheaper..
For instance .. you may not legally be entitled to drive another vehicle under 3rd party cover..or driving to work may not be covered, and a very big one is driving another family members car or even a spouses car and you are not covered..

 

[Shezbo]

Buy the cheapest insurance and in case of a crash just use the damn approved repairer...life's too short and the different possible outcomes in the minefield that is insurance/repairers is too abstract to comprehend.

Doh!

I think you would bother, when the repair is sh*te

 

[Xtractorfan]

I honestly cannot think of any cheap n nasty Insurance companies in the UK, certainly none that I've ever come across... There are some awkward people working within those companies, but generally moving sideways or upline can sort most problems..
The Belfast AXA claims department is currently the most useless place on earth as the head engineer is off sick..