1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

A question for our Insurance Supporters

Discussion in 'Insurance' started by Miffy, Dec 3, 2012.

  1. Miffy

    Miffy Senior Member

    Messages:
    7,356
    Likes Received:
    2
    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2008
    Location:
    Bromley, London
    Your Mercedes:
    CLK 320 CAB Elegance C208
    At out GTG last weekend, one of our members was describing an accient his car was in and we were a little surprised at the outcome, could we have an official reply on how this sad state of affairs is correct and proper please.

    His car was parked up, with another car parked in front along the road edge. A car was driven at speed, and crashed into the first car which when pushed back, hit our members car causing a fair bit of damage. The car that actually caused the first accident did a runner so there was nobody to lay the blame at for that, but the parked car that was hit and pushed back was fully insured but were not claimed against.

    Our members car had to be repaired on his own insurance, with him paying his excess out of his pocket, and I believe subsequent loss of partial no claims discount.

    Should his claim not be 100% against the parked car that actually hit him and caused the damage? It just seems wrong that he has been penalised for being parked in the wrong place at the wrong time.
     
  2. taxii

    taxii Senior Member

    Messages:
    112
    Likes Received:
    0
    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2012
    Location:
    Bristol
    Your Mercedes:
    c200, 1996, 2000
    I always thought it was the vehicle that made the contact that was claimed against as well. Will be interesting to hear the outcome of this. I might put the story on the consumer forum as well as a lot of legal people advise on there.
     
  3. drmw

    drmw Moderator

    Messages:
    3,681
    Likes Received:
    112
    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2007
    Location:
    Yorkshire
    Your Mercedes:
    M6 Cab - prior to that, SL63 AMG, A-M V8 Vantage, SL55, SL500 and many more
    Hope springs eternal !!
     
  4. antijam

    antijam Senior Member

    Messages:
    1,618
    Likes Received:
    61
    Joined:
    Jul 20, 2008
    Location:
    Gloucestershire
    Your Mercedes:
    2003 SLK320
    Be interesting to hear a professional reply.

    Perhaps it's akin to trying to sue the brick that someone has thrown through your window?
     
  5. taxii

    taxii Senior Member

    Messages:
    112
    Likes Received:
    0
    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2012
    Location:
    Bristol
    Your Mercedes:
    c200, 1996, 2000
    If your in a three or more car shunt doesn't the one that hit you have to pay yours and then claim off the one that hit them thus pushing them into you?
     
  6. racall

    racall Senior Member

    Messages:
    374
    Likes Received:
    0
    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2003
    Location:
    london
    Your Mercedes:
    c class and slk
    They said the car that was pushed into mine was also parked and he was not negligent. The beemer that caused it all done a runner there was one one to claim off.
     
    Last edited: Dec 3, 2012
  7. DanF

    DanF Senior Member

    Messages:
    117
    Likes Received:
    1
    Joined:
    Jan 8, 2007
    I was rear-ended recently and pushed into the car in front. The car I was pushed into claimed directly off the guy behind me who caused the accident, as do I or rather as does my insurance company.

    As it was a no fault claim I don't lose my no claims bonus. I was surprised though that my insurance company don't pay my excess, I have to claim that directly back from the offending driver's insurance company myself, even though it is a no fault claim. If I had ticked the right box when I took out the policy my insurance company would have instructed an 'uninsured loss solicitor' to claim back my excess on my behalf, but I didn't choose that option...
     
  8. Xtractorfan

    Xtractorfan Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,084
    Likes Received:
    155
    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2007
    Your Mercedes:
    S class
    The first accident involved a parked car being smashed into another parked car.. None of the legally parked cars can be blamed as the fault lies with the Driver who caused the crash to both parked cars... The claim should be made to the MIB who pay out for non insured accidents or where a driver cannot be found..
     
  9. Xtractorfan

    Xtractorfan Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,084
    Likes Received:
    155
    Joined:
    Nov 16, 2007
    Your Mercedes:
    S class
    You should have claimed from the driver who caused your accident then they would have paid all of your claim including the excess ..your own insurance company will not pay your excess, so you have to then claim it yourself., a silly insurance self imposed rule that they cannot break.....
     
  10. Gkinghorn

    Gkinghorn Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,808
    Likes Received:
    178
    Joined:
    Jul 25, 2009
    Location:
    Bournemouth
    Your Mercedes:
    E350 CDI Cabriolet - 2011
    The OP noted the guy who hit the car scarpered so nobody to pursue....
     
  11. Rory

    Rory Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,866
    Likes Received:
    161
    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2005
    Location:
    Cheshire, UK
    Your Mercedes:
    2005 C270CDi Avantgarde Estate
    Surely it would be just as wrong for the insurer of the other parked car to be stuffed with both sets of claims?
     
  12. Rory

    Rory Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,866
    Likes Received:
    161
    Joined:
    Feb 8, 2005
    Location:
    Cheshire, UK
    Your Mercedes:
    2005 C270CDi Avantgarde Estate
    You need a better insurance company. LV= waived mine, and I didn't even use their authorised repairer.
     
  13. ChrisKnottIns

    ChrisKnottIns Forum Supporter Authorised Forum Supporter

    Messages:
    543
    Likes Received:
    9
    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2010
    Location:
    Hastings, East Sussex
    Your Mercedes:
    na
    I think you've come to the answer yourselves: as there's no-one else to go after it's not fair for the guy that was hit first to have to pay for his own repairs plus the second victim's. Normally the two insurance companies would agree to each pay for their own policyholder's repairs. The excess would still be payable. Had the offender hung around, moving along the shunt car 3 would claim off car 2 and car 2 would claim off car 1.
     
  14. OP
    Miffy

    Miffy Senior Member

    Messages:
    7,356
    Likes Received:
    2
    Joined:
    Sep 6, 2008
    Location:
    Bromley, London
    Your Mercedes:
    CLK 320 CAB Elegance C208
    would it not have been fairer for the first car hit to claim via the MIB and the final hit car to claim legitimately off the car that did in fact cause the damage to his car? arbitrary question I know but hey :)

    Thanks for your reply tho :)
     
    Last edited: Dec 4, 2012
  15. ChrisKnottIns

    ChrisKnottIns Forum Supporter Authorised Forum Supporter

    Messages:
    543
    Likes Received:
    9
    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2010
    Location:
    Hastings, East Sussex
    Your Mercedes:
    na
    The MIB's website states: "It is a requirement that the vehicle causing the damage must be identified as a condition of being able to claim for property damage." So unless someone got the reg number an MIB claim wouldn't be successful.
     
  16. racall

    racall Senior Member

    Messages:
    374
    Likes Received:
    0
    Joined:
    Nov 24, 2003
    Location:
    london
    Your Mercedes:
    c class and slk
    Both my cars have seperate policys.C class with AF and Slk with Admiral

    I informed admiral about the claim on the C class

    Admiral said it shouldnt affect my renewal ncd on the Slk but noted there was a claim on the C class car.
    But if i move from them i must declare ive had a claim fault or non fault in the last 5 years

    I read this as i.ll have to stick with admiral for a while.

    If you had a bump in say the firms van would you inform your car insurer.Food for thought!!!!
     
    Last edited: Dec 4, 2012
  17. Mic

    Mic Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,271
    Likes Received:
    127
    Joined:
    Nov 12, 2009
    Location:
    Oxfordshire
    Your Mercedes:
    MB SL500(2003), MB SLK320(2001), Volvo V70 XC AWD(2001)
    I consider this to be the equitable resolution......these are clearly ''no fault'' claims and as such it should be incumbent upon the insurance industry to protect its customers under such circumstances from any and all costs including excesses and the risk of knock on premium hikes/loss of no claims bonuses.
    The resolution effected and affirmed by Chris Knott is an example of the insurance industry failing to keep faith with its innocent clients and is another reason why the industry is held in such low regard.

    Mic
     
  18. drmw

    drmw Moderator

    Messages:
    3,681
    Likes Received:
    112
    Joined:
    Nov 25, 2007
    Location:
    Yorkshire
    Your Mercedes:
    M6 Cab - prior to that, SL63 AMG, A-M V8 Vantage, SL55, SL500 and many more
    Pedantic I know - but that's the stuff of insurance policy wording - surely in this instance, the "vehicle causing the damage" was the car that was parked in front and as such, completely identifiable ?
     
  19. Gkinghorn

    Gkinghorn Senior Member

    Messages:
    2,808
    Likes Received:
    178
    Joined:
    Jul 25, 2009
    Location:
    Bournemouth
    Your Mercedes:
    E350 CDI Cabriolet - 2011
    if you don't and they find out and you make a claim you'll be uninsured!
     
  20. ChrisKnottIns

    ChrisKnottIns Forum Supporter Authorised Forum Supporter

    Messages:
    543
    Likes Received:
    9
    Joined:
    Sep 10, 2010
    Location:
    Hastings, East Sussex
    Your Mercedes:
    na
    As I said above, car 3 (the end vehicle) would claim off car 2 and car 2 would include those costs in it's own claim against car 1 (which in this case is unidentified) so the MIB couldn't pick up the claim. It's not fair for car 2 to foot the entire bill so each of the insurers agree to cover their own costs.

    Whether you agree with it or not, that's how it works - sorry.
     

Share This Page