car insurance question

grasscutter

My partner has had many happy years of claim free driving and the car insurance was down to around 440 euro for 1.3L with the Hibernian new driver thing.

Today she was in an incident which will result in a claim against her insurance and she hadnt taken out the no claims protection previously

What cost is she probably now looking at for next years insurance?
Does anybody have any similar stories and legal ways round having to pay top dollar?

seamus

grasscutter wrote:

My partner has had many happy years of claim free driving and the car insurance was down to around 440 euro for 1.3L with the Hibernian new driver thing.

Today she was in an incident which will result in a claim against her insurance and she hadnt taken out the no claims protection previously

What cost is she probably now looking at for next years insurance?
Does anybody have any similar stories and legal ways round having to pay top dollar?

Assuming she had a 50% NCB, then she's looking at around €900 without the NCB. If the claim is minor (<= €2000) then she's unlikely to have her premium loaded.
In terms of legally keeping the premium down, about the only things that can be done are to reduce the theft risk (by installing extra security features), reduce the amount of driving done (some insurers give a discount for driving < 5k miles/year), and add you as a named driver, assuming you have a full NCB and full licence.

Eoin

grasscutter wrote:

My partner has had many happy years of claim free driving and the car insurance was down to around 440 euro for 1.3L with the Hibernian new driver thing.

Today she was in an incident which will result in a claim against her insurance and she hadnt taken out the no claims protection previously

What cost is she probably now looking at for next years insurance?
Does anybody have any similar stories and legal ways round having to pay top dollar?

There are way too many variables there for you to get an answer that will be of much use to you. Even if there was no accident, the chances are that someone of the same age, experience, car would be paying a different premium due to the somewhat fickle nature of Irish Insurance.

For what it's worth, the following details would be useful: her age, # of years driving history, amount of damage done in the incident (i.e. just a fender-bender, more serious body work, chance of damages being sought).

When is the policy next due? If the claim is not settled by then, you could be talking about a hefty increase - some of which may be refunded when the case is settled, if the settlement ends up to be low enough.

grasscutter

thanks for the quick replies

she has around 4 years no claims, 30 years of age


The other car was able to drive away so I presume there wasnt that much damage. I wasnt there at the time so havent seen the damage for myself.
Our house is a blind corner and car swerved to avoid hitting her as she pulled out and hit our wall which is a bit of a double whammy.

Eoin

grasscutter wrote:

thanks for the quick replies

she has around 4 years no claims, 30 years of age


The other car was able to drive away so I presume there wasnt that much damage. I wasnt there at the time so havent seen the damage for myself.
Our house is a blind corner and car swerved to avoid hitting her as she pulled out and hit our wall which is a bit of a double whammy.

hmmm, so she never actually hit the other car?

grasscutter

basically

other car was damaged and our garden wall :-(

Seth Brundle

...and this is her fault because?
She did not force the other driver to drive at a speed that required evasive action.
You should be claiming off the other driver for damage to your wall!

Eoin

kbannon wrote:

...and this is her fault because?
She did not force the other driver to drive at a speed that required evasive action.
You should be claiming off the other driver for damage to your wall!

Well, it could well be a case that the other car would have definitely crashed into the OPs partner if no evasive manoeuvres had been taken, but as it stands, she did not hit the car so may not be liable at all?

grasscutter

she phoned the gards and its something to do with her pulling out onto the road means its her fault

seamus

Ouch. Well at least she's not off the road waiting for your car to get fixed

Did she own up straight away? Is there any chance the other vehicle was speeding/overtaking/otherwise driving carelessly?

toffeapple

grasscutter wrote:

she phoned the gards and its something to do with her pulling out onto the road means its her fault

let them prove it

Bogger77

Firstly, did she say to the other driver that she was at fault. Hopefully she didn't say anything.

Did she reverse onto the road, or drive forwards onto the road. My reading of it is if she reversed, she was breaking the law, and maybe judged liable. If she was driving forwards, and the corner is blind as you say, then legally I can't see how she would be liable for another car taking that corner at excess speed, and remember its the other car's responsiblity to drive at a speed at which it can stop, esp on corners.

If she didn't accept responsibility, and she was driving forwards onto the road, initiate a claim for damages to your wall against the other driver. Of course, talk to solicitor and insurance company firstly.

If neither of the above is true, then talk to insurance comany but it's likely that some % of fault maybe hers, but I'd fight on the speed issue.

grasscutter

thats the problem she did admit it verbally to the dude.

The way I see it if it can be settled by parting with a couple of hundred then its worth it. Any more than that and its let the insurance company sort it out.

toffeapple

did he get it in writing?
people can be pressured into admitting things

Rudolph Claus

She probably pulled oput onto the road, dodnt bother to look in her rearview mirrir when she was out on the road and probably continued to crawl along in 2nd gear instead of driving on up through the gears in case of a car coming around the blind corner.

I see this everyday at a junction near my house, i come around a bend on a main road, and some dopey **** pulls out onto the main road from a junction and instead of moving up the road fast, they crawl meaning you have to slam on your brakes or overtake the dope.

please, tell me your wife wasnt reversing out onto the road, and was she even aware of the other car behind her at any stage or was the 1st she saw of it when it swerved around her. ie:she never looked in her mirrors. :rolleyes:

Ps: how is it that poor guys fault, because some woman carelessly pulls out in front of him.

MrPudding

Why are you claiming off your car insurance for this? Would you not be better to claim it off you house insurance? Assuming of course she is actually liable. I would want to check that. As far as I know a verbal admission of guilt at the scene in the heat of the moment can be challenged.

MrP

grasscutter

a big thanks to the majority who have answered so promptly with positive comments and information

"A problem shared is a problem halved"

Bogger77

Actually, I'm with Mr P on this, if there is no contact between the cars, she can't be liable.
Talk to solicitor. and send all correspondance from the other party to solicitor, send a nice letter stating damages to your wall, asking other party to pay.

JohnCleary

Uh, without trying to sound ignorant...

If she did not accept liability to the Guards/In writing id tell the other person to fupoff tbh.

If your wifes car did not touch the other persons car then she is not liable. Full stop.

Sorry if this seems ignorant (I know ill probably get slated), but thats life my boyos. Only a sucker would accept liability for somehting like that, especially since the cars didnt touch and risk of her losing 4 years NCB

JohnCleary

MrPudding wrote:

As far as I know a verbal admission of guilt at the scene in the heat of the moment can be challenged.

MrP

It can, happened a friend of mine. At the time of the accidnet, the other party accepted liability and asked for the Gardai not to be rang. We rang the Gardai (You'd be a fool not to if your not at fault), and when he went to take statment/details the other party denied accepting liability.

Atomic Pineapple

never admit liability at an accident unless it is totally and clearly your fault
if she's admitted fault to the gardai already its unlikely she can change her mind so easily but if she hasnt then i agree you should challenge it.

if its a blind bend then i assume there is signs warning of a hidden entrance/exit before the bend? if so it should be easy to challenge with the opinion that the other person was driving around the bend without due care.

Seth Brundle

MrPudding wrote:

Why are you claiming off your car insurance for this? Would you not be better to claim it off you house insurance? Assuming of course she is actually liable. I would want to check that. As far as I know a verbal admission of guilt at the scene in the heat of the moment can be challenged.

MrP

I firmly believe that they shouldnt be claiming off either theri home or motor insurance. They did not cause the damage!

MrPudding

draffodx wrote:

never admit liability at an accident unless it is totally and clearly your fault

I would change this line slightly. Try, "never admit liability at an accident." I used to have a military license and one of it's conditions was to never ever admit liability no matter how apparent it seems you were at fault.

kbannon wrote:

I firmly believe that they shouldnt be claiming off either theri home or motor insurance. They did not cause the damage!

Exactly.

MrP

Litcagral

draffodx wrote:

never admit liability at an accident unless it is totally and clearly your faultQUOTE]



You should NEVER EVER admit liability at the scene of an accident. Most motor insurance companies will insist on this anyway as they will more than likely be dealing with the situation. There is also the danger of thinking that you may have been wrong when there may be other mitigating circumstances, eg the other driver may have been drunk - ever though you may have made the mistake.

Seth Brundle

If you read the literature given to you by your insurance company you will see something about never admitting liability!

seamus

Even if you fell asleep at the wheel, drove off a bridge and landed on a convoy of pensioner cyclists, do not admit liability.

Atomic Pineapple

well i meant like if it was something silly and you knew it was your fault and it was only gonna cost a bit, not enough to get insurance involved then i personally would admit my wrong doing and pay for damages caused.

I know that on insurance letters etc... it says never admit liability at the scene of an accident.

Eoin

draffodx wrote:

well i meant like if it was something silly and you knew it was your fault and it was only gonna cost a bit, not enough to get insurance involved then i personally would admit my wrong doing and pay for damages caused.

I would still be very wary of doing that. Suppose you tip into someone and dent their bumper. The two of you look at the damage, agree that it is probably quite minor and you say you will pay for it, but exchange insurance details all the same (as you should do in any incident I think).

You could get a call the next day saying that the entire bumper has to be replaced, and that will cost more. You have admitted liability. Or worse, you give them a personal check and you find out that they have also lodged a claim for a new bumper and a crippling case of whiplash.

Atomic Pineapple

hhhmmm good point, am too trusting