Car damaged in floods

Unrealman

Hi

Last week my car stalled in a massive flood. Problem is that I was on company business using my private car , and I my premium does not cover me whilst on company business.

Now I face the problem of replacing the car as it is probably going to be a write-off. I had no plans to change the car and the problem is compounded by the fact that recently I the car passed the NCT but not with considerable expenditure on my behalf

The companies stance is that I am not covered and more or less tough luck. I am peeved off with this perspective as I have effectively become carless whilst using my own car on company business. I will probably re-coup most of value of car on inmsurance but have spent €1000 to get it NCT ready + €300 (excess on policy) + loss of no claims.

Any advice on how I could attempt to negotiate with company?

Toots

Moved to Motors.

Seth Brundle

I don't see how you could negotiate with them given that these are usually specifically defined in the policy.
I'm curious to know how your car stalled in a "massive flood" - did you actually choose to drive into the "massive flood".

Should I and others suffer an increase to our policy because people decided to wreck their cars by driving into a lake? Its a harsh accusation but one that will unfortunately become reality and the type of view taken by the insurance companys!


edit: what was the €300 spent on your excess actually for if the insurance company aren't covering it?

Anan1

I'm a bit lost. How will you 'probably recoup most of value of car on insurance' if the insurance company are saying you're not covered?

Mr Benevolent

Why are you trying to get your company policy to pay for a car they don't insure? Why not go to the insurance company that covers your private car? Makes no sense tbh.

Marlow

Honestly:

You can only claim on the company policy, if you use a company car.

If you use your own car to claim milage instead, you need to make sure, that your insurance covers you. Not your companies problem. That's your own risk in this situation.

By not using common sense, driving into a puddle, wrecking your own car and then claiming on your own insurance you hurt not only your no claims, your excess and your policy price, but everybody elses too. The more that do it, the more it'll hurt everybody in Ireland next year.

You should have checked, where your airintake is and other stuff and how deep the puddle is and if you can possibly pass it, before driving in there.

/M

Henry Ford III

If you were on company business were you getting mileage?

If so, and you didn't have class II cover on your private motor policy it's frankly hard to have any sympathy.

Drummerboy08

In fairness, I just wouldnt have driven through the flood in the first place.
Two lessons (hopefully) learned here -

1 - Dont drive through a flood if you are anyway unsure, have never driven in deep enough water, or have a car with a low air intake, regardless of what has gone before you.

2 - Make sure you have adequate insurance to cover you.

hblock21

Unrealman wrote: »

Hi

Last week my car stalled in a massive flood. Problem is that I was on company business using my private car , and I my premium does not cover me whilst on company business.

Now I face the problem of replacing the car as it is probably going to be a write-off. I had no plans to change the car and the problem is compounded by the fact that recently I the car passed the NCT but not with considerable expenditure on my behalf

The companies stance is that I am not covered and more or less tough luck. I am peeved off with this perspective as I have effectively become carless whilst using my own car on company business. I will probably re-coup most of value of car on inmsurance but have spent €1000 to get it NCT ready + €300 (excess on policy) + loss of no claims.

Any advice on how I could attempt to negotiate with company?

Why would you bother telling the insurance company it was a business trip?!!?!

I_luv_2_ski!

hblock21 i was thinking the same thing!!!

My mam did this a few years ago in Lucan...she saw a small cinquecento go through and thought "if that can get through so can i" well a few seconds later mams Chrysler Voyager (big car) stopped...flooded engine!!! as the car was only a year old she got a new engine and when selling the car a year later it only had half the millage it would have had!!!

*not to self* always know where your air intake is...in most FIATs its right under the bonnet so Im always good!!!

Go to your local mechanic and see can he fit a 2nd hand engine...i got one awhile ago cause mine overheated and blew up (well there was alot of smoke/steam) and i got a 2nd hand one fitted and all for €750 cash!

Henry Ford III

hblock21 wrote: »

Why would you bother telling the insurance company it was a business trip?!!?!

It'd be an attempt to defraud if he didn't. Some would call it attempted theft.

Henry Ford III

Henry Ford III wrote: »

It'd be an attempt to defraud if he didn't. Some would call it attempted theft.

Ah come on. You would be insane to mention it. I don't see how driving from A to B while working is any different than driving from A to B in the evening. Its the same roads and is it really any different than driving to work in the morning?

The insurance company probably wont even ask.

I dont think it is fraud its just too small a detail, you are driving your car which you have paid to insure but it just happens to be going somewhere for work.

I would say almost everybody in the country drives there private car on company business at some point.

Mr Benevolent

Eden Enough Sauce wrote: »

Ah come on. You would be insane to mention it. I don't see how driving from A to B while working is any different than driving from A to B in the evening. Its the same roads and is it really any different than driving to work in the morning?

The insurance company probably wont even ask.

I dont think it is fraud its just too small a detail, you are driving your car which you have paid to insure but it just happens to be going somewhere for work.

I would say almost everybody in the country drives there private car on company business at some point.

Insurance companies are far smarter then you think. 'Utmost good faith' is a basic principle of insurance and they don't take kindly to customers trying it on.

Anan1

Let's have no more encouraging people to commit insurance fraud, thanks.

Seth Brundle

Eden Enough Sauce wrote: »

Ah come on. You would be insane to mention it. I don't see how driving from A to B while working is any different than driving from A to B in the evening. Its the same roads and is it really any different than driving to work in the morning?

The insurance company probably wont even ask.

I dont think it is fraud its just too small a detail, you are driving your car which you have paid to insure but it just happens to be going somewhere for work.

I would say almost everybody in the country drives there private car on company business at some point.

Do you not realise that when others make claims, all policyholders end up paying for it. When you make a false claim, then you are expecting others to pay.
Like the advert says, you are stealing from me and everyone else here who is honest.

kbannon

kbannon wrote: »

Do you not realise that when others make claims, all policyholders end up paying for it. When you make a false claim, then you are expecting others to pay.
Like the advert says, you are stealing from me and everyone else here who is honest.

I completely understand that and I am totally against false personal injury claims and other completely blatant fraudulent claims however( I'm not encouraging anybody to make a false claim here just giving my opinion) I don't see why it makes a difference that he was driving somewhere on business. As I said he was driving legally, insured, tax'd nct'd but as he was on work time he cannot claim on his insurance its just seams ridiculous to me thats all.

hblock21

kbannon wrote: »

Do you not realise that when others make claims, all policyholders end up paying for it. When you make a false claim, then you are expecting others to pay.
Like the advert says, you are stealing from me and everyone else here who is honest.

Don't ever go into the loss assessing business then!

In any insurance claim done by a smart assessor / quantity surveyor, the client cleans up!

I could give you examples...but I won't, because it will just shock everyone! (I'm shocked myself sometimes, the money you can get for relatively small damage)

Anan1

Eden Enough Sauce wrote: »

I completely understand that and I am totally against false personal injury claims and other completely blatant fraudulent claims however( I'm not encouraging anybody to make a false claim here just giving my opinion) I don't see why it makes a difference that he was driving somewhere on business. As I said he was driving legally, insured, tax'd nct'd but as he was on work time he cannot claim on his insurance its just seams ridiculous to me thats all.

The OP could have paid extra for Class II cover, which would have provided cover for business use of the car. They didn't, and the car is therefore not covered for business use. That's why claiming they weren't using the car for business at the time would be fraud.

Seth Brundle

hblock21 wrote: »

Don't ever go into the loss assessing business then!

In any insurance claim done by a smart assessor / quantity surveyor, the client cleans up!

I could give you examples...but I won't, because it will just shock everyone! (I'm shocked myself sometimes, the money you can get for relatively small damage)

The client being the person who pays the assessor which in many cases will be the insurance company.
However, any claims paid out will be borne by existing and future policyholders!

hblock21

kbannon wrote: »

The client being the person who pays the assessor which in many cases will be the insurance company.
However, any claims paid out will be borne by existing and future policyholders!

I know. But money makes the world go round!

Anan1

hblock21 wrote: »

I know. But money makes the world go round!

Is this of any relevance to kbannon's point that fraudulent claims inevitably increase premiums for the rest of us?

Seth Brundle

interesting article on the flood and insurance issue
http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/motors/2009/1125/1224259388500.html

no1beemerfan

What I CAN'T understand is people driving into floods. And drive too fast through them then.

Like has already been said we'll all be paying for other people's stupidity when our premiums are up for renewal next year.

galwaytt

...indeed. Speaking to someone at the w/end on how to tackle floods, and they said they alway presumed to rev it right up just before entering !

Wow, suck up all the water why dontcha ? :rolleyes:

O/T that link to the IT above, interesting that Personal Accident claims are up by 24% last year. WOW, does that mean that the Celtic Tiger was more a cause for lower premia than PIAB ? Now that one is dead, and other with us, and claims are up.........certainly looks like it !

maidhc

kbannon wrote: »

Do you not realise that when others make claims, all policyholders end up paying for it. When you make a false claim, then you are expecting others to pay.
Like the advert says, you are stealing from me and everyone else here who is honest.

You are of course right, but a little naive. Insurers are anything but squeaky clean, and in fact are well able to act the cnut and bend the law when it suits them. You want a source? Here: http://www.mlaw.ie/news/harassed-plaintiff-settles-claim-on-favourable-terms

Now we are assuming the OP does not have insurance, but here is a assumption made by 123.ie when providing a quote (on their website as of today)

"Vehicle is used for social domestic and pleasure purposes including commuting to and from work or use in connection with your business but excluding use for the carriage of goods or passengers for hire or reward or for soliciting of commercial orders."

Whether or not the OP is technically insured or not is one matter, BUT, they are not making a false claim in the sense of feigning an injury. The fact is the OP suffered damage and the insurance co is trying to avoid cover. There are different things.

(BTW your premium will probably go though the roof because some investments made by insurers have lost 90+% of their value more than paying for the odd flooded car)

star.chaser

I'd never encourage anyone to make a false insurance claim but if this was me, I would omit telling them I was on business.

I.S.T.

Unrealman wrote: »

Hi

Last week my car stalled in a massive flood.

Marlow wrote: »

By not using common sense, driving into a puddle, wrecking your own car ...

...You should have checked, where your airintake is and other stuff and how deep the puddle is and if you can possibly pass it, before driving in there.

Drummerboy08 wrote: »

In fairness, I just wouldnt have driven through the flood in the first place.
Two lessons (hopefully) learned here -

1 - Dont drive through a flood if you are anyway unsure,...

no1beemerfan wrote: »

What I CAN'T understand is people driving into floods. And drive too fast through them then..

Can't anyone ask a question in this forum without getting the usual moral high-horse "i told you so" responses? :rolleyes:

galwaytt

IrishSpeedTraps wrote: »

Can't anyone ask a question in this forum without getting the usual moral high-horse "i told you so" responses? :rolleyes:

I dunno -can we ? And, let's not forget....the High Moral Ground is........dry

meathstevie

To the best of my knowledge insurance is there at the minimum to protect others ( 3rd parties) from accidental loss and damage caused by the insured. When a comprehensive policy is paid for it will also protect you from your own accidental losses and damage including fire and theft. Where in driving through a flood does the factor "accidental" play a role ? It sounds harsh but as far as I can see there's nothing accidental about what happened.

Anan1

star.chaser wrote: »

I'd never encourage anyone to make a false insurance claim but if this was me, I would omit telling them I was on business.

I've already warned about this in the thread, next time it'll be a week off.

Henry Ford III

hblock21 wrote: »

I know. But money makes the world go round!

That's no excuse for fraud however.

Anan1

IrishSpeedTraps wrote: »

Can't anyone ask a question in this forum without getting the usual moral high-horse "i told you so" responses? :rolleyes:

If you think they're wrong then address their points - all this accusing people of being on their high horses without any supporting argument is getting very old.

Anan1

maidhc wrote: »

Whether or not the OP is technically insured or not is one matter, BUT, they are not making a false claim in the sense of feigning an injury. The fact is the OP suffered damage and the insurance co is trying to avoid cover. There are different things.

Your post made interesting reading, and I for one would not be a huge fan of insurance companies. That said, it appears to me that the insurance company is trying to avoid cover because Class II cover was neither sought nor paid for by the OP? I assume that the OP has thoroughly read through their policy document to see whether they are in fact covered under the terms of the policy.

100gSoma

If your insurer can prove that you drove through a puddle they won't cover it as that was avoidable and your own fault. If you can prove that your underground car park etc flooded overnight and it was not avoidable / your fault, I think you may have a chance.
Policies are due to increase 20% in 2010 before this flooding, who knows what will happen now with so many people "chancing" driving through 'puddles' and waterlocking(permanent engine damage) their car and then expected a new engine from their policy.

Anan1

100gSoma wrote: »

If your insurer can prove that you drove through a puddle they won't cover it as that was avoidable and your own fault. If you can prove that your underground car park etc flooded overnight and it was not avoidable / your fault, I think you may have a chance.

This is in direct contradiction of a quote attributed to Michael Horan of the Irish Insurance Federation in this article, posted earlier in the thread: http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/motors/2009/1125/1224259388500.html

100gSoma

Anan1 wrote: »

This is in direct contradiction of a quote attributed to Michael Horan of the Irish Insurance Federation in this article, posted earlier in the thread: http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/motors/2009/1125/1224259388500.html

Well, I guess I was done by my insurer earlier in the year They would not pay out on my policy as I drove through a puddle intentionally and risked the damage of my own volition.
I wish I had that article in February.

Anan1

100gSoma wrote: »

Well, I guess I was done by my insurer earlier in the year They would not pay out on my policy as I drove through a puddle intentionally and risked the damage of my own volition.
I wish I had that article in February.

I'd give the IIF a call if I were you.

Seth Brundle

100gSoma wrote: »

Policies are due to increase 20% in 2010 before this flooding, who knows what will happen now with so many people "chancing" driving through 'puddles' and waterlocking(permanent engine damage) their car and then expected a new engine from their policy.

That will be the least of your worries IMO - with Gormley pushing for his carbon taxes and Lenihan pushing to empty peoples wallets, we will have no money left to run our cars!

jimoc

Has a mechanic actually looked at the car yet so see how much damage is done?

I few years ago, I drove into what I thought was a roadside puddle but turned out to be a 1 foot deep pool of water, I got about 100 feet down the road and then the car completely died and wouldn't even tick over.

I was leaving for a holiday that night so I just got the AA to tow me back home and left the car. After I told the AA guy what had happened, he told me I had sucked water into the engine and probably would need a new engine.

Came home a week later, turned the key and it worked!.

So maybe it just needs a good going over with a hair dryer

I_luv_2_ski!

jimoc wrote: »

So maybe it just needs a good going over with a hair dryer

it works for phones why not for cars??? lol...or you could try puttin it in the hot press!!! between the tank and the insulation is best!!!

lucky yoy jimoc...got away nicely!!!