Insurance Claims - How does the insurance industry get away with it?

Hoddlestone

Was in an accident recently where the other driver was clearly at fault and denied liability. I'm not going to go into too much detail but just wanted to get peoples opinions on how this whole system works, being in an accident.

Ok, the incident itself, the other driver drove head first into the side of my car. We got out and I rang the police, who asked if anyone was injured, I said no as nobody was. The officer explained in that case its a civil matter (I thought thats what police do, civil matters?), and the police would not be attending, we should notify our insurance. So I said thats fine, I'm not liable after all (or am I?). I pointed out to the other driver, nobody injured, little damage, I'll get a quote in the morning, you pay me cash, keep your no claims. No, no, your fault, bla bla bla (yeah, because I stuck a magnet on the side of my car?). So I said fine, give me your details and I'll get the money from your insurance. Got his details, registered the accident with my insurance and his (this sounds very easy here, but in truth, just that was a nightmare from both my insurance and his).

Now, they reviewed it, my insurance thinks the other driver is liable and his insurance thinks I'm liable. They (both insurances) are ringing me, him, our witnesses for the last 2 months....

What is going on here? How are insurance companies, who have a vested interest in the outcome meant to decide liability? this is crazy!!!!

Meanwhile I'm left with my car with dents because some ......... I cant finish this, but will once its over.

mickdw

It is a huge help if the gardai do attend. In your case, you should have got an much info from crash site as possible such as witnesses, photos, road position sketches etc.
If you both just swapped details and drove away, it is very dificult to decide who is at fault. Of course the insurers will try to pass cost onto other side.

slimjimmc

Gardaí deal with criminal matters, and public safety, that's their remit. Insurance companies and solicitors deal with civil matters. Unless someone has been injured or a crime is alleged they have no reason to get involved.

You have handed over the case to your insurer and they will decide liability based on the evidence presented, that's why they're trying to to get more info from you and him and witnesses. Neither insurers wants to pay out if they can avoid it, but equally they don't want to get caught up in a protracted and expensive process. It sounds unfair but money talks and the insurance companies tend to choose the path of least expense if they can't pin it on the other.

CiniO

OP I understand your confussion, as I find is stupid as well.
How can insurance comapnies decide who's a fault. Thay are there to pay money, not do investigation.
Garda should be doing it, and in my opinion they should come to the place of accident, if asked to do so, and decide who's fault was it.
That's how it works in most other countries.

Civil matter, criminal matter - what's the difference.
Someone destroyed your property and he's not admiting liability. I see a perfect role for Gardai to intervent here.

If I walk down the street and someone will steal my mobilephone worth 50 euros, Garda will react as that's criminal matter.
If I drive down the road and someone destroys my car worth 10k, Garda don't see reason to intervent.

I find it very stupid and unfair.

Hoddlestone

I think its insane that two people who sit in an office all day, never seen the crash area, find it hard to answer phone calls and emails, get rewarded in their job (or looked on favourably if you will ) for getting the least amount of liable customers, get to decide liability.

I mean this crash I'm talking about is nailed down 100% bonafied not my fault situation over small amounts of money and its taking forever. Also, what if my insurer decides i'm liable when I know, fact, that I'm not? do I have to accept their decision?

If that does happen I will not accept it, not for the money of the repairs or even my NCB going out the window for years. This guy had 3 kids in car and in a different accident could have killed them (its a long story but this guy was about as sharp as an egg). This is the reason for my question about the insurance companies more than anything. If there is no independant body deciding liability then it is their responsibility to make sure accidents are dealt with efficiently and properly. I mean the guy who crashed into me is probably thinking right now, ooh I might get away with it, or maybe I was'nt at fault. This only encourages his bad driving for the future and bad attitude when (note, i say when) he gets into another accident.

I am just absolutely amazed this is the way things are handled, is it like this in all countries? am I only one who thinks this is insane?

Also, the damages I am claiming for are under 500 yo yo. Is it even possible to get a judge or even the justice system to listen to you for a claim so small?

CiniO

Hoddlestone wrote: »

I am just absolutely amazed this is the way things are handled, is it like this in all countries? am I only one who thinks this is insane?

For comparision in Poland, if you have even a very minor crash, you can always call the police if you wish to. Obviously you can agree who was at fault, and write a statement what actually happened signed by both. Then with this statement you go to insurance company.
But if it's unclear, or someone is denying his fault, you can always call police, and they will come (sometimes you might have to wait for them a good while - even up to few hours, sometimes it takes only couple of minutes). Anyway - when they come, they ask both drivers what happened, they investigate traces left at the scene, and they decide who's at fault and give a written statement. (which is useful while claiming insurance).
Obviously person who they say is at fault can not agree with their decision (but it's rarely happens) and then case goes to court.

oldyouth

CiniO wrote: »

OP I understand your confussion, as I find is stupid as well.
How can insurance comapnies decide who's a fault. Thay are there to pay money, not do investigation.

That's exactly what they are there for. Responsibility has to be established for a payment against your insurance to be made. Would you be happy if your insurance company paid out next day to a gobsheen who ploughed in to your car, leaving you with no NCB and a claims record?

When both parties claim to be in the right, establishing the facts can take time. Sometimes it should proceed quicker but that's how it is when neither party's version of events demonstrates clear negligence

robtri

oldyouth wrote: »

That's exactly what they are there for. Responsibility has to be established for a payment against your insurance to be made. Would you be happy if your insurance company paid out next day to a gobsheen who ploughed in to your car, leaving you with no NCB and a claims record?

When both parties claim to be in the right, establishing the facts can take time. Sometimes it should proceed quicker but that's how it is when neither party's version of events demonstrates clear negligence

going to agree with this 100%

if the insurance company didnt investigate... then u would be found 50% liable.. as the other driver said it was your fault.

investigations can take time...