Extortionate claim without notificaton

HelloYoungBoy

So I was involved in an accident about 6 months ago. No damage to anyone. Hit a barrier after slipping on damp conditions. The Gardai came and took my details and I had to be towed from the scene. I covered this cost myself. I was told there would be no further action given the conditions. Front bumper had to be replaced on my own vehicle which I handled myself, not claiming from the insurance company. I received a phone call today from my insurance company saying that they were to pay out on repairs to the barrier for 3 THOUSAND EURO! For a tiny section of a barrier. Literally out of nowhere. This is the first I've heard of it. Apparently the claim went through the motor bureau. The insurance company said they are paying it and that my no claims bonus will now be wiped, hiking up my premium massively. How can this just come out of nowhere? Surely I should have been notified well before now? What are my rights etc what can I do
One very disgruntled motorist

beechwood55

http://www.thejournal.ie/how-you-could-end-up-with-a-hefty-bill-if-you-crash-on-the-m50-479609-Jun2012/

That article refers to the M50, presume same procedure applies to any other road.

As a matter of interest if you had been notified what would you have done?

bmm

Find out who sent the bill for 3k and have a chat with them explaining the circumstances. It looks like you or insurance will have to pay something for the barrier. The question is how much.

HelloYoungBoy

beechwood55 wrote: »

http://www.thejournal.ie/how-you-could-end-up-with-a-hefty-bill-if-you-crash-on-the-m50-479609-Jun2012/

That article refers to the M50, presume same procedure applies to any other road.

As a matter of interest if you had been notified what would you have done?

Thanks for that link. Well I would certainly have challenged the 3K cost of repair. I cant understand how I was not notified directly by the private company.

HelloYoungBoy

bmm wrote: »

Find out who sent the bill for 3k and have a chat with them explaining the circumstances. It looks like you or insurance will have to pay something for the barrier. The question is how much.

I appreciate your input. Knowing these private companies I reckon they will look for every cent they can get their hands on

Liam McPoyle

Those barriers are very expensive to replace.

I'm dealing with a non disclosure case at the moment.

We are declining the damage to the insured vehicle however are on the hook for the crash barrier he hit.

Its something in the region of €5000 to €6000.

Due to the safety requirements its not just a matter of replacing the damaged section, the case we have means a stretch of barrier a number of meters long has to be completely replaced.

How did the MIBI get involved?

Did you just crash into the barrier and not report it to anyone?

HelloYoungBoy

Rod Munch wrote: »

Those barriers are very expensive to replace.

I'm dealing with a non disclosure case at the moment.

We are declining the damage to the insured vehicle however are on the hook for the crash barrier he hit.

Its something in the region of €5000 to €6000.

Due to the safety requirements its not just a matter of replacing the damaged section, the case we have means a stretch of barrier a number of meters long has to be completely replaced.

How did the MIBI get involved?

Did you just crash into the barrier and not report it to anyone?

Thanks again for the input. The Gardai came at the time and took my details etc. They said there would be no further consequences given the conditions when the accident happened. Who else was I supposed to do?

Liam McPoyle

HelloYoungBoy wrote: »

Thanks again for the input. The Gardai came at the time and took my details etc. They said there would be no further consequences given the conditions when the accident happened. Who else was I supposed to do?

The guards know zilch about insurance so they should not have told you that.

As part of your policy conditions you are obliged to advise your insurer of any incident that may give rise to a claim, even if you yourself have no intention of making a claim yourself.

I can understand though why you didnt as it is somewhat of a grey area.

HelloYoungBoy

Rod Munch wrote: »

HelloYoungBoy wrote: »

Thanks again for the input. The Gardai came at the time and took my details etc. They said there would be no further consequences given the conditions when the accident happened. Who else was I supposed to do?

The guards know zilch about insurance so they should not have told you that.

As part of your policy conditions you are obliged to advise your insurer of any incident that may give rise to a claim, even if you yourself have no intention of making a claim yourself.

I can understand though why you didnt as it is somewhat of a grey area.

Ya I knew I was going to patch up the car myself because I didnt want it to affect my no claims bonus. If I had known that a private company would seek to claim back the cost of the barrier I would have taken pictures myself as evidence. Serves as a warning to everyone I suppose

NUTLEY BOY

bmm wrote: »

Find out who sent the bill for 3k and have a chat with them explaining the circumstances. It looks like you or insurance will have to pay something for the barrier. The question is how much.

If the insurers are dealing with it the OP cannot enter negotiations or discussions with the claimant.

OP should certainly make his concerns clearly known to his insurers and insist that the quantum of the repairs is adequately verified by someone such as a loss adjuster.

TheQuietFella

HelloYoungBoy wrote: »

Thanks again for the input. The Gardai came at the time and took my details etc. They said there would be no further consequences given the conditions when the accident happened. Who else was I supposed to do?

Why did you not contact the injured party?

NUTLEY BOY

Rod Munch wrote: »

The guards know zilch about insurance so they should not have told you that. SNIP SNIP

When Gardai informed OP that there would be " no further consequences given the conditions when the accident happened " they would not have been referring to civil liability. The Gardaí would have been referring to their interest in the matter namely whether or not motoring offences had been committed. They obviously took a fair and benign view of the matter.

Gardaí know full well not to make judgments on civil liabilities. As they say in Garda-speak, the matter will be left to civil remedy.

HelloYoungBoy

TheQuietFella wrote: »

HelloYoungBoy wrote: »

Thanks again for the input. The Gardai came at the time and took my details etc. They said there would be no further consequences given the conditions when the accident happened. Who else was I supposed to do?

Why did you not contact the injured party?

There was no "injured party"

HelloYoungBoy

NUTLEY BOY wrote: »

bmm wrote: »

Find out who sent the bill for 3k and have a chat with them explaining the circumstances. It looks like you or insurance will have to pay something for the barrier. The question is how much.

If the insurers are dealing with it the OP cannot enter negotiations or discussions with the claimant.

OP should certainly make his concerns clearly known to his insurers and insist that the quantum of the repairs is adequately verified by someone such as a loss adjuster.

They told me that it was obviously too late for them to mitigate the loss by inspecting the damage so they are just paying out on what the private company are requesting

NUTLEY BOY

HelloYoungBoy wrote: »

They told me that it was obviously too late for them to mitigate the loss by inspecting the damage so they are just paying out on what the private company are requesting

That is very unsatisfactory and a bit lazy.

The difficulty here is that even if the barrier could have been seen by a loss adjuster the next day the quantum claimed may actually be reasonable for what was involved. I still cannot see why the insurers do not ask an adjuster to look over the issue of quantum to see if it looks right and reasonable.

I do not like the idea of insurers surrendering without making some basic enquiries on quantum. Apart from the fact that it is their money this also goes against your insurance claims history.

I would tell the insurers that you are considering a complaint to the Financial Services Ombudsman about the quality of the handling of the claim. Specifically, I would complain about their failure to verify the issue of quantum.

If an adjuster looked at the issue of quantum and was satisfied that it was reasonable that would be the end of the matter and there would be no basis for complaint. Otherwise, you are left wondering about whether or not the amount claimed was right.

HelloYoungBoy

NUTLEY BOY wrote: »

HelloYoungBoy wrote: »

They told me that it was obviously too late for them to mitigate the loss by inspecting the damage so they are just paying out on what the private company are requesting

That is very unsatisfactory and a bit lazy.

The difficulty here is that even if the barrier could have been seen by a loss adjuster the next day the quantum claimed may actually be reasonable for what was involved. I still cannot see why the insurers do not ask an adjuster to look over the issue of quantum to see if it looks right and reasonable.

I do not like the idea of insurers surrendering without making some basic enquiries on quantum. Apart from the fact that it is their money this also goes against your insurance claims history.

I would tell the insurers that you are considering a complaint to the Financial Services Ombudsman about the quality of the handling of the claim. Specifically, I would complain about their failure to verify the issue of quantum.

If an adjuster looked at the issue of quantum and was satisfied that it was reasonable that would be the end of the matter and there would be no basis for complaint. Otherwise, you are left wondering about whether or not the amount claimed was right.

Id just like to take this opportunity to thank you for your response. Such knowledge of the industry I would not possess. I'm going to go down that route. They caught me on the hop yesterday when they called me so I didnt really know what to say to them at the time!

NUTLEY BOY

You are welcome.

On re-reading the original post an additional thought occurs to me.

Is OP satisfied about the extent of the actual damage that he caused to the barrier ? I ask this to ensure that what is being claimed is actually all and directly attributable to the OP's collision with the barrier ?

HelloYoungBoy

NUTLEY BOY wrote: »

You are welcome.

On re-reading the original post an additional thought occurs to me.

Is OP satisfied about the extent of the actual damage that he caused to the barrier ? I ask this to ensure that what is being claimed is actually all and directly attributable to the OP's collision with the barrier ?

I do not believe I caused 3K worth of damage seeing as the cost of repair to the car was under 200e. I dont know how I go about proving this though?

Liam McPoyle

NUTLEY BOY wrote: »

That is very unsatisfactory and a bit lazy.

The difficulty here is that even if the barrier could have been seen by a loss adjuster the next day the quantum claimed may actually be reasonable for what was involved. I still cannot see why the insurers do not ask an adjuster to look over the issue of quantum to see if it looks right and reasonable.

I do not like the idea of insurers surrendering without making some basic enquiries on quantum. Apart from the fact that it is their money this also goes against your insurance claims history.

I would tell the insurers that you are considering a complaint to the Financial Services Ombudsman about the quality of the handling of the claim. Specifically, I would complain about their failure to verify the issue of quantum.

If an adjuster looked at the issue of quantum and was satisfied that it was reasonable that would be the end of the matter and there would be no basis for complaint. Otherwise, you are left wondering about whether or not the amount claimed was right.

Tbh he hasn't a leg to stand on.

He did not take any photos and did not inform his insurer of the accident.

The insurer would be well within their rights to cancel his insurance for not notifying them of a potential claim, even though the non notification was completely innocent.

You also do not know what the insurer did or didn't do wrt inspecting the damage.

The damage has most likely already being long repaired and the company responsible are seeking recovery.

Threatening the ombudsman when you are completely in the wrong (by not notifiying the incident) is not an advisable way to operate.

Querying it certainly, but the heavy handed approach will not work.

seamus

HelloYoungBoy wrote: »

There was no "injured party"

Of course there was. You damaged the barrier. That barrier is owned by someone.

That someone is the injured party. Probably Transport Infrastructure Ireland.

But by virtue of the Gardai being present, you had no further obligation to report the incident to the injured party. But you were obliged to report it to your own insurer.

The cost of the damage to your own vehicle is irrelevant. You could run a 1998 Micra into the back of a 171 Lexus and the Lexus repairs will cost 10 or 20 times the Micra repairs.

There's not a whole lot you can do here really unless you want to go to engineering companies and get quotes. Even then all you may prove is that your insurer overpaid, you're not going to get your no claims bonus back.

My understanding is that the insurer are entitled to handle the claim as they see fit, without your express authorisation.

troyzer

Just out of curiosity, even if the OP managed to successfully challenge it and offer to pay the bill themselves, maybe for less than 3,000 euro. Would the incident still go down on their history and negatively affect their premium next time around?

Liam McPoyle

troyzer wrote: »

Just out of curiosity, even if the OP managed to successfully challenge it and offer to pay the bill themselves, maybe for less than 3,000 euro. Would the incident still go down on their history and negatively affect their premium next time around?

If he paid the damages himself then its essentially the same as the claim having never occurred as it did not cost his insurer anything.

NUTLEY BOY

Rod Munch wrote: »

The insurer would be well within their rights to cancel his insurance for not notifying them of a potential claim, even though the non notification was completely innocent. SNIP....

Agreed.

However, as the insurers are actually dealing with the claim it appears that indemnity is being granted under the contract and that is something that renders this point somewhat nugatory. i.e. they would be effectively estopped if they tried to repudiate now.

NUTLEY BOY

Rod Munch wrote: »

SNIP...

You also do not know what the insurer did or didn't do wrt inspecting the damage.

According to the OP "They told me that it was obviously too late for them to mitigate the loss by inspecting the damage so they are just paying out on what the private company are requesting".

NUTLEY BOY

Rod Munch wrote: »

SNIP...

Threatening the ombudsman when you are completely in the wrong (by not notifiying the incident) is not an advisable way to operate.

Querying it certainly, but the heavy handed approach will not work.

Insurers owe their policyholders a duty of care and they are supposed to conform to certain professional standards. If there has been significant failure in this respect the policyholder is certainly entitled to complain. As I posted earlier there would be no basis of complaint if the validity of quantum was verified by the insurers.

There is no point in conflating the preceding point with the issue of non-notification. They are separate issues.

givyjoe

NUTLEY BOY wrote: »

That is very unsatisfactory and a bit lazy.

The difficulty here is that even if the barrier could have been seen by a loss adjuster the next day the quantum claimed may actually be reasonable for what was involved. I still cannot see why the insurers do not ask an adjuster to look over the issue of quantum to see if it looks right and reasonable.

I do not like the idea of insurers surrendering without making some basic enquiries on quantum. Apart from the fact that it is their money this also goes against your insurance claims history.

Isn't this the norm these days?! (Not actually verifying the veracity of claims with a loss adjuster)

Isn't this practice one of the main contributing factors to increased premiums.

Liam McPoyle

NUTLEY BOY wrote: »

Insurers owe their policyholders a duty of care and they are supposed to conform to certain professional standards. If there has been significant failure in this respect the policyholder is certainly entitled to complain. As I posted earlier there would be no basis of complaint if the validity of quantum was verified by the insurers.

There is no point in conflating the preceding point with the issue of non-notification. They are separate issues.

It was around 6 months between the accident and the insurer notifying the OP.

He mentioned the bureau so im assuming that's the MIBI.

Realistically the repairs would have to be done as a matter of urgency so it was impossible for the insurer to carry out the full due diligence because they didn't know of any incident until another party advised them of it.

I have no doubt that they got as much information as they could, insurers do not just cut a cheque unless they know they are snookered.

They most likely had no opportunity to defend the claim and made the payment based on past experiences.

Insurers are not obliged to tell policy holders how they settle a claim.

Its part of the policy conditions that they (the insurer) takes ownership of the claims process ans settle them as they see fit.

With zero opportunity to defend all they can do is settle for what they feel is the best possible figure when liability has been established.

Liam McPoyle

givyjoe wrote: »

Isn't this the norm these days?! (Not actually verifying the veracity of claims with a loss adjuster)

Isn't this practice one of the main contributing factors to increased premiums.

Nonsense.

The fact is its often cheaper to settle a claim "on the steps" than going through a protracted court case, incurring substantial legal fees, on cases they are most likely going to lose.

Often times, particularly with personal injury claims, discretion is the better part of valour.

Its not ideal but with the level of dishonesty out there insurers have no choice but to settle claims for as reasonable an amount as they can.

givyjoe

Rod Munch wrote: »

Nonsense.

The fact is its often cheaper to settle a claim "on the steps" than going through a protracted court case, incurring substantial legal fees, on cases they are most likely going to lose.

Often times, particularly with personal injury claims, discretion is the better part of valour.

Its not ideal but with the level of dishonesty out there insurers have no choice but to settle claims for as reasonable an amount as they can.

Sorry, but are you on about 'nonsense'?

Do you think that insurers not bothering their arse to get claims independently checked isn't happening..? It is.. you've also just been given a specific example by the OP.

Insurers aren't just settling 'on the steps' of a court house, claims aren't even getting that far. It might be cheaper not to get to court, but not to bother their holes checking if any claim should be paid out at all, isn't saving any money.

If this particular claims circumstances were repeated on a home insurance policy, the claim would have been rejected out of hand. You can't go making repairs that have never been verified and then just stick in a claim and get whatever you billed them for (at least for home insurance policies).

Torcaill

HelloYoungBoy wrote: »

I do not believe I caused 3K worth of damage seeing as the cost of repair to the car was under 200e. I dont know how I go about proving this though?

The bill could easily hit that figure when you take in the labour charges required for initial inspection and installation. I'm sure this wasn't a one man quick repair job.

seamus

givyjoe wrote: »

Do you think that insurers not bothering their arse to get claims independently checked isn't happening..? It is.. you've also just been given a specific example by the OP.

Independent checking can only go so far. In the OP's case the insurance company were presented with a bill.

The best an independent assessor can do is look at the itemised bill and confirm or refute the figures given. Without having been there to assess the damage, what else do you think an independent assessment would do?

And more importantly, do you think it would save money?

They look at at 3k claim, do their independent figures and come up with a figure of, let's say, 2,800 euro. But in order to properly dispute that, they'll need to go further and properly investigate the alleged damage and the effort involved. The cost of doing any more investigation is likely to be 3 days work for a loss adjuster at an internal cost of 200 euro per day.

So they pay out.

Liam McPoyle

givyjoe wrote: »

Sorry, but are you on about 'nonsense'?

Do you think that insurers not bothering their arse to get claims independently checked isn't happening..? It is.. you've also just been given a specific example by the OP.

Insurers aren't just settling 'on the steps' of a court house, claims aren't even getting that far. It might be cheaper not to get to court, but not to bother their holes checking if any claim should be paid out at all, isn't saving any money.

If this particular claims circumstances were repeated on a home insurance policy, the claim would have been rejected out of hand. You can't go making repairs that have never been verified and then just stick in a claim and get whatever you billed them for (at least for home insurance policies).

A third party claim came in that they had no forewarning of, approx 6 months after the fact.

The repairs were most likely long completed due to health and safety requirements for whoever is responsible for maintaining the motorway barriers.

There is a massive difference in a homeowner submitting an invoice for damages to their home that they got repaired and a third party submitting an invoice for damage caused.

Liability is not in dispute.

All the insurer can do is as Seamus outlined above and pay the claim.

As I said above, the op or the insurer havnt a leg to stand on.

9935452

Rod Munch wrote: »

Threatening the ombudsman when you are completely in the wrong (by not notifiying the incident) is not an advisable way to operate.

Querying it certainly, but the heavy handed approach will not work.

NUTLEY BOY wrote: »

Insurers owe their policyholders a duty of care and they are supposed to conform to certain professional standards. If there has been significant failure in this respect the policyholder is certainly entitled to complain. As I posted earlier there would be no basis of complaint if the validity of quantum was verified by the insurers.

There is no point in conflating the preceding point with the issue of non-notification. They are separate issues.

Id be inclined to agree with Rod on this .
The op hit another persons property and damaged it . The bill came to 3k to fix it . He seems to be questioning the size of the repair bill but not the fact that he hit and damaged the barrier and is responsible for the repair of it.

Personally i wouldnt be threatening the insurance company with the ombudsman. What will it achieve , you might get the bill down to 2.5k.
Then they would turn around and cancel your insurance for non disclosure and possibly seek to recover costs from you. Try to get insurance after having a policy cancelled
You might win the battle but will lose the war.

HelloYoungBoy

Is the consensus here that I should just put up and shut up rather than possibly making the situation worse?

HelloYoungBoy

Rod Munch wrote: »

troyzer wrote: »

Just out of curiosity, even if the OP managed to successfully challenge it and offer to pay the bill themselves, maybe for less than 3,000 euro. Would the incident still go down on their history and negatively affect their premium next time around?

If he paid the damages himself then its essentially the same as the claim having never occurred as it did not cost his insurer anything.

For those of you who have been following this thread, I have decided to repay the amount to the insurer on the basis that my no claims bonus will now remain untainted