Reporting accidents where you're not claiming-do they penalise you?

Mikenesson

As the question says

If you're reporting an accident as required but damages are being repaired privately

Are you still going to get hammered on renewal anyway.?

I know some people don't notify but that is a risky thing to do and risks a cancellation

Henry Ford III

Who was at fault?

wirelessdude01

Why bother reporting if you aren't going through the insurance? Don't see the point.

Mikenesson

Henry Ford III wrote: »

Who was at fault?

Not established

Reason for reporting I thought is obvious in some cases

You're depending on the other party involved not to notify their insurance at any stage

whomitconcerns

wirelessdude01 wrote: »

Why bother reporting if you aren't going through the insurance? Don't see the point.

Because you are required to do so. It can allow them to invalidate a claim at a later stage if they find pre-existing damage

youngblood

If your not making a claim and do report it to your insurance company, should your premium increase?

Mikenesson

youngblood wrote: »

If your not making a claim and do report it to your insurance company, should your premium increase?

That's what I'm asking

If you decided not to report an incident and settle privately your fate is in another person's hands to an extent as they can later decide to notifty their insurer or claim if the deal goes sour.

Btw I'm not advocating the above ,I actually reported a minor incident being settled privately

Henry Ford III

Consider a really poor but wealthy driver who has a series of crashes and just coughs up every time out of his/her pocket.

Any insurer would want to/would be entitled to know about crashes.

Eggs For Dinner

Firstly, you're obliged to notify your insurer of any incident that could give rise to a claim. Break a policy condition at your peril
Secondly, it rarely ends well to try and settle privately and as you say yourself, liability has not been established here
Finally, insurers do not increase premiums where no claim has been made and no cost incurred

Mikenesson

Eggs For Dinner wrote: »

Firstly, you're obliged to notify your insurer of any incident that could give rise to a claim. Break a policy condition at your peril
Secondly, it rarely ends well to try and settle privately and as you say yourself, liability has not been established here
Finally, insurers do not increase premiums where no claim has been made and no cost incurred

Are you certain of the last part or just an opinion?

Eggs For Dinner

Mikenesson wrote: »

Are you certain of the last part or just an opinion?

I am 100% certain on the 1st two points I made. As for the 3rd, I've never seen it happen but there is nothing to stop an insurer quoting what he likes, claim or no claim

whomitconcerns

Well speaking for the UK. When you have a no fault claim they still increase your risk factor. This was confirmed to me by admiral insurance as once you've had an accident irregardless they say your more likely to have another one.

Eggs For Dinner

whomitconcerns wrote:

Well speaking for the UK. When you have a no fault claim they still increase your risk factor. This was confirmed to me by admiral insurance as once you've had an accident irregardless they say your more likely to have another one.

Whoever said that to you was talking through theirr hoop. The specific circumstances of some accidents may give an indication to your insurers as to the standard of your driving and therefore an increased possibility of another incident. However, to say any accident irregardless is not correct

whomitconcerns

Eggs For Dinner wrote: »

whomitconcerns wrote:

Well speaking for the UK. When you have a no fault claim they still increase your risk factor. This was confirmed to me by admiral insurance as once you've had an accident irregardless they say your more likely to have another one.

Whoever said that to you was talking through theirr hoop. The specific circumstances of some accidents may give an indication to your insurers as to the standard of your driving and therefore an increased possibility of another incident. However, to say any accident irregardless is not correct

Well my insurance company told me that. So take from that what you wish. I was stopped at traffic lights when someone else tried to squeeze between me and the car in the right lane... Insane but anyway...

jcd5971

Had a tip last year the guy was in the.
wrong he tried to overtake me but it was unsafe, so he had to break hard and pull back in, making contact with my rear right bumper his front left bumper.


We pulled over no damage to either car.
I rang my insurance and he used my phone to ring his as well. Neither seemed to worried when it was apparent there was no claim.

I never heard more about it again and renewed since.

Can't speak to the other drivers renewal however.

galwaytt

My SO was involved in an accident (other party's fault), and so for 5 years we've had to disclose she's been involved in an accident (which the other party 100% admitted & paid for) - and there hasn't been any evidence at all of it affecting her renewals since.

That said, I too had a tip about 6 years ago. We were to to settle it between ourselves, which was fine by me, the sum involved was not great. However, we fell out over the costs, and she put it through her insurance against mine. Did I mention she worked for an insurance company ...? And just happened to be the one I was with as well......and I magically came out as at-fault ? Or that after 6 weeks, the assessor still hadn't even assessed my vehicle, nor interviewed the independent witnesses...........but her car was fixed and paid for inside 2 weeks ?

I'll leave you to your own conclusions on the veracity of anything I hear from any insurance person now............

Eggs For Dinner

galwaytt wrote: »

That said, I too had a tip about 6 years ago. We were to to settle it between ourselves, which was fine by me, the sum involved was not great. However, we fell out over the costs, and she put it through her insurance against mine. Did I mention she worked for an insurance company ...? And just happened to be the one I was with as well......and I magically came out as at-fault ? Or that after 6 weeks, the assessor still hadn't even assessed my vehicle, nor interviewed the independent witnesses...........but her car was fixed and paid for inside 2 weeks ?

I'll leave you to your own conclusions on the veracity of anything I hear from any insurance person now............

Let me see if I can clarify what you have described here. Both parties tried to settle privately (which is never a good idea and rarely ends well). The other party decided to put through a claim under HER OWN policy and it was settled very quickly. Why wouldn't it be?

After 6 weeks, your car hadn't been assessed. Are you saying you wanted t put through a claim under YOUR OWN POLICY and they wouldn't look at it? Very poor form if that's the case. If you wanted your repairs to come out of her policy and they felt she wasn't liable, why would they assess your damages? An insurer who denies liability would rarely look at a 3rd party's vehicle unless there was potential for an injury claim.

If you had witnesses, the onus is on you to obtain their account and present it to the insurers you want to pursue. As for her working for the insurer, trust me, those circumstances are examined with more care and attention than others. There is too much at stake for the individual or the insurer to risk not going by the book

galwaytt

Eggs For Dinner wrote: »

Let me see if I can clarify what you have described here. Both parties tried to settle privately (which is never a good idea and rarely ends well). The other party decided to put through a claim under HER OWN policy and it was settled very quickly. Why wouldn't it be?

After 6 weeks, your car hadn't been assessed. Are you saying you wanted t put through a claim under YOUR OWN POLICY and they wouldn't look at it? Very poor form if that's the case. If you wanted your repairs to come out of her policy and they felt she wasn't liable, why would they assess your damages? An insurer who denies liability would rarely look at a 3rd party's vehicle unless there was potential for an injury claim.

If you had witnesses, the onus is on you to obtain their account and present it to the insurers you want to pursue. As for her working for the insurer, trust me, those circumstances are examined with more care and attention than others. There is too much at stake for the individual or the insurer to risk not going by the book

I am saying I contested liability, did not admit it, from day 1. They/she put the claim through on MY policy, not hers, without agreement or consultation with me. That she worked for them, and I was also insured with the same company, I think is a very major issue of conflict of interest.

The insurance company failed to interview the witnesses whose details I provided. They failed to send an assessor to the scene, nor to me, nor look at my vehicle, until under pressure they did. I only found out about this when someone working in the garage tipped me off.

The fact is they did nothing for me one way or another, despite being a paying customer, but were quite happy to process an employee's claim against me without going through the process properly.

Eggs For Dinner

Apologies, but you did say she put it through her insurance (against yours). That usually means they claim on their own policy and then they seek recovery against you

Anyway, without knowing the facts of the case, it is hard to say if placing liability with you was the right or wrong outcome. I truly doubt there was anything dodgy about it. The employee stood to lose their job, which would prohibit them working in the business again. This would include any colleagues assisting her.

NUTLEY BOY

I understand the following to be the pertinent facts ;

1. OP and other motorist are covered with the same insurance company.
2. OP contests liability.
3. Other motorist is an employee of the same said insurance company.
4. Insurance company paid claim for other car under OP's policy.

A few observations on the basis of above assumptions being correct ;

OP's insurers are entitled to settle a third party claim if they see fit on the merits. They would need to justify their position.

Where both parties are insured with the same insurer and there is a dispute on liability there is a significant conflict of interest where an insurer elects to establish liability as between them.
It is worse where there is no indication of an intention to proceed this way thus denying OP the right to be heard I]audit alterem[/I before an adverse adjudication is rendered.

In my experience the ethical thing to do is for the insurers not to appoint themselves as arbiters of fact as between their policyholders. Insurers should actually offer both parties a 50/50 settlement on the condition that is accepted by both. Otherwise, the matter should proceed to a hearing.

My inclination would be to lodge a formal complaint to the management of the insurers involved.

We do not know what went on inside the insurance company to arrive at the present situation. There may have been improper conduct - aka pulling a fast one - which would warrant probing by their internal audit function. If there has been internal impropriety this might also become a matter for investigation by Gardaí.

If complaining to the insurers be extremely careful not to make direct accusations of a criminal nature - just tee it up properly.

Eggs For Dinner

NUTLEY BOY wrote: »

In my experience the ethical thing to do is for the insurers not to appoint themselves as arbiters of fact as between their policyholders. Insurers should actually offer both parties a 50/50 settlement on the condition that is accepted by both. Otherwise, the matter should proceed to a hearing.

QUOTE]

If you apply a 50/50 settlement, then both parties claims experience is affected, with resulting loss of bonus and premium increase. If the facts of the case indicate one party to liable, the equitable solution is to have their policy bear the claim. The option to have the matter referred for investigation is always available, even after it has been decided and, if overturned, it is a simple internal process to amend records of the payment to the other party

As mentioned earlier, I would be amazed if any staff member took a chance over a claim. I'll be straight out and say that staff insurance rates and policy conditions are so good, that a property damage only claim is unlikely to have increased the premium. Wouldn't be worth the effort