Motor Claim split between policies impact on No Claims

g0g

Hoping someone might be able to guide me on a question. We have two cars at home. I'm insured on one and my wife named. She is insured on the other and I'm named. Policies with two providers and both have full No Claims discount. She was in a minor/medium car crash over the weekend (everyone is fine) while driving the car with the policy in my name.

There is a chance she might be found liable. Today on a call to the insurance company They asked if she had a policy on another car which I confirmed. They then said she effectively had double-cover - i.e. being named on my policy for the car and also cover to drive other cars via the other policy in her name. The person on the phone suggested that if we are liable then they might seek to split the claim with the other insurer.

Now this is all well and good for them, but I'm guessing in this case that could mean we lose the No Claims discount on both policies? If so then that is surely madness! I know I need to wait on decision re liability but I want to be prepared. Does any consumer policy offer any protection to me? Surely it can't end in an outcome where we are hit twice? Or perhaps there is no impact on the policy where she is just the named extra driver? (although I can't imagine so)

Eggs For Dinner

If your wife is liable, the primary policy which covers her liability to others (her policy) picks up the loss of the 3rd party. There will be clauses under each policy which basically state that if the driver has cover elsewhere, then that policy picks up the loss. Obviously, this would leave the driver in a never ending loop. That is why your wife's policy becomes the one where the 3rd party gets paid.

The damage to your car is covered under the comprehensive part of your policy. The effect on NCBs is dependent on the level of protection on each policy

g0g

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/121698513#Comment_121698513

Thanks, appreciate you taking the time to reply! Regardless of the other policy my wife has, I thought her being named on my policy meant she had both the 1st and 3rd party elements via my policy.

To illustrate what seems to me to be the unfairness - let's assume we have two cars. Base policy on each € 1,000 and No Claims brings it down to say € 500 each. We are named on each other's policy to be covered on the other car. Let's also imagine we have a child named on the policy of the car in question too who doesn't have their own policy. And assume no protection of No Claims.

1) If I'm in an accident in "my" car and found liable it's clear - everything hits my policy and I expect I lose the NCD and policy say goes to € 1,000 for me and stays € 500 for my wife.

2) If our child (who has no policy) is in an accident in "my" car then again it hits my policy and I assume I lose NCD and again policy goes to € 1,000 and again stays € 500 for my wife.

3) But then in this circumstance I have applied if neither policy had NCB protection then potentially both policies have a claim element against them and in theory both policies could rise to say € 1,000!?

I want to ignore the NCB protection piece and just understand if the above logic is correct? Should I never have claimed on the policy of the car being driven and my wife should have instead called her own insurance? It just seems from the above 3 scenarios that the policy holder potentially gets unfairly hit in #3?

Eggs For Dinner

It is unfortunate, but they are the contract conditions. I've made the assumption that your wife has driving of other cars on her policy. If she hasn't, or if she has except for driving a spouse's car, your policy may well pick up both aspects of the claim