Just had a claim against me settled..

Rod Munch wrote: »

That is the world we live in.

That is the main reason insurance has spiked.

People can blame the insurers all they want but at the end of the day personal accountability has to be taken.

Of course real injuries should rightly be compensated, thats why we buy insurance but I'd be very confident that the majority of the whiplash claims are either false or very much exaggerated.

I read an article during the week from a member of the GAA, they were talking about the spike in their own insurance premiums and the rise in public liability claims.

So that's motor insurance that has substantially increased, along with insurance for places that have a large footfall of the public such as football grounds, pubs and shops.

Has the nation suddenly become clumsier?

Or have people suddenly become unluckier that they as having more trips and falls?

Or is it a case that alot of people see anything to do with insurance as the opportunity to get a nice fat payout?

Now I'm not a scientician but I'd be fairly comfortable in betting the farm on number 3.

Still though, its the gouging fat cats in insurance HQ that are to blame.

2 people to blame here

1- The Insurance industry for happily facilitating payouts, setting bench marks of what they were happy to pay. i.e acceptable loses. And not pursuing down claimants more aggressively.

2- The Judiciary this people need to be given clearer guidelines on what is acceptable payout levels as presently they are picking figures out of the sky.

trixiebust wrote: »

Accident happened in 2011, only got notification of settlement yesterday.

45 k awarded for a whiplash injury & loss of earnings. Absolute joke. Speed more than 10kph, 1st gear on a roundabout.

And there was me thinking you must have nearly crippled them for that kind of payout! Reminds me of a post I read here recently where a poster bemoaned the seemingly genetic weakness of Irish necks.

Mind you that sort of rubbish has been going on for years. I have an acquaintance who got 10k about 25 years ago for much the same thing. Once the court award came through there wasn't a mention of the neck. I was rear ended myself about 20 years ago- the car was in bits - but I never claimed for myself as I wasn't injured. I've had the odd fall in a supermarket- once on a squashed mushroom! I picked myself up and hoped to God no one saw it!
Fed up with chancers

Remember insurance companies campaigning for the abolition of juries in most personal injuries cases ? 1980s ? They succeeded. What happened to damages after that ? They went up - very steeply. Who did that then ?

Ultimately, if all parties know that a case will secure € X in court well that is where the authority to demand high damages lies.

So, if the courts keep awarding high levels of damages that has to be funded from somewhere. Ireland is a small country with a limited size pool of risk.
High damages funded by a small risk pool = high premiums.

cruizer101 wrote: »

On of the other issues I see is that the money is paid out as a cash lump sum, fair enough loss of earning has to be paid that way but all medical expenses should be vouched. The money can be spent on medical care and nothing else.

This also touches of a bigger problem which is our two tier health case system. If we had a proper single tier system, you shouldn't need to pay out medical expenses. If someone is sick or injured they get taken of, regardless of circumstances.

In most cases items of special damages have to be vouched if they are not being agreed between the parties.

Where some or all of the medical expenses have been paid by a health insurer there is usually a requirement to reimburse the health insurer's outlay from your damages - subrogation.

Otherwise, plaintiffs are virtually free to do what they like with their damages unless there are specific court orders directing that certain payments are made to certain parties.

OSI wrote: »

My brother got knocked off his bike last year and fractured his arm. Fracture wasn't even bad enough to require a cast and he didn't miss work as he's a student. He agreed with the driver to just pay for the repair of his bike, but she went incognito and ignored it, so the Gards got involved and it went to her insurer. Insurance instantly offered 25k. His solicitor urged him to push for more. F*****g ridiculous.

He would of been chancing his arm then?

I couldn't resist sorry.

I had ful ncb and stepback, small (compared to others in thread) claim from me for new engine (bogey fuel) they paid out 7k for new engine (old engine had less than 10k km) did not affect my premium. Don't know if that was because no persons were injured or what.

trixiebust wrote: »

Accident happened in 2011, only got notification of settlement yesterday.

45 k awarded for a whiplash injury & loss of earnings. Absolute joke. Speed more than 10kph, 1st gear on a roundabout.

Unfortunately some people find this way easier than trying to pick 6 numbers in the lotto!

A friend of mine flipped a hi ace van about 30 years ago with 13 people inside. He was only covered for the 3 front seats. As the driver he was the only one that did not get to claim. All 13 claims that they were in the front.
Insurance paid out over quarter of a million punts. Biggest Irish claim at the time.
He's still driving today. It all balances out over time

ravima wrote: »

I have recevived a small payout for my stolen and crashed car. But 7 people who quite clearly were in a staged crash so they can all claim are claiming from my insurance.

But I have to keep paying my premium, until case closes. Basically if this stays open the insurance company will make back their tiny payout to me by summer time.

I was told I CANNOT stop paying premium, as then it will be recorded as walking away from contract.

Seems wierd no? I am losing on all fronts basically. I was the victim of the crime after all.

A few thoughts ;

1. I cannot see any basis for the proposition that you must continue paying a premium until the case closes. This sounds like insurance company twaddle made up by some idiot who does not know what they are talking about.

I would view this as an issue of contract. If you paid your contractual consideration in the form of a premium they must provide their contractual consideration in the form of indemnity under the terms of the policy.

2. Insurance contracts are annual.

There is no obligation on either party to continue the contract beyond the next renewal date. The policy wording should provide the specific terms of cancellation rights including cancellation if a claim has occurred within the present period of insurance.

3. As far as the Spurious 7 go their claims should not constitute a claim against your policy or your insurance record / insurance history.

Your vehicle was stolen. (I assume this to have been an unauthorised taking as per S.112, RTA 1961 = theft to you and me). In these circumstances no legal liability should attach to you for the negligence of the driver of your vehicle.

However, my understanding of these situations has always been that if there was a current certificate of insurance in existence on the vehicle at the time of the accident the insurers who issued that certificate deal with the case as the insurers concerned under some agreement with the MIBI. This would not be a claim for indemnity against your policy or your insurance history. However, if this has changed somebody might jump in and put me right.

Rod Munch wrote: »

Strange that a solicitor would suggest he go for even more, seemingly they arent ticks, they have the injured parties best interests at heart. Who else would defend the proletariat against the insurance cartel other than someone that had justice on their mind. The fact that a higher settlement figure = a higher slice for them doesn't factor at all.

1. File PIAB(IB) documents on behalf of client
2. Wait
3. PIAB determine 50K (the insurers offers are always a big lowball to entice the claimant with instant cash)
4. Take cut for 20 mins work

You dont need a solicitor for the process, thats the point of it, but they convince joe soap they're required.

Your totally right Nutley Boy, When I present your argument to insurance company they say because they are dealing with the claims from the 'spurious 7' as you put it so well, my policy is still open.

Is there an 'adult' I can go to? :-) An ombusdman perhaps, I have asked solicitor friends but they not so sure. I am paying a premium which is basically me paying back the insurance company any money they gave me....It just seems absurd.

I'll go back over the contract if I can find it. I'll update on what happens

So a small update;

I can't really cancel as it will be recorded as lapsing on an open claim, and I literally wont get insurance again. it happened my colleague, they moved abroad on an open claim and can't get insurance now hes back.

i have to keep paying my premium on a car that was stolen 3 months ago. I was told I will also be charged a lot extra when i finally save up for a new car and insure it, i will be applying as someone who has an open claim. Also, i can only get insured with this same company.

So.....Insurance defined in this situation: i pay money to a company to insure a non existent object, after the insurable object gets stolen, to pay for little runts to make a claim against my insurance for an incident that happened when it was stolen ?

If I don't pay, I don't get this privelege again !!!!

Wait!
So some little scums rob your car and crash it and can claim of your insurance? Wtf