Car Insurance - question for the legal eagles

I’ve been rear-ended by a drunk driver.
Their insurance company tells me that they won’t pay out, because “their insured driver was breaking the law at the time of impact, thus invalidating their cover”.

So, my car gets written off, I have lost my no claims bonus, my insurance renewal has now tripled, and I get told I have no comeback.

…Then today, I get a letter from the other insurer asking me to sign a form releasing their responsibility, and withdrawing any further claims… WTF?

Talk about ■■■■■■■■ on someone’s doorstep - and asking for paper!

I’m thinking they might be attempting to defraud me here… What say yous?

I’m thinking that this other driver has originally paid a 4 figure sum for their insurance premium. For that huge sum, an insurer should accept the increased perceived risk - ie being a boy racer in a high performance car. They are clearly not prepared to do that, just happy to take premiums from the other guy, and then not pay ME out when he goes up my arse at high speed!

I want to take the insurer to court, but I am not sure what I need to pursue them with legal wise, and I don’t know if I can get someone to represent me without having to pay up-front fees.

This is the first time I have ever been involved in a collision in my private car, so I must confess “lack of experience in playing the system” here.
I am told it’s clearly 100% the other guy’s fault - so how come my arse is to the wall over all this?

Do you have legal cover on your own car insurance? Do you have legal cover on your home insurance? Are you a union member with a legal advice service?
Don’t sign or enter into any correspondence with the other drivers insurance company. Why aren’t your insurers dealing with this?
Why are his insurance contacting you? Normally your car is repaired by your insurers who then invoice the other drivers insurer. You should have no dealings with the other company whatsoever.
If you don’t have any free means of legal advice, contact the Motor Insurance Bureau (MIB) who may be able to advise you on how the system should work and also call citizens advice.

Well, i wouldn’t normally advise this but i’d be straight on to a claims management company, the other insurer is trying to rip you off by getting you to sign away your legitimate claim, so they deserve to pay more than if they played it straight for being a bunch of ■■■■■…this is probably some fly by night cheap as chips internet insurer and not a household name…actually it would be nice to know what company are involved so we can all avoid them in the future.

You as the 3rd part to the other insurer are covered whatever happens, the other driver won’t have his damage paid though cos he was ■■■■■■ and his insurer may well attempt to recover all costs from him in due course if he’s got two ha’pennies to scratch his arse with, but they are responsible to cover your damage…plus injuries loss of earnings etc…take 'em for every penny, they deserve it.

I’d be wary of accepting a credit hire car from a claims management crew, unless you can be absolutely convinced (by whats in writing) that you won’t be left with car hire charges when the other insurer refuses to pay them.

Course if you have legal cover with your own insurer, now’s the time to use it, the other party is completely liable (therefore his insurer) as he was drunk and had no business being on the road at all.

I would contact the insurance ombudsmans office re that insurers behaviour, and i suspect you’ll eventually be using the ombudsman to force this bunch of wide boys to face up to their responsibilities anyway…

I have the legal cover, but apparently no ‘protected no claims’. I’m told by my insurer that I’ll be re-awarded back my no claims once they’ve been paid out for their own costs by the other side.

My insurer sent me the correspondence sent to them by the other side, requesting I sign off my claim - which I flatly refused, and phoned them to tell them so. I told them that "unless an actual cash offer was not forthcoming for full and final settlement" that I’d be taking the legal aspect out of their hands, and going to a third-party solicitor, because I believe I am in a “conflict of interest” situation, where my own insurer wish me to sign, so they get paid. Once they are paid, I’ll just be told to get lost I’m thinking…

The amount I want offered to me in my mind is less than a single year’s premiums for the other driver. The fact that even such a small payment has been shrunk away from suggests to me that the other insurer might be on the verge of bankruptcy. I may include a petition for their bankruptcy - should they not throw their damned hand away, and settle up pronto.

This is a BIG name insurer as far as I knew, not some firm you’ve not heard of.

I don’t reckon I can name either side at this point, but my own insurer is pretty big too… I was offered a hire car “on acceptance of their offer” which is totally daft, because they’ve yet to MAKE me any offer FFS.

My own insurer so far has paid me the “Market value” of the car when it was written off.

I continue to be out of pocket by
(1) No claims bonus lost
(2) Already having to pay for the renewal at three times the premium
(3) The excess
(4) Having to draw down 2 weeks of my holiday pot, because I’m unable to go to work for a fortnight…
(5) The cost of a replacement car, which I’ve jumped the gun on and done already, just so I could get back to work as soon as possible.

I’ve done everything to keep my costs to a minimum - and everyone takes the ■■■■! I’m really cheesed off with the entire insurance system here, because they seem to be closing ranks, asking for my agency to open up their accounts for scrutiny, etc. as proof of “Loss of earnings” for example. “opening up my boss’s accounts” ain’t gonna happen outside of court - and if I AM made to jump such a fence - I’ll run up the legal bills for both sides like no one would believe, because if I lose the case the costs will likely bankrupt me anyway! That being the case, the moment we land in court - the other side cannot win, because they’ll end up paying both ends regardless…

If it goes to court, I’ll be adding personal injury into it as well. FInancial stress, worry, and even the fact I’ve been in hospital since the accident for an ailment that feasibly could be related…

The police tell me that this other driver “has been charged with more than one traffic offence” btw. I’ve been asked if I’d be prepared to attend court over his prosecution, and I’ve said “yes”.

Surely “refusing to pay out me as third party because the punter has invalidated his insurance” only applies to their own car - not mine. “Driving without insurance” is illegal, but the police will never be charging him with that - because he HAD the damned insurance - which just happens to be unfit for purpose! I assume at this point, having read your replies that the letter “I’ve got to sign” seems just a cheap attempt to push me off the pot with a bluff here… “Won’t deal with your claim further, unless you sign” - My Arse!

It’s the big name aspect of them that is most shocking of all!
Not prepared to settle with me for a fraction of what it’ll cost once it gets to court? - This isn’t logical, unless the firm has no money at all - right?

That’s got to be illegal.

I feel your anger.

Get legally represented, advise the other drivers insurers that all further contact is to be through them and have no further direct contact with the company directly. Let your legal team rack up the cost to them.

Many moons ago I was hit by a driver who had not removed a crook lock device which he had wrapped around the brake instead of the clutch pedal his insurers were trying a similar thing and it wasn’t until the legal people from my breakdown got involved that the claim was settled with no loss to me bar the stress of having to deal with the clowns.

You need to be cold and ruthless dealing with these people, they are NOT your friend. Have the police taken any action against the other driver as there would appear to be a couple of possible charges that would assist in apportioning responsibility for the collision?

Third party (you) should be paid. If the TP has broken his contract with his insurer, that’s between them. Nowt to do you. I would have thought they pay out your claim and if they want to recover costs from the driver breaking the contract, then they can do that if they wish.

Get a proper solicitor on the case.

macplaxton:
Third party (you) should be paid. If the TP has broken his contract with his insurer, that’s between them. Nowt to do you. I would have thought they pay out your claim and if they want to recover costs from the driver breaking the contract, then they can do that if they wish.

Get a proper solicitor on the case.

This ^^ It happened to a friend of mine. A few years ago the loophole was done away with where by insures could refuse to pay out to a third party in cases like this. They have to pay out and as mentioned above can then sue their insured for any and all costs. It’s totally illegal what they’re saying to you.

Winseer:
I have the legal cover, but apparently no ‘protected no claims’. I’m told by my insurer that I’ll be re-awarded back my no claims once they’ve been paid out for their own costs by the other side.

My insurer sent me the correspondence sent to them by the other side, requesting I sign off my claim - which I flatly refused, and phoned them to tell them so. I told them that "unless an actual cash offer was not forthcoming for full and final settlement" that I’d be taking the legal aspect out of their hands, and going to a third-party solicitor, because I believe I am in a “conflict of interest” situation, where my own insurer wish me to sign, so they get paid. Once they are paid, I’ll just be told to get lost I’m thinking…

The amount I want offered to me in my mind is less than a single year’s premiums for the other driver. The fact that even such a small payment has been shrunk away from suggests to me that the other insurer might be on the verge of bankruptcy. I may include a petition for their bankruptcy - should they not throw their damned hand away, and settle up pronto.

This is a BIG name insurer as far as I knew, not some firm you’ve not heard of.

I don’t reckon I can name either side at this point, but my own insurer is pretty big too… I was offered a hire car “on acceptance of their offer” which is totally daft, because they’ve yet to MAKE me any offer FFS.

My own insurer so far has paid me the “Market value” of the car when it was written off.

I continue to be out of pocket by
(1) No claims bonus lost
(2) Already having to pay for the renewal at three times the premium
(3) The excess
(4) Having to draw down 2 weeks of my holiday pot, because I’m unable to go to work for a fortnight…
(5) The cost of a replacement car, which I’ve jumped the gun on and done already, just so I could get back to work as soon as possible.

I’ve done everything to keep my costs to a minimum - and everyone takes the ■■■■! I’m really cheesed off with the entire insurance system here, because they seem to be closing ranks, asking for my agency to open up their accounts for scrutiny, etc. as proof of “Loss of earnings” for example. “opening up my boss’s accounts” ain’t gonna happen outside of court - and if I AM made to jump such a fence - I’ll run up the legal bills for both sides like no one would believe, because if I lose the case the costs will likely bankrupt me anyway! That being the case, the moment we land in court - the other side cannot win, because they’ll end up paying both ends regardless…

If it goes to court, I’ll be adding personal injury into it as well. FInancial stress, worry, and even the fact I’ve been in hospital since the accident for an ailment that feasibly could be related…

The police tell me that this other driver “has been charged with more than one traffic offence” btw. I’ve been asked if I’d be prepared to attend court over his prosecution, and I’ve said “yes”.

Surely “refusing to pay out me as third party because the punter has invalidated his insurance” only applies to their own car - not mine. “Driving without insurance” is illegal, but the police will never be charging him with that - because he HAD the damned insurance - which just happens to be unfit for purpose! I assume at this point, having read your replies that the letter “I’ve got to sign” seems just a cheap attempt to push me off the pot with a bluff here… “Won’t deal with your claim further, unless you sign” - My Arse!

It’s the big name aspect of them that is most shocking of all!
Not prepared to settle with me for a fraction of what it’ll cost once it gets to court? - This isn’t logical, unless the firm has no money at all - right?

sorry for your situation but you need too get a proper legal eagle on your side and pronto, yes it may cost you in the short term but will probably save you in the long term.
good luck with your fight

Its time to lawyer up!

Winseer:
I have the legal cover, but apparently no ‘protected no claims’. I’m told by my insurer that I’ll be re-awarded back my no claims once they’ve been paid out for their own costs by the other side.

My insurer sent me the correspondence sent to them by the other side, requesting I sign off my claim - which I flatly refused, and phoned them to tell them so. I told them that "unless an actual cash offer was not forthcoming for full and final settlement" that I’d be taking the legal aspect out of their hands, and going to a third-party solicitor, because I believe I am in a “conflict of interest” situation, where my own insurer wish me to sign, so they get paid. Once they are paid, I’ll just be told to get lost I’m thinking…

The amount I want offered to me in my mind is less than a single year’s premiums for the other driver. The fact that even such a small payment has been shrunk away from suggests to me that the other insurer might be on the verge of bankruptcy. I may include a petition for their bankruptcy - should they not throw their damned hand away, and settle up pronto.

This is a BIG name insurer as far as I knew, not some firm you’ve not heard of.

I don’t reckon I can name either side at this point, but my own insurer is pretty big too… I was offered a hire car “on acceptance of their offer” which is totally daft, because they’ve yet to MAKE me any offer FFS.

My own insurer so far has paid me the “Market value” of the car when it was written off.

I continue to be out of pocket by
(1) No claims bonus lost
(2) Already having to pay for the renewal at three times the premium
(3) The excess
(4) Having to draw down 2 weeks of my holiday pot, because I’m unable to go to work for a fortnight…
(5) The cost of a replacement car, which I’ve jumped the gun on and done already, just so I could get back to work as soon as possible.

I’ve done everything to keep my costs to a minimum - and everyone takes the ■■■■! I’m really cheesed off with the entire insurance system here, because they seem to be closing ranks, asking for my agency to open up their accounts for scrutiny, etc. as proof of “Loss of earnings” for example. “opening up my boss’s accounts” ain’t gonna happen outside of court - and if I AM made to jump such a fence - I’ll run up the legal bills for both sides like no one would believe, because if I lose the case the costs will likely bankrupt me anyway! That being the case, the moment we land in court - the other side cannot win, because they’ll end up paying both ends regardless…

If it goes to court, I’ll be adding personal injury into it as well. FInancial stress, worry, and even the fact I’ve been in hospital since the accident for an ailment that feasibly could be related…

The police tell me that this other driver “has been charged with more than one traffic offence” btw. I’ve been asked if I’d be prepared to attend court over his prosecution, and I’ve said “yes”.

Surely “refusing to pay out me as third party because the punter has invalidated his insurance” only applies to their own car - not mine. “Driving without insurance” is illegal, but the police will never be charging him with that - because he HAD the damned insurance - which just happens to be unfit for purpose! I assume at this point, having read your replies that the letter “I’ve got to sign” seems just a cheap attempt to push me off the pot with a bluff here… “Won’t deal with your claim further, unless you sign” - My Arse!

It’s the big name aspect of them that is most shocking of all!
Not prepared to settle with me for a fraction of what it’ll cost once it gets to court? - This isn’t logical, unless the firm has no money at all - right?

Like others have said get some legal advice, go to a solicitor, the 1st half hour is free at most high street practice’s. What you’ve described cant be legal.

Dont settle for a keep you quiet settlement, after all even though you werent at fault, your insurance will be inflated for the next 5 years, until you no longer have notify about previous accidents on your proposal(in which you were involved regardless of fualt).

If you get little joy, go to the media, BBC watchdog or something.

Insurers come from the the same sewer as the bankers

Winseer - my heartfelt sympathy.

Only way to deal with this is with an independent, specialist solicitor. They are trying to royally shaft you all ends up, with your company helping out by the sounds of it. Don’t settle for any old solicitor, you need one that is a specialist in this field. White Dalton are well known in the motorcycling world for this kind of thing . I’m not sure if they would deal with this case (but a call would clarify). Andrew Dalton writes for several motorcycling mags on legal issues. They certainly know what they are doing. Whatever, you need someone that is on your side that knows the crack.

Best of luck with things. Keep us posted on progress

Thanks for the feedback on this one and all…

I’ve told my side for the time being that “I believe we have a conflict of interest situation here”. I’ve given them a week to re-negotiate an offer out of the other side, instead of advising me to sign away my rights - which seems indeed to be merely so they can get paid off, and I’m left high and dry.
I’ve even suggested to my side that I’d settle on the spot, and sign anything they like - IF they offered me the mere amount of what the other guy paid in premium for the past year! How reasonable is THAT? - If I ask for so little, and get knocked back though - by God, it’s gonna cost everyone a whole lot more in court fees win or lose for either side - because I won’t be paying pound one of any legal bill - I can tell you!

If my treatment so far is what I can expect to get for my so-called “free legal cover” - then it’s clearly not fit for purpose. I’ve already warned my insurer that I intend taking it out of their hands (ie they’ll never get paid) if they don’t get a result (a cash offer of settlement, let alone one that’s accepted by me!) out of the other side within the reasonable timespace of the next seven days.

At this point, I will be engaging a outside solititor, and the costs will considerably rise. I can’t afford any costs myself, especially up-front, so I need one prepared to take me onboard on a “no win no fee” basis, and therefore need them to recognise this as an open and shut 100% in my favour case that I feel it should be. Jeez… If I walk into Ladbrokes and stick a monkey on a 50-1 shot and it wins - they pay me out no quibble, no bull, no “That horse wasn’t supposed to be able to win” or “we accidentally took on more of a liability than we realised” rubbish etc etc…

Insurance companies have got to be one level above bankers, one below estate agents, six stories below spivs and streetwalkers surely…

Insurers instruct their drivers to “never admit liability” even in the face of a police bang-to-rights prosecution apparently… So, in court we’re going to have an insurer saying they can shirk their liabilities in a crooked manner, and don’t recognise the fact that they are holding the can for their insured driver who’s since been busted by plod… Who’s in charge in this country? FFS

Insurance ombudsman might be cheaper than a lawyer?

As I understand the law, the other party’s insurer is obliged to pay out. It’s then up to them to recover the cost from their client.The fact their client was drunk is nothing to do with you.

The police have informed me they are not charging “drunk driving”, because they caught up with him long after he’d sobered up - because he left the scene. He’s been charged with “leaving the scene of an accident” though, and some other counts that the police won’t go into, other than that they are “traffic offence related” - whatever that means.

Perhaps it’s better for me if there’s no DD on the charge sheet - how can their insurer wriggle out on this so-called “invalidated by criminal act” thing if the criminal act in question never actually arose officially?

I suspect that the other driver might be a pro driver himself - since if we asked ourselves “what would you do if you’d just had an accident under the influence” - and the tactical answer might well be “I’d leave the scene, so I can’t get busted for DD and lose my job into the bargain!”

If hes not been charged or convicted then how can they refuse to pay out on suspicion he may have been over the limit? It does sound like they’re trying to royally shaft you.
Make sure every communication is verifyable from now on. Letter or email only - nothing verbal.

The latest is the copy of the letter sent from other insurer to mine… That is now going to be used against them by me in court, since they’ve refused to take the current claim forward if I don’t sign the form effectively dropping everything… “Heads they win, tails I lose” eh?

If an insurance company is under legal obligation to settle, then I guess what will happen next is
(1) nothing for a while
(2) I get a court date
(3) Days before the court date, I get offered a few grand to go away quickly, by which point I’m beyond caring… Too little, too late - unless they offer more than what the maximum I’d likely win in court of course… Can’t see that being likely somehow though.
(4) We get into court where the costs already will far outweigh anything they might offer or actually pay me
(5) I’ve been around the houses so much by this point, that I’ll just ask for a cash offer the same as the current outstanding court charges… The longer they take, the more it mushrooms… Hehe!

If my premiums are up by £500 for the next 9 years whilst I get my full no claims back up again - then that’s £4500 added to it for a start.
I’ve had to go overdrawn at the bank to get another car… Add that, and the back interest.
I’ve had to engage a third party solicitor… that’s THREE rather than two sets of “admin costs” to pay out on
Loss of earnings - even if one takes two weeks at minimum wage, they’re already trying to push it down below this, which implies my job is an illegal one… I guess my agency will step in at this point, and bring their own guns to bear, stating how much money THEY have lost because they “had to give a shift I couldn’t do away to another agency” etc etc… It happens - right?
FInancial Stress - What value do you put on this? - Think of a number!

…And all this without even going into any kind of “physical personal injury” which will be kicked around in the long grass for years, and is a route I even now would rather not take… If it gets to court though - it’s going on the list, thus protracting the case out even further… If villain insurer are not insolvent now, they might be by the time I’m finished with them…

Maybe I can perform a service for the public here, and get a crooked organisation closed down outright, and the spotlight turned upon the whole insurance industry, as to how bent it all is… With base premiums “rising this year” for no other reason than “It’s a nice day outside”, I’m sure some of the other insurers might consider “cutting their brother loose” at this point…

I’m not trying to blow my own trumpet but this is a field I specialise in.

Car Insurance is governed by the Road Traffic Act which is Statute Law, an Insurer issues a Certificate of Insurance which is a legal document confirming they will pay valid third party claims all the time that Certificate is “relevant” eg has not expired or been correctly cancelled (To be properly cancelled the RTA has specific requirements).

Providing the claim is valid eg their client is legally liable than the Insurer has to pay third party claims, they apply restrictions to their on clients cover for their own damage but cannot apply conditions to third parties hence why if you look at your own Certificate you will see it carries the legend “Notice to Third Parties, nothing contained on this Certificate affects your ability to claim”.

Insurers cannot void a policy or cancel it from a date prior to an accident to affect third parties except in very very rare circumstances which is that at the time of taking cover their client acted fraudulently. Declaring policies invalid under such circumstances are very very rare. The name for this is ab initio

The RTA is written in such a way to make Insurers liable to third parties to ensure that they’re provided protection by the Insurance unless in incredibly exceptional circumstances (See above paragraph).

I would recommend you give the MIB www.mib.org.uk/Home/en/default.htm a quick call, the reason I recommend this is because if you had been hit by a truely uninsured motorist they would deal with the claim. However the person you were hit by was insured (Unless the Insurers have gone down the ab initio route) as they had a policy in place. The MIB do not like taking on claims that Insurers are obliged to pay under their obligations due to the RTA, they’re likely to give you advice and hopefully ring the correct person at the Insurers to tell them to deal with the claim.

Incidently the RTA makes an Insurer liable for an accident even if the driver at the time of the accident is not named on the policy eg you lent it to your friend providing the driver is “identified”. The RTA will make the Insurer pay any valid claims although the Insurer is likely to look to their policyholder to repay any monies they paid out. The same principle applies if you sell your car but do not cancel the Insurance and the new owner has an accident whilst not having their own policy.

If you need any more advice feel free to post but I strongly recommend you ring the MIB for some advice and hopefully them to remind the other Insurer of their statutory obligations under the RTA

Winseer, you have my sympathy for what its worth. I think you have some really good advice, especially from the poster The couch but i want to give my twopennorth. The insurance company very happily took this guys money, so there is in fact a contract in place, and he could drive for whatever time he has on his policy as an insured driver. The fact that he hit you up the arse puts the blame on him, now the fact he had been drinking and had an accident, maybe puts his insurance company under pressure to cancel out his insurance ( you can check this out via mid ) to see whether this vehicle is still insured !
At the time of the collision, he was insured, and your claim with them is valid by law, also in your favour is the fact that the police are not charging him with DD, therefore making him still insured, and you still liable to claim. I would be in the mind to make a small claims court application which will cost you about £20 for the application, but you must notify them of your intentions, and do not under any circumstances sign any waiver on their behalf, or even your own insurers waiver, until you get something in writing that suits your purpose. Whatever you decide to do, take the advice first of The Couch and contact the insurers ombudsman and any other advice he gave you, for he said he specialises in this subject. I wish you well, and please keep us informed of your progress.

truckyboy:
Winseer, you have my sympathy for what its worth. I think you have some really good advice, especially from the poster The couch but i want to give my twopennorth. The insurance company very happily took this guys money, so there is in fact a contract in place, and he could drive for whatever time he has on his policy as an insured driver. The fact that he hit you up the arse puts the blame on him, now the fact he had been drinking and had an accident, maybe puts his insurance company under pressure to cancel out his insurance ( you can check this out via mid ) to see whether this vehicle is still insured !
At the time of the collision, he was insured, and your claim with them is valid by law, also in your favour is the fact that the police are not charging him with DD, therefore making him still insured, and you still liable to claim. I would be in the mind to make a small claims court application which will cost you about £20 for the application, but you must notify them of your intentions, and do not under any circumstances sign any waiver on their behalf, or even your own insurers waiver, until you get something in writing that suits your purpose. Whatever you decide to do, take the advice first of The Couch and contact the insurers ombudsman and any other advice he gave you, for he said he specialises in this subject. I wish you well, and please keep us informed of your progress.

It would not matter to the OP whether or not the other driver was charged with Drink Driving or not, for obvious reasons the Road Traffic Act is designed to ensure innocent third parties are able to recover their losses from a negligent driver. The Insurer can decline to pay their own clients own damage if their is a clause in the policy entitling them to which would be due to their being a contract (Policy) in place between their client and the Insurer. The OP does not have any contractural relationship with the Insurer, their responsibility to him is enforced on them by the Road Traffic Act if their client was negligent.

The OP cannot complain to the Ombudsman about the other parties Insurer as he has no contract with them, he can complain to the Ombudsman about his own Insurer if he desires subject to him going through the Insurers “Official Complaint” process first