Rear ended - I expect the other driver to deny responsibility

Princey

Princey

Princey

Soldato
Joined
26 Apr 2003
Posts
5,746
Location
West Midlands
My car was rear ended back in November last year, and through a mixture of myself and my insurer dragging their heels it was repaired last week via a credit repair company that my insurance referred me to. Car is repaired, hire car returned and all is well and good. Today I received a letter from the credit repair company saying that they've now submitted the costs to the 3rd Party's insurer. Now being the paranoid guy I am I'm expecting them to deny this and I'll have to foot the credit repairer's bill.

Has anybody any experience of the likely outcome of this? I have photos and a front facing dashcam footage that shows the car 'jolt' when getting hit that I can provide a link to if needs be.
 
I don't think they have contacted the 3rd party yet, I think they repair the car first on a credit agreement and then try and recover the costs.
 
You'll have likely signed an agreement before the repairs were carried out? Chances are there's a clause in there holding you liable for any costs they can't reclaim.
 
Typically, you will be provided with an insurance policy by the credit repair company which will cover all of the costs should they not be able to recover them from the 3rd party. They usually do not take on the case unless they are confident of doing so, and being hit from behind is usually cut and dry. However, I would check you have this insurance cover to put your mind at ease.

The other thing to have considered before using the credit repair company is that you will need to comply with all of their demands in assisting them. This could mean court appearances and witness statements. Also, these companies are why we end up paying so much for insurance. I was offered a similar agreement with a hire car charged out at £400 / day. It was very tempting, but in the end I decided to go direct to the third party insurer who paid for my repairs and provided me with an adequate hire car (£60 / day). I slept easier knowing that no-one would be chasing me to recoup costs and that the matter was resolved directly.
 
Thanks Fezster, this is very much an eye opening learning experience. Reading the policy document again properly, shows that I am fully protected against these costs should they not be recovered from the 3rd party.

Last question, if my insurance see that this is a non-fault claim but are unable to reclaim does that effect my no-claims?
 
Princey said:
Last question, if my insurance see that this is a non-fault claim but are unable to reclaim does that effect my no-claims?
Click to expand...

Yes, "No Fault" means they were able to recover the costs from the other party. A theft, for example, is a fault claim - even though it wasn't your fault!
 
It is very hard for anyone who has gone into the back end of someone to deny liability. IIRC from my limited claims adjuster days the only time there is a valid argument for it to be the car in front's fault is if they have just moved into the lane of the car behind without sufficient gap (either by lane switching or pulling out of junction). Otherwise it is always the car behind's fault as they should have left sufficient stopping distance.
 
Royal Fleet said:
It is very hard for anyone who has gone into the back end of someone to deny liability. IIRC from my limited claims adjuster days the only time there is a valid argument for it to be the car in front's fault is if they have just moved into the lane of the car behind without sufficient gap (either by lane switching or pulling out of junction). Otherwise it is always the car behind's fault as they should have left sufficient stopping distance.
Click to expand...

Didn't a poster a while back have someone run into the back of them who then claimed the poster had actually reversed into them.....Can't remember the outcome but if it went to court hopefully the balance of probabilities worked for them
 
If they rear ended you they will have a very hard time shaking off responsibility. Unless they can prove you did something silly (like reversed in to them).
 
[TW]Fox said:
Sadly yes. It's a no claims bonus not a no blame bonus.

What makes you think they are denying liability?
Click to expand...

I would imagine because his insurer hasn't contacted the 3rd party yet about an accident that took place 6 months ago!

Princey said:
I don't think they have contacted the 3rd party yet, I think they repair the car first on a credit agreement and then try and recover the costs.
Click to expand...
 
They have paid for a hire car for 6 months... WTF... lol. thats going to cost some let alone the car repair
 
The irony is that the other side may well admit liability - but then go on to dispute the credit hire company's extortionate costs. None of this should affect the OP, but if you read online, there's been cases where people have had to justify why they needed a brand new 3 litre diesel 4x4 when they ordinarily drive a 1 litre small hatchback. Or cases where the claimant has an alternative car available to use, but was still provided with a hire car. To be fair, this is all a result of the credit hire companies taking the ****.
 
If it was organised via a credit hire agency the hire car costs will be running into several thousand, so it seems plausible that the TPI will challenge it i.e. why did it take 6 months to organise a repair. Even if liability isn't disputed (most liability matrices would have Insured hit TP from behind as fault), I assume in order to recover the costs it has to be demonstrable that the costs are reasonable in relation to the incident. It's quite well known that the accident management companies tend to have over-inflated fees because the 'customer' isn't actually the one expecting to foot the bill. Six months seems a helluva long time to sort out a repair and you can't expect a TPI to allow that sort of behaviour to go unchallenged otherwise everyone would be rolling around in new hire cars for months without the TPI getting the opportunity to sort out the incident.
 
If you were referred to the credit hire/repair company by your insurer then even if liability isn't settled in your favour 100%, it should only affect your no claims discount in the same way a non fault claim would.

The reason insurance companies use third party companies is so they don't have to pay out any costs themselves and therefore there is no outlay for them to recover. If anything, your insurer has probably profited by your incident by getting a referral fee from the credit repair company.
 
Just to clarify some information here. Yes the incident happened last year but I only had a hire car for two days at £130 a day I believe and it was a like for like with my Insignia. My car was still in a driveable state and didn't get booked into the body shop until last week. It was a mixture of myself and insurance dragging their heels on this, mostly me as I wanted to research body shops and I've been very busy with work.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom