Helphire question

This is a mess and you should have just claimed for the write off from your own Comp (?) policy and done the arguments over liability at a later date. In fact I think you can still do that but it may involve instant withdrawal of any courtesy car.

I've got a £180,000 motor insurance policy to renew & zero time to help/advise, sorry.
 
I have been contacting Esure as thats the other parties ins. co. at the request of Helphire, even though they had already contacted them. I guess the hirecar part wanted to know where there money was coming from and operating independantly of the legal loss mitigation side. Im with Sky insurance brokes, insured with QBE.
 
So she is contesting because you had your indicator on? I dont get this how would that be any less relevant, if you were turning into the junction you would still have been there. What a tard, good luck.
 
Jonnycoupe said:
I come off the M40 at from the north and go SW on Gaydon road where she pulls out infront of me.

LOOK how tight that left hander would have been!
Click to expand...


Even if you did turn left, she should have waited and followed you down the road - sounds like she was in a rush and tried to beat you to the M40
 
merlin said:
This is a mess and you should have just claimed for the write off from your own Comp (?) policy and done the arguments over liability at a later date.
Click to expand...

Possibly, but everyone was getting wood over helphire and assuming i was at zero fault I was happy to go that way. I also wasnt sure about the write off status so I didnt want to wait for a repairer to have my car before i got a courtesy car, or if it was wrote off I would have no car. I could'nt afford time off work ontop of the day I did have off.

The arguments over liability have just started really. I can refuse any offer that comes back, the 1/3 2/3 is in light of the Wadsworth vs. Gillespie case and is without prejudice, its the solictors opinion on the event rather than my statement and counters Esures initial claim that I was fully at fault.

But yes, its a mess. i dont want it fixed, hopefully my guys will write it off, I dont want a Cat C thats gonna cost a lot more to insure.
 
Wow, this seems to be turning into a bit of a mess for you.

When I delt with Helphire I had someone run into the back of me, whilst I was in a queue of traffic, his insurers (Direct Line), disputed liability but eventually admitted it.

Really hope you get it sorted, insurance is a pain in the **** to sort out, and an even bigger pain when it comes to claiming!
 
Even better my agreed value isnt on the endorsements on the policy even though I paid the £71 extra. So its just boggo market value thats gonna be effective, heres hoping scene tax saves my day.

I feel like crying how bad this is going :mad:
 
[TW]Fox;12889232 said:
If its a writeoff you'll be offered the salvage for pennies and will profit after you repair it yourself/pay a garage to do it.
Click to expand...

I don't know about pennies, Kate's insurer wanted something in the region of £1800 for this (worth approx £3500 in VGC)

CrashedSX.jpg
 
Jonnycoupe said:
How much was the payout on the s14 there Lopez?
Click to expand...

£4000 was the final settlement, minus the excess of £500 (uninsured driver, disputed fault, and both police and insurer have shown very little interest in following things up - think the guy ended up with 5 points on a licence he doesn't have and a £200 fine or something equally paltry) I'll have to check with Kate to be certain but she's at the gym.
She sent countless Pistonheads adverts, SXOC classifieds etc just to demonstrate we could not buy another one with the £3600 or so they originally wanted to pay out (she actually paid £3200 for the car)

She had to do a fair bit of nagging to get the settlement she wanted though. There was apparently only one assessor who could deal with the valuation and he repeatedly ignored voicemails, emails, letter etc. They really didn't want to up the offer as you'd expect.
That was Sainsbury who I believe are part of Esure.
 
I am currently using Europa Consultants for a very minor bump. I pick up my hire car tomorrow when my car goes in for repair , the service so far seems excellent. The only small but potentially large issue is they will not indemnify the cost of the hire car ie. If the insurance company does not pay out the full amount i could potentially be liable. They have assured me that they won’t pursue me personally for any monies but they will not confirm this in writing.

I will post up when my claim is done with a short review of their service.
 
My take on it:

crashcj7.jpg


if you look at the road, from the merc's point of view, IF jonny was indicating it looks like he is pulling into the sliproad like thing, so i can completely understand why the merc made the move, if indeed your indicator was on at some point. if i saw somebody indicating coming from where you were coming from, i would probably have gone aswell, indeed theres a similar road where i do it all the time.

I know its harsh, and if you didnt have your indicator on then i fully agree that your 100% not at fault. However, your indicator should have cancelled well before you got into sight of the merc, so if she truly did see your indicator, and indeed the witness did aswell, i cant help but feel that the merc driver simply done what most people here would do.
 
Last edited:
Jonny, you now need to switch your claim for the damage to your car to your own insurers.

At present the TP insurers are denying liability - so you're going to get nothing from them.

If if your solicitor gets them to accept 66% then that's still unacceptable as you'll only get 66% payment of the write off value from the TP insurers and you might have trouble getting the balance 33% from your own insurers as it wouldn't have been them who inspected the car and placed a valuation on it.

You have to claim under your Comp policy for the car and you'll get 100% payment from them less the excess. Then, if the solicitor has made progress by the time you get your money through from your own insurers you can get 66% of your policy excess back.

Then your insurers will also recover 66% of their outlay & of course you'll step back 2 yrs NCB.

First job will be to get onto your insurers and ask them to inspect your car and give you an offer.
 
deko said:
My take on it:

crashcj7.jpg


if you look at the road, from the merc's point of view, IF jonny was indicating it looks like he is pulling into the sliproad like thing, so i can completely understand why the merc made the move, if indeed your indicator was on at some point. if i saw somebody indicating coming from where you were coming from, i would probably have gone aswell, indeed theres a similar road where i do it all the time.

I know its harsh, and if you didnt have your indicator on then i fully agree that your 100% not at fault. However, your indicator should have cancelled well before you got into sight of the merc, so if she truly did see your indicator, and indeed the witness did aswell, i cant help but feel that the merc driver simply done what most people here would do.
Click to expand...

The indicator being on just means the bulb is working, not much else.

As my dad taught me, assume everyone is an idiot.
 
Yeah thats pretty much it. However I was pretty close to a Pug 206, with a low Integra, Im a bit miffed how she would have actually seen my inidicator other than at the top of the hill and im approaching at 45.

There is a case law gillespie v Wadsworth where the 1/3 2/3 split was ruled. (1978 i think) when someone indicating similar to me failed to turn but a motorcylce pulled out of the junction rather into it infront. Difference here I think is that the motorcylcist has a number of postitions to look at, SLK driver had a single direction she was facing and totally misjudged my speed. But i lie partly at fault due to whats now recognised in claims as a 'misleading signal', thats the problem with a noisy car, low sun and on that slight curve it needed a manual cancellation :mad: But she is local and that junction is a bit dodgy.

My ins is dealing with it, and has been for a week or so now since Esure actually contacted them laying full blame on myself refering to a Watson v Cotton case law where the signalling party was at 100%, however I dont know the circumstances of that incident. The witness statment matching hers is making any sort of challenge difficult in light of the Wadsworth case law thats set a precident for this type of collision.

Car should be inspected within 48 hrs. Im just severely angry that my agreed value policy as gone up the swanny as Sky are claiming they didnt receive the pictures and MOT and wont action it now as there is a claim outstanding even though I have paid the premium :( Market value of the Teg is probably gonna be £3.5k rather than the £5k agreed.
 
Last edited:
Get the additional premium refunded from Sky. If they don't then ask them for a copy of their FSA complaints procedure and watch them **** themselves.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom