Insurance question regarding excess on third party t+t

Felix E · 23 Mar 2009 at 12:49

Had an accident yesterday, I wasn't concentrating properly and hit a car at a junction as I tried to get past him to turn left.

Anyway, my insurance is Third party Fire and Theft with More Than. To get my premium down when I took it out I went for a 'Fire and Theft' excess of £750.

I was very worried after the incident that I would therefore have to pay the first £750 of any claim, however according to 2 people I spoke to at More Than today - if the third party claims against me, they will take care of it and I will not have to pay anything.

Does this make sense? I thought the point of having an excess was that you would have to pay it... does it only apply if I try to claim on my own vehicle when I don't have fully comp insurance?

I just want to be totally sure before I jump up and down with joy...

Felix

[TW]Fox · 23 Mar 2009 at 12:51

You have a fire and theft excess. Your car has not been stolen nor burnt out. The excess therefore does not apply.

antijoke · 23 Mar 2009 at 12:53

That would indicate to me that you would pay £750 if you claimed for fire or theft to your vehicle.

Felix E · 23 Mar 2009 at 12:53

thanks, so do these excesses only apply when making a claim against your own insurance company? I always thought it was for any claim made by you or against you by a third party.

very relieved now!

[TW]Fox · 23 Mar 2009 at 12:54

Its a FIRE AND THEFT excess, the third party is not claiming for either!

Unless your policy has a specific third party excess, then you only pay an excess if YOU claim.

needmorespeed · 23 Mar 2009 at 12:54

you only pay the excess if you claim for your own vehicle

Dj_Jestar · 23 Mar 2009 at 13:04

[TW]Fox;13736416 said:
Its a FIRE AND THEFT excess, the third party is not claiming for either!

Unless your policy has a specific third party excess, then you only pay an excess if YOU claim.

The fact it is fire and theft is entirely irrelevant. You don't pay excess on any vehicle except your own.

[TW]Fox · 23 Mar 2009 at 13:06

Dj_Jestar said:
The fact it is fire and theft is entirely irrelevant. You don't pay excess on any vehicle except your own.

This depends on the specific policy.

Dj_Jestar · 23 Mar 2009 at 13:07

[TW]Fox;13736512 said:
This depends on the specific policy.

I've never seen a policy with excess on 3rd party.. and didn't think it possible, because what happens if the claimant cannot pay the excess? If it's their own vehicle, the insurance company will take the car. If it's the 3rd party vehicle, and no claim against the policy holders car.. what then?

[TW]Fox · 23 Mar 2009 at 13:08

There are insurers who now have a third party excess, one that springs to mind is Bell Direct with the Flexibell product.

loki101 · 23 Mar 2009 at 13:55

i guess my question is why go TPFT if your pick an excess of 750? you've gone TPFT becuase i asume the cars not worth a lot (so why go fully comp), but if thats the case with an excess of 750 TPFT why would you ever claim because you wounldn't get much asumming car worth a grand you'd get 250 and you'd prob been better not claiming and get the ncb.

So why not just go TP?

[TW]Fox · 23 Mar 2009 at 13:57

TP is rarely any cheaper.

Jez · 23 Mar 2009 at 13:57

also a lot of insurers do not offer a TPO policy....

DampCat · 23 Mar 2009 at 14:01

Because TPFT policies can come with benefits (legal, courtesy car, breakdown), and TPO policies are usually quite bare. TPO is rarely an option on the car market anyway. It's more common on bikes and other personal lines insurance.

Dj_Jestar · 23 Mar 2009 at 14:09

[TW]Fox;13736535 said:
There are insurers who now have a third party excess, one that springs to mind is Bell Direct with the Flexibell product.

Yet to see that myself. Didn't think they'd go for it.