Hi

In November 2007 my 20 year old son and another car collided in a supermarket carpark. Both parties deny fault and the claim is still in the hands of their insurers. He is now due to renew his insurance and was hoping that the £1500 he paid in year 1 would have decreased substantially but his current policy has actually gone up! He has enquired why and he has been told by his insurer that until the outcome of the claim is decided, he can't claim a NCB despite having driven for 1 year. This is obviously making a big difference to his premium. I hope you can help answer a couple of queries:

1. Does it usually take this long to resolve an insurance claim? It's knocking on 6 months now. Being an old cynic I wondered whether they would drag their feet until after the renewal date in order to bump up his premium and hope that he wouldn't shop around and simply pay it.

2. He needs his car for work so will have to renew, presumably without a NCB. What happens when the claim is resolved (assuming he doesn't lose his NCB) ... can he then have his premium amended or does he have to wait until next year and pay over the odds this year? All very confusing.

3. He's shopped around online and given details of the claim but until he spoke to his insurers today, he had stated that he had 1 years NCB (which he thought he had .. driving 1 year = 1 years NCB). Is it correct that he can't claim to have 1 years NCB until the outcome is decided?

Any suggestions/help would be appreciated.

Many thanks.

the insurance companies will try every trick in the book to prevent paying out. i would like to bet both insurers will get together and say as both parties deny fault and it cannot be resolved then both drivers insurers will pay out, ensuring both will lose there ncb and next year sees an increase in their renewal.

ronbobby:the insurance companies will try every trick in the book to prevent paying out. i would like to bet both insurers will get together and say as both parties deny fault and it cannot be resolved then both drivers insurers will pay out, ensuring both will lose there ncb and next year sees an increase in their renewal.

Absolute rubbish lol!

In November 2007 my 20 year old son and another car collided in a supermarket carpark. Both parties deny fault and the claim is still in the hands of their insurers. He is now due to renew his insurance and was hoping that the £1500 he paid in year 1 would have decreased substantially but his current policy has actually gone up! He has enquired why and he has been told by his insurer that until the outcome of the claim is decided, he can't claim a NCB despite having driven for 1 year. This is obviously making a big difference to his premium. I hope you can help answer a couple of queries:

1. Does it usually take this long to resolve an insurance claim? It's knocking on 6 months now. Being an old cynic I wondered whether they would drag their feet until after the renewal date in order to bump up his premium and hope that he wouldn't shop around and simply pay it.

It doesn't usually take a long time if the case is clear cut. It seems to have been going on for longer than necessary but this could be that one insurer is not prepared to accept any liability and one is trying to settle 50/50 or pushing for nil liability also. They are NOT dragging their feet until after the renewal date to bump the premium up.

2. He needs his car for work so will have to renew, presumably without a NCB. What happens when the claim is resolved (assuming he doesn't lose his NCB) ... can he then have his premium amended or does he have to wait until next year and pay over the odds this year? All very confusing.

Monies will be paid back pro-rata for him having 1 years NCD if any discount were applicable at renewal stage if there were to be 1 years NCD. Not all companies give a discount for only 1 NCD, especially with a recorded claim.

3. He's shopped around online and given details of the claim but until he spoke to his insurers today, he had stated that he had 1 years NCB (which he thought he had .. driving 1 year = 1 years NCB). Is it correct that he can't claim to have 1 years NCB until the outcome is decided?

The clue is in the title "No Claims Bonus" or "No Claims Discount". It's amazing how many people think they are entitled to NCB/NCD because they have driven for a year without killing anyone. A claim has been made, and is still undecided on who will accept liability. He should declare a pending claim with ZERO NCD.

One of my close friends was involved in a 50/50 car park accident but her insurer, Tesco, allowed her 2 years no claims at renewal instead of the 4 she had earned. This is a nice gesture from Tesco as I guess they are within their rights to disallow the no claims completely.

Maybe some insurers use a rule of current no claims discount - 2.

---

Joe Blogs

joeblogs:

One of my close friends was involved in a 50/50 car park accident but her insurer, Tesco, allowed her 2 years no claims at renewal instead of the 4 she had earned. This is a nice gesture from Tesco as I guess they are within their rights to disallow the no claims completely.

Maybe some insurers use a rule of current no claims discount - 2.

Absolutely. Usually -2 is the standard procedure but some take more than others.

It doesn't usually take a long time if the case is clear cut. It seems to have been going on for longer than necessary but this could be that one insurer is not prepared to accept any liability and one is trying to settle 50/50 or pushing for nil liability also. They are NOT dragging their feet until after the renewal date to bump the premium up.

So if the insurers settle 50/50, how does this affect my son's insurance? I guess this means that he pays for his repairs and the other owner pays for hers, but if he doesn't claim for any repairs to his car, does that still mean that he has made a claim and could lose his NCB?

Thank you for your response, although the hint of sarcasm wasn't really necessary. I simply wondered if the NCB stood until fault was ascertained, at which point it would revert to 0 if he was found to be at fault. Having driven for 34 years without an accident or claim, I'm not knowledgeable in this area ... hence the question.

From the research carried out to-date, the premium is approximately half once he has the NCB. Guess he'll just have to wait and see.

Best wishes

deebee:

"It doesn't usually take a long time if the case is clear cut. It seems to have been going on for longer than necessary but this could be that one insurer is not prepared to accept any liability and one is trying to settle 50/50 or pushing for nil liability also. They are NOT dragging their feet until after the renewal date to bump the premium up."

So if the insurers settle 50/50, how does this affect my son's insurance? I guess this means that he pays for his repairs and the other owner pays for hers, but if he doesn't claim for any repairs to his car, does that still mean that he has made a claim and could lose his NCB?

Thank you for your response, although the hint of sarcasm wasn't really necessary. I simply wondered if the NCB stood until fault was ascertained, at which point it would revert to 0 if he was found to be at fault. Having driven for 34 years without an accident or claim, I'm not knowledgeable in this area ... hence the question.

From the research carried out to-date, the premium is approximately half once he has the NCB. Guess he'll just have to wait and see.

Best wishes

So if the insurers settle 50/50, how does this affect my son's insurance? I guess this means that he pays for his repairs and the other owner pays for hers, but if he doesn't claim for any repairs to his car, does that still mean that he has made a claim and could lose his NCB?

If the claim is settled 50/50 then each insurer will pay for their own repairs to their own insured. In this instance, a claim has still been paid out but not a full claim as it was split liability and will therefore be recorded as literally 50%, Partial met. If he doesn't claim for repairs to his car, then the claim will still be recorded but usually non-fault as his insurer has not paid any monies (although this will depend on the underwriter or the agent you speak to over the telephone that may not have a clue what to do).

Thank you for your response, although the hint of sarcasm wasn't really necessary. I simply wondered if the NCB stood until fault was ascertained, at which point it would revert to 0 if he was found to be at fault. Having driven for 34 years without an accident or claim, I'm not knowledgeable in this area ... hence the question.

Not too sure where to find the hint of sarcasm? My comment RE "It's amazing how many people think they are entitled to NCB/NCD because they have driven for a year without killing anyone. " was aimed 'generally' but my apologies if you read this 'specifically' to your case.

From the research carried out to-date, the premium is approximately half once he has the NCB. Guess he'll just have to wait and see.

Abolutely. Ensure that your research is carried out with his current company who you say you will renew with. Find out how much the premium is after 1 year NCD with them specifically.

Many thanks for your advice and for taking the time to respond, Vicissitude.

Best wishes

I got hit in a carpark last march, myn has just been paid out this week. I was stationary and the other car reversed into me. I kept my no claims but it was decided 50/50 . I recommend help hire to anyone whom has a none fault crash it saved my no claims, this was via the aa . Its unfair but even a none fault claim takes your insurance up

Settling 50/50 believing no-claims discount will be kepy should perhaps be done if only the premium is guaranteed to remain without any effect from the incident?

It is not unusual to be advised by insurer type organisations to settle as no-claims remain in tact without being infirmed that there is a practice to double premiums when agreeing to protect no-claims discounts?

Best check and complain if settlement terms were not explained in full in writing with likely future increases in premium explained?

Just a thought.

R

I didnt have a choice in the matter, if there isnt clear evidence to state the other party was in the wrong this is what happens. Car parks arrently know one has right of way.

I kept my no claims as the aa put me through to help hire and my injury claims was by another company they put me though. But my insurance had seen it has his fault quite suprised but they gave me my no claims which wasnt protected.

I can guarantee everyone no matter who is to blame their next policy will go up as you have to declair it.

Sorry can't agree with the advices you were given as it amounts to believing you have misrepresented the facts....as to evidence...it is merely presented to the court and the court decide upon the evidence...if you are certain you have recollected the events accurately then the other parties errors would become apparent. .from what you say seems the insurers won as both parties will end up paying for the claim repairs and injury claim through increased premiums given the advises of their agents...

Regarding car parks the advise ....no right of way is the gossip from the fact the law says they are not part of the highway etc....but negligence still happens where the place of occurrence is not part of the highway and hence your claims would have succeeded in full had the court got to hear the evidence ....given what you say about it is a correct reflection of the facts....

But there we have it insurers profit again from a claim.

R

legal motor insurance cover companys only take it to court if there is 100% chance of winning I was told by my solicitor whom is a big law firm.