Much as I understand the view that a new merc adds to the cost of the claim I can assure you it has no effect as only resonable charges will ever be awarded by any court.

By far the greater detriment to all motorist, consumers and citizens is the failure by the FSA and others to perform their regulatory responsibility to protect consumers from the cost to the tax payer of treating so many thousands of injury victims of collisions where the at fault insurer seeks out and disuades vulnerable consumers from their staturtory rights to claim full and fair compensation.

Much as many on this site are aware interveneing companis such as Drive Assist add costs to victims losses and liabilities while seeminly avoiding complaince and good conduct.

R

Not sure if it ever computes but when the insurer direct Drive Assist the victim is often left underpaid with so many other areas of their claim...the recourse is to disregard the insurer's hire car....hence the staff of Drive Assist are known for their up-selling of damage claims...so much for a free car which any court would see cannot be free given the examples of charging up and up-selling so clear a part of car hire businesses..

R

I think that if you had volunteered to pay extra insurance to cover the £250 excess,you would have avoided this trouble. It sounds to me that Drive Assist are operating like any other Hire Car Co--and leasing cars with full comprehensive insurance --except for the standard excess part. For around £4 a day you could have been covered for this. It saves all sorts of silly discussions about scratches when you return the car.

Firstly Roly, we never say to any client that the vehicle is "free" because there is charges involved. Usually it is the client's insurers who publicise that fact is "free" or "no cost" or "its a courtesy vehicle", when it is a credit hire vehicle that incurrs charges that are invoiced to the third party insurer. We are very clear when explaining to the client what the vehicle is and the charges involved, so much so that a script is introduced on booking and is read to every client.

Presumabley, you are now try to say that drive assist "up sells" damage to our hire vehicles. All charges that are for damage of hire vehicles are used for repair work to OUR vehicles that other people have damaged, no costs are retained as "profit" and are entirley used for rectification work. There is no commision, no hidden charges, no bonus schemes for selling insurance, all options are there for the client's benefit and all charges for new damage are used to recify the damage. I hope this clarifies the matter for you because you are obviousley under a gross misunderstanding of Drive assist's operations.

While I appreciate the reply your assertions that repairs carry no profit element the contents of this site rather suggests from consumer's experience something, rather different.

Also, I do not seek to presume much or think much of Insurer Capture Agents or the hire companies associated with some of the dispicable practices I have investigated. I merely comment upon the facts I have become aware of which seems well known within the practices of Insurers and their agents.

Also, the anticeedent negotiations you confirm misrepresent the vehicle to the consumer as 'free' when clearly it is not, nor ever would be, rather confirms the misinformation that I have discovered is common practice within the operators of Third Party Capture/Intervention. You seem to confirm this of Drive Assist not me.

Third Party Inteveners and Capture operatives appear to have traded for many years with a disregard of the consumer protection laws and regulations. The misadvice over CDWs being one minor example albeit vastly profitable for the many companies that seem to do anythiong an insurer wants to gain their trade.

Of course its rather more easy to harrass injured and vulnerable consumers and cap their lawful and legitimate claims. It always saddens me when the injured children's parents are misled as their child's entitlements and rights.

However, once the conduct comes under the scrutiny of the courts when these so-called 'settled claimes' are reopened no doubt, the Professional Indemnity Insurance cover will repay the doubly injured and misled. Oh yes, many trade without any propper insurance as to get it they must be authorised by the FSA and MoJ in the business they operate which of course so many Capture Operators are not...

I am sure you and your colleagues will count your profits and continue along your profitable course.

I am unsure if Dive Assist are one of the companies using the electronic copies of consumers signatures gained or captured from when the customer signes for the car upon the electronis pad and then reuse it upon other documents which are then represented to insirers as 'customer signed'?

Perhaps you could enlighten me as I try not to presume one common practice is practiced by all?

R

as usual not spelt checked.

Drive assist do have a third party scheme as we are a report line for insurance companies such as Endsleigh, Swinton and Direct Choice, and yes we do try to provide them with our service. From looking at the posts, the absolute without doubt main issue with drive assist's service is us marking down new damage, and as I have explained in previous posts that we try to do everything we can to stop this from happening, and the fact that if we get the vehice back from one of clients and it has been damaged (whether their fault or not) they would have to pay the x/s on their insurance if this damage is not removable by low costs e.g. temp repair or polish. But other than this problem, Drive Assist do provide a helpful service to those who would normally be stranded without the use of their own vehicle.

Drive assist as mentioned are authorised and regulated by the FSA and as mentioned we have scripts to ensure that our service is not misinterpreted and that the client fully understands what we are offering them and the full terms of conditions are explained, if the client does not wish to listen that is their fault but we do everything to ensure the client fully understands.

I do believe drive assist does 'copy' the signature onto different parts of the renta agreement but when they do sign for the vehicle on the PDA, they do sign for the full terms and conditions of service. The signature is copied to show the different sections of the terms of conditions that they have signed for, but i can understand that the appearance of the document can look misleading.

I must emphasise that Drive assist do not take part in any unlawful practices and that they explain everything to the client. I understand if you have had bad experiences with other credit hire companies, but at present Drive assist are fair and provide a good service, and I don't say that because I work there, I believe it.

I think your assumptions that 'the scripts' are sufficient are sufficient to meet your statutory obligations to customers is misplaced as the FSA ICOBS make it clear you MUST use durable medium being what is commonly known by the FSA a as hard copy written ie a letter.

The key factors regarding the conduct of the intervener must be detailed within the Letter of Compliance which must be sent to all customers at the outset of any agreement for the provision of services. The latter will/MUST detail among complaints proceedures all the factors relating to the goods and services and any potential and real conflicts of interests MUST be detailed and Informed Consent received from the customer prior to any services being supplied or there is no basis for the recovery of any charges from the customer or from any party in their name.

Clearly these Regulatory Requirements and Costs detract from quick profits which is probably why such information/Regulatory Requirements are commonly ignored.

But then again, this is historically regulatory breaches remain so common much as they are within insurance trading and those that carry out such practices for and on behalf of insurers.

Any quick recollection of Mortgage, Endownment, Pension misselling rather confirms similar practices from these dreadful practices which are now so very prevelent within the misleading of consumers in the regulatory breaches of Third Party Capture/Intervention where the driving factor is the reduction of the value of a consumer's lawful and legitimate claim.

No doubt the re-claims that are beginning to find their way to the FOS and the FSA's fines of companies who have not complied with Letters of Compliance Regulations (where the fines are around £30,000.00) will eventually bring about some ideas of complainace and its importance.

As ever in the meanwhile happy profit and capping of consumer's lawful and legitimate claims and the use of customer's signatures for documents the consumer never knew of.

Roly

also as ever no spelling checks etc

We do in fact send this "letter of compliance" out to all our clients which does mention every aspect of our service and the terms and conditions involved. If you think we didn't, don't you think the FSA would of caught on by now? As mentioned the we are authorised by the FSA and comply by all of its regulations, and in no way are we misleading clients, all the information is there and explained numerous times, and even if they did have any questions our customer service staff are available from 9am until midnight, can't say fairer than that?!

I take it you work for an insurer ;)

Amazing that not one entry on this blog refer to any Letter of Compliance being received.....nor any Informed Consent Letter detailing the clear conflicts of interests when the introducer of your services states to the customer they are free and without charge. Nor does any entry confirm they were aware of how to complain regarding false representations of fact.

Perhaps the scanned signature is used by your offices upon ABI-GTA docs to represent to insuers that they did? This would enable hire charges to be recovered without the customers disatisfaction being disclosed?

Nevertheless the upselling of CDWs that should be not charged to the consumer remain a profit centre for Third Party Cature/Intervention Agents.

The ABI-GTA clearly allows many unauthorised companies to trade within a regulated market as so long as it suits insurers. Insurers often disregard the requirements of FSA Regs much as when they made assurances to the government that they would report all un-authorised companies acting within regulated markets when they gained exemption from being regulated under CA 2006?

Also, the withdrawl of the hire vehicle at the insurers behest is always a good tool to make the customer accept the low values offered to customers for their total loss vehicles.

Also, the taking away of the hire car when injured third parties have hospital appointments to attend which hinder their search for a replacement car clearly assist in the capping of lawful and legitimate need for transport.

No I work for injured and prejudiced consumers who have often been bullied out of lawful, legitimate claims by insurers and their cohorts keen to profit from injured and vulnerable families.

But then again as we all know greed knows no standards associated with fairness. see the recent bank and insurer failings which has led to the worldwide recession.

Oh yes the widespread use of second hand parts and no-genuine parts in the repair of vehicles by thrid party interveners is often never disclosed to any consumer despite the inevitable durability and safety issues as is not the fact that many insurance appointed repairers suffer 40-60% levels of defective work which of course leaves many consumers without transport while the repairs are attended to. Not that non-genuine parts are ever going to fit properly or the manufacturer would approve them would they not?

Just another profit gain for those working with insurers.

Just like many MPs....it would seem those misleading and misrepresenting statutory rights to consumers....Third Party Capturers just dont get it....because they seem to only consider their own interests for profit rather than seek profit from quality and honesty to consumers

As all those within the Regulated Claims markets know the business is populated with dreaful practisioners of terrible prejudices towards consumers...if they are being honest...

R

While my car was being repaired after an accident I had a hire car from Drive Assist. A couple of things about the process worried me so I googled Drive Assist and was horrified to see all of the negative threads on this site and others. I spent the next few weeks feeling very worried, but in fact we had no difficulties with them. They delivered the car promptly and collected it the same day that my own car was returned. We were very careful to return the car in a pristine condition and with the correct amount of petrol in. The driver was very pleasant, checked the car over, then had me sign a screen confirming that there was no damage, the car was clean, and the fuel was fine. A short while later I received email confirmation of this, and was very relieved that I had not been subject to the difficulties that others have reported ie false claims that the car was dirty or damaged or out of fuel.

I've taken the trouble to post this so that other people who have had to use Drive Assist will be careful with the details & car but will not spend weeks worrying themselves sick like I did.

Given that using Drive Assist leaves you potentially liable to pay hire costs yourself I just have to hope now that they can recover the costs from the other party's insurers. And if I ever have another accident I will ask for a car from the garage or from the Insurers so that I am not at risk of having to pay the hire charges myself, which is unfair as I pay extra on my policy for a guaranteed hire car.

I had an accident back last year 24th October I am with (endsleigh car insurance) when I rang their claims line they put me to 'Driver Assist' which supplied me with a car and also handled the claim i.e. getting my car inspected by third parties engineer as well which ....... signed pda showed me the car where scratches were the car was filthy the driver apologised.... has it had just come off hire... however in November the tax disk ran out which I noticed when I was pulled over via the police spot check I advised them this was a hire car etc, officer given me the benefit of the doubt..

However the amount of times I rang there Tamworth number and told them of the tax disc issue they advised me to tell police that its driver assist problem not mine, i complained about the tax disk over 20 times no joke until dvla came and clamped the car i rang through to Tamworth number again got but through to their depot (which I believe is in Lincoln) spoke to Bill there manager who rand dvla advised them that they had the tax disc with them and told them this was a hire car so dvla came took clamp off.... anyway my claim went through car was written of contacted at 5.28pm by driver assist who advised me they will off hire the vehicle that night fine four days later a man comes to pick car up (same man who dropped it off) and he was like the car is filthy and that i have damaged the wheel trim I didn’t sign any think and told him to bugger off in which he did.. after an hour

In February 2009 driver assist trying to charge me £440 what a joke luckily i have been watching this forum for over months sent them a couple of letters and they investigated my complaint and has well good will gesture they decided to waiver the charge....

Personally I would advised anyone who takes a car from these cowboys be careful they seem to have a communication problem and their attitude stinks

Hi to all reading this very intresting forum past and present, i have been keeping my self up to date with what people are posting and think that if i am able to help others in trouble with regards to drive assist car problems then i will do my best to help as i hate the company with a passion.I too like so many others on here work for drive assist, as a driver though not as a useless drive assist pen pusher. if anyone has any questions or would like any help, reply to this post.

Help!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Drive Assist just dropped off a black BMW 09 plate which is automatic( i have never driven one before ) as some clown drove into the back of my Focus.

I went over the T&Cs checked over the car, i found a scuff on 1 of the alloys and the guy noted it down, however, i never looked insde, i have since checked and everything is fine.

I am now very wary after reading everyones comments on this forum, i would be more than happy to bus it for 4 days rather than drive this tank around, where do i stand? I would worry so much but i have just put down a deposit for a new house and i dont think i could handle a big pay out should the worst happen...please help guys! thanks

hi i would contact them to off hire the vechile if you can manage without the car, or give them a call to say you dont feel confident driving an auto and see if they can re arrange another car for you, or have a word with your insurance company to see if you were to hire a car privately and re claim the charges back via the 3rd party insurance company........

Best call Drive Assist and inform them that you reject the hire vehicle as unsuitable.....there are many more regulkatory matters you could raise but seek £20-39/day loss of use payment from at fault insurers.....best you seek advices of independent claims management company......all so typical it would seem of Drive/insurers assist

R