Insurance Claims - new trend

[Empi5]

Just had quite an interesting conversation with the Manager of our Claims Accident management company.

The latest trend with regards to Motor Claims, where there are no witnesses, is that the Third Party denies all knowledge of the accident, confirms he/she was no where near the accident site and therefore cannot be proved, and as a consequence claims are settled on a ( knock for knock - old fashioned saying that doesnt exist anymore)

Common sense really, to prevent this, :

1. make sure you get a "independent" witness if there is one available
2. try your best to take a picture of the tp car with specific reference to the number plate.( i think most people have cameras on their phone )


:(

[DanGB]

Yeah I think photos are the most important thing, especially as most people havea camera phone these days.

[CupraUK]

Check about for CCTV cameras too.

[xrchris]

The latest trend with regards to Motor Claims, where there are no witnesses, is that the Third Party denies all knowledge of the accident, confirms he/she was no where near the accident site and therefore cannot be proved, and as a consequence claims are settled on a ( knock for knock - old fashioned saying that doesn't exist anymore)

If the third party denied the incident took place and that they were nowhere near the scene of the incident then they are hardly likely to agree settlement on a 50/50 basis as this would mean that they WERE present.

I have always had a cheap camera or phone about for this kind of thing.

[Empi5]

If the third party denied the incident took place and that they were nowhere near the scene of the incident then they are hardly likely to agree settlement on a 50/50 basis as this would mean that they WERE present.

I have always had a cheap camera or phone about for this kind of thing.

50/50 in this case means, each Insurer meets their own cost, ie Your own Insurance pays for the damage

[Tallpaul]

If each insurer meets their own cost then the 3rd party is at least admitting they were involved in an accident at the same time as you, even if they deny it was with you.

I'd happily use this as a basis to persue my claim through a court, would motor legal protection support this? I'd have thought your insurer would be more than happy to support you if it meant recovering their costs.

See how long the lying ******* is willing to push it...

[Empi5]

To be case specific,

Insured was driving along a main road, when the TP came from a side street and struck Insureds vehicle.

Insured reported the incident to their Insurers, the TP didnt.

Obviously the TP Insurers then have a duty to ask their Insured for comments, and the TP, despite giving correct Insurance information, then says that no incident took place ( the TP obviously will not be using his Insurance for own repairs)

Therefore the TP insurers then take the stance that no incident took place and they can be of no further assistance.

So Basically without witnesses , its the Insureds word against the TP. Yes Im sure if it went to court it may well come out that hes lying, but no Insurer will take it that far with the hope that it might be succesfull. Its all about costs, and it would be cheaper for the Insurers to pay for their own damage, than to seek recovery against a TP that says it wasnt involved.

Its the world we live in,

[Tallpaul]

50/50 in this case means, each Insurer meets their own cost

Insured reported the incident to their Insurers, the TP didnt.

Hence the confusion :)