Car Insurance - accident - advice needed

[EternalOptimist]

EO there has already been a claim, if there hadn't the insurance companies wouldn't be involved at all.

I'm afraid that what Jubber said is entirely correct, the risk profile systems that the insurance companies all use treat any claim irrespective of fault as an increased risk factor in setting your premium before No Claims Discount is applied.

What two insurance companies are involved? It's extremely common that if they are part of the same group or affiliated in any way that they default to 50/50 if they can get away with it as it improves their premium charges from both parties.

As a classic example:-

Someone I know was parked at a Tesco and the car next to his caught fire due to an electrical fault while he was in the shop. The fire damaged his car quite badly, but obviously was nothing to do with his actions. The insurance companies agreed a 50/50 deal which he had to contest and won, the two insurance companies were Direct Line and Privilege (both RBS companies) so the money was coming from the same source in the long run. He contested it strongly as he only had 3 years no claims and he would have lost the lot if 50/50 was the outcome.

Insurance companies act on their own behalf first and their customers behalf a very, very distant second.

understood.
I think the problem here is that the on-line application asks a simple question, how many years no claims bonus do you have, without providing a definition, or asking any further questions.
From what I read above, no claims seems to be, 'no claim and no accident and forget who is to blame'.

fair enough.

[AtW]

You can still save your no claim bonus if you pay the insurance company their costs, if they offered 50/50 then it probably won't be huge amount, go talk to them.

[Incognito]

all this suing him yourself stuff.

It'll be tough if it's his word against yours surely? Hence also why the 2 insurance companies reached a 50/50.

Not at all. You only have to prove there's more likelihood he was at fault. No dispute over location of the accident, take pictures of the location. Present pictures of damage to the car consistent with story, i.e damage to your driver side, damage to his passenger side. Smoking gun, present proof driver was medicated.

The reason the insurance company is not persuing it is they'll also have to stump up legal fees and won't be able to recover these as damages are <5k. They're acting entirely in their own self interest.

Any witnesses? Photos taken at time of accident? CCTV at location of accident?

I'd also make a complaint to the GMC and Police that the driver was driving under the influence. He's actually committed a criminal offence. People don't realise that the section of the Road Traffic Act (RTA) about driving while under the influence of drugs, does not differentiate between drugs that are prescribed by a medical authority for illness or pain, those that are purchased over the counter, and those that are obtained illegally. This means that if you are stopped while driving, and it is later determined that you were unfit to drive due to any medication that you had taken, then you may be prosecuted and in turn, could lose your licence.

Of course, now it is his word against yours. You should have involved the police at the time. Whilst he'd get away with that in a criminal court (reasonable doubt) in a civil action, the fact that he's got the medication in the car with him means in all likelihood he's on medication.

[Mustang]

....some GP

Isn't he suffering enough after the budget? How will afford to pay after the tax rise for the over £150k-ers.