Insurance 3rd party claim

Pitbull said:
You have insurance for a reason. Don't stress yourself up. Lodge a claim against your insurance and let them deal with it. I would much rather pay the excess and get it back eventually than stress myself with other people's issues and having to probably drive a smashed car during all these delays. You pay a lot monthly. use it...
Click to expand...
He doesn't want to lose his no claim bonus and the added increase in premium and risk just because someone drove into him. Seems like a fair expectation. When you change insurance they don't care whose fault it was they only want to know your claim history.
 
R13... said:
He doesn't want to lose his no claim bonus and the added increase in premium and risk just because someone drove into him. Seems like a fair expectation. When you change insurance they don't care whose fault it was they only want to know your claim history.
Click to expand...

If he's worried about a NCB then he shouldn't have insurance.

No one drives with the intention of being in an accident, so we should all then not have insurance? Fark NCB, if you are involved in an accident claim, that is what you have insurance for. I agree with the NCB when it comes to things like claiming for a cellphone screen maybe and the likes as your NCB adjustment will probably make it cheaper to just fix it yourself in the long run. But fixing cars are not cheap. Why put all the added stress on yourself if it wasn't even your fault. Claim, take the NCB hit and pay the excess. Your NCB will be re-instated and your excess repaid once the other party settles.

They won't back date your NCB adjustment when they re-instate it, but I would much rather pay little more extra for a few months than have to stress myself with other people's problems.
 
saturnz said:
uh what?

what made you think the guy was nice about it?
Click to expand...
The answer is in your question. "think", otherwise also called assumption (I seem to be guilty of this in recent posts and Steven Seagal's nemesis warned me against it years ago... ).
 
cpu. said:
The answer is in your question. "think", otherwise also called assumption (I seem to be guilty of this in recent posts and Steven Seagal's nemesis warned me against it years ago... ).
Click to expand...

yeah there seems to be a tendency for some people to make up facts (assumptions) when engaging me
 
Mvu said:
Good day everyone

Need some advice. Someone rammed into my car on Saturday night. We did the AR and I have the details. Now apparently he needs to register the claim on his insurance if I want to go 3rd party. Or else i can do the quotations and ask my lawyers to persuit him. I am getting frustrated now. The guy hasnt registered the claim as agreed.

Any advice? I am trying to avoid claiming from my insurance because even if I go that route I still need his insurance claim number if I want to recover my access. Or else I just cut my losses and fix my car. :twisted:
Click to expand...

Your insurers are your lawyers...that's literally what you pay them for so why not use them?

Third party claims although possible are almost never worth the hassle in time and effort over money.

There will be an insurance claim number whether he claims or not based on your insurance going after his for their money.


So just use the people that you are paying to do this job instead of getting involved. If you get your excess (not access) back it's a win, if you don't then they did their jobs to get your car fixed with minimal effort to yourself.

My just posting this thread your are already doing work that you are literally already paying someone else for.
 
saturnz said:
a guy drove into the back of me in 2014 and I claimed successfully from his insurance, he was 100% responsible.

you don't need huge resources
Click to expand...

This reply is yet more evidence that you are a fool with an enormous ego.

That you claim the other party was 100% responsible is an opinion and not a legally binding fact until established in a court of law. The op was obviously uninformed in regard to this legal situation, if he had pursued them himself and the 3rd party and their insurance got even slightly difficult he would be screwed unless he lawyered up at huge and probably totally uneconomical cost - that is a fact.

The op engaging his insurance to sort the situation out is the only logical solution, unless he has funds of his own that he potentially doesn't mind throwing the drain to fight the 3rd party in court or have the repairs done out of his own pocket.
 
Last edited:
airborne said:
This reply is yet more evidence that you are fool with an enormous ego.

That you claim the other party was 100% responsible is an opinion and not a legally binding fact until established in a court of law. The op was obviously uninformed in regard to this legal situation, if he had pursued them himself and the 3rd party and their insurance got even slightly difficult he would be screwed unless he lawyered up at huge and probably totally uneconomical cost - that is a fact.

The op engaging his insurance to sort the situation out is the only logical solution, unless he has funds of his own that he potentially doesn't mind throwing the drain to fight the 3rd party in court or have the repairs done out of his own pocket.
Click to expand...

it doesn't require funding to engage with the insurance of the person who knocked into him, it didn't cost me any money, and at this point he hasn't engaged the insurance, so you are making an assumption with respect to his potential engagement with them (surprise surprise)

I even assisted a friend with his 3rd party claim and the insurance revised upwards their original offer too, also no money involved in getting them to change their settlement offer.
 
Last edited:
saturnz said:
it doesn't require funding to engage with the insurance of the person who knocked into him, it didn't cost me any money, and at this point he hasn't engaged the insurance, so you are making an assumption with respect to his potential engagement with them (surprise surprise)

I even assisted a friend with his 3rd party claim and the insurance revised upwards their original offer too, also no money involved in getting them to change their settlement offer.
Click to expand...

As always you have another story to recount about your most amazing luck :crylaugh:

Your retelling of your presumed to be non-ficticious fame and fortune doesn't change the facts about these situations.

Once you engage the 3rd party insurance company in your own capacity you waive the right to claim using your own insurance policy. What does happen is despite the 3rd party insurance companies client being "100% responsible" and things going well during negotiations with the 3rd party insurance , their claims dept can suddenly say sorry we have re-examined the case and decided it does not merit us paying out, pursue us in court if you see fit. Or we have decided you are 50% to blame for the accident, therefore we will only cover 50% of your damage, take us to court if you dispute that.

So genius/saturnz who exactly will be covering those legal expenses?

So yes my previous estimations stand.
 
Last edited:
airborne said:
As always you have another story to recount about your most amazing luck :crylaugh:

Your retelling of your presumed to be non-ficticious fame and fortune doesn't change the facts about these situations.

Once you engage the 3rd party insurance company in your own capacity you waive the right to claim using your own insurance policy. What does happen is despite the 3rd party insurance companies client being "100% responsible" and things going well during negotiations with the 3rd party insurance , their claims dept can suddenly say sorry we have re-examined the case and decided it does not merit us paying out, pursue us in court if you see fit. Or we have decided you are 50% to blame for the accident, therefore we will only cover 50% of your damage, take us to court of you dispute that.

So yes my previous estimations stand.
Click to expand...

Yes, but to be fair, this only happens in real life :D
 
Subrogation...

You have insurance for a reason. Claim from them, they will recover what they can. I don't know why we keep on getting these damn threads every now and again. I can understand if you a broke arse mofo like some posters on here and can't afford insurance, that is another story. But if you have insurance, don't stress yourself, just claim and get on with life.
 
Pitbull said:
Subrogation...

You have insurance for a reason. Claim from them, they will recover what they can. I don't know why we keep on getting these damn threads every now and again. I can understand if you a broke arse mofo like some posters on here and can't afford insurance, that is another story. But if you have insurance, don't stress yourself, just claim and get on with life.
Click to expand...


Probably fell in the trap of stupidly large excess for a smaller premium.
 
airborne said:
As always you have another story to recount about your most amazing luck :crylaugh:
Click to expand...

so instead you make a black box argument and go with that

where have I heard this before...

by the way do you know the quantum of the figure thats being claimed for damages? or have you based your entire argument on the fact that the damages are astronomical and can only be solved in a court that requires lawyers...
 
Last edited:
saturnz said:
so instead you make a black box argument and go with that

where have I heard this before...

by the way do you know the quantum of the figure thats being claimed for damages? or have you based your entire argument on the fact that the damages are astronomical and can only be solved in a court that requires lawyers...
Click to expand...

Nice red herring, interesting that you didn't base your advice off of the quantum in any of your previous replies but now it's pivotally important. In any case it has no bearing unless the op had no insurance, which is not the case.

The value of the claim does not change the consequences of the outcome. If the claim dept of the 3rd party insurance Co decides not to pay out you either litigate or take it on the chin. For which reason going down that road when you have insurance cover would be downright stupid, probably why it's not surprising to see you endorse it.

Also if it is retroactively discovered that there is far greater liability for the op as a result of the incident his insurance company will not cover any of it. There is no benefit to an insured party bypassing his insurance Co to make a 3rd party claim, unless the 3rd party were offering to accept full liability and deliver an agreement to that effect signed and on a silver platter.
 
airborne said:
Nice red herring, interesting that you didn't base your advice off of the quantum in any of your previous replies but now it's pivotally important. In any case it has no bearing unless the op had no insurance, which is not the case.
Click to expand...

I haven't created facts, you have, and you have done so in order to put forward your narrative.
 
saturnz said:
I haven't created facts, you have, and you have done so in order to put forward your narrative.
Click to expand...

I have only stated the plain facts of the matter, granted your loose grip on what constitutes a fact may hinder your ability to ascertain that.

Your narrative is filled with the usual self aggrandizing bs you post.

Same sh#t different day.

But please feel free to point out where I am wrong seeing you have noticeably failed to do so thus far.
 
Momentum just gave me a bundle of money for not claiming anything (I actually forgot that someone called me and told me they can add no claim bonus for free a few years back). anyway, I see why OP is hesitant now.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X