Crashed Lexus Loaner

[Linas.P]

Short summary:

I had fully insured car for loan, which had fully comprehensive insurance which is in no way related to my own car insurance. I was hit by van, non-fault accident, damage is so minor that Lexus claims no damages, the loaner insurance is informed as per loan agreement.

Should I inform my insurance company which again has nothing to do with the accident and cannot even cover me from it a) because it was loan car b) it had superior insurance policy already.

1. yes, I must disclose everything including if I have hair loss treatment.. just because... because they might find it statistically relevant... which they will because why not to increase insurance premium for no reason?!

2. no, it was already disclosed with relevant insurance for that car which in turn decided it is too minor to bother.

[Linas.P]

6 minutes ago, madasahatter said:

I work in a bus yard bus clipped my car. Car was booked in for repair payed by bus company insurance. I did not tell my insurance why should i ???

That is when my night mare began. My vehicle was booked in for repair on a tuesday for arguments sake, at a certain garage then my car was hit again.

My vehicle was then sent to a different garage on a tow truck. I had to cancel the first garage for obvious reasons. That is when i was nearly prosecuted for

 failing to tell my insurance about the first accident. In my eyes  it had nothing to do with them, it was on private land and would of been repaired.

My car was insured with Lv and still is to this day, i have protected no claims etc but saving it all was a headache and a half.

I know this vehicle has not been hit twice. I am just saying ring your insurance for your own piece of mind. If it later comes out they find out you will become

grey haired very very quickly. I am talking from personal experience on this matter. 

These are 2 separate things - you need to disclose damage to your car to your insurance company. Even if it is non claim, non fault. Reason is pretty straight forward - if you hit again as per your example your insurance company only want to cover the damage for the later event and not all the damage which you previously failed to disclose, which was not cause by accident you are claiming for. That is typical insurance fraud.

[The-Acre]

In my thankfully limited dealings with insurance companies it seems that everything you mention is counted against you, your fault or not!

[Linas.P]

4 minutes ago, The-Acre said:

In my thankfully limited dealings with insurance companies it seems that everything you mention is counted against you, your fault or not!

That is always the case.. hence the label - "insurance is fraud".. plain and simple.. government backed one as well, with only one goal to price out people of the roads. That is because government transportation plans failed miserably and public transport is just awful, they don't want to spend on road infrastructure, just want to charge everyone for it and have their free cake of £20bn each. As such current car ownership and usage exceed capacity and the easy way to fix it is price out certain demographic by fraud which is called "insurance"..

Just to point out again - car insurance was notified as per agreement. It is against me, but it is already behind me... 

The question is whenever complete unrelated insurance need to be informed as well. I will give definitive answer when I check my policy.. sadly I am busy right now.. 

[dougie175]

25 minutes ago, Linas.P said:

I don't really understand what you mean by lack of responsibilities. The loaner car has it's own insurance and I have reported the damage there as per the policy - end of story. If I have 4 separate insurance policies should I inform each single one of them when I have non-fault, no claim, notification only incident on one of them?

Indeed we need to have separate thread for this:

 

 

Yes you will need to let every policy know you have had an accident.

Let me put it to you another way, you get a speeding fine next week, will you be just letting the insurance company of the car you committed the offence know or all the insurance companies you are insured for?

If you have had an accident, anyone who insures you is interested your fault or not

[aly-g]

If a insurance company can rip you off they will, they complain about fraudsters but they are the worst of all ....I've lost thousands of pounds in no fault claims in the past all they say is take it or leave it ...I now have agreed value on my car ,of course this cost extra again .....

 

I'll  bet linas wished he never mentioned that slight scrape !!!!!!! I sure this happens to hundreds of drivers every day, do they report it , no probably not ,do they have problems in the future ? Probably only if they had a massive claim and the insurance company didn't want to pay ! 

Have a good day everyone 

Allan

[Linas.P]

Ohh yes 100%... guys from the van had offered me money etc. As it is much better to deal with it without involving insurance fraudsters... 

The problem that was Lexus loaner so fixing myself of letting them do it was not an option.

[rich1068]

If Lexus know and the insurers of the loan car know I'd leave it at that.

[Ishaq]

Yey! I am all booked in to have my air bag and fuel sensor @Lexus Woodford next Wednesday 6th.

is there anything I need to know? Also do I still get the free fuel for the sensor job? 

[VrmmVrmm]

Bottom line here (and let's get sensible) you purchase insurance from a company of your own choice,  you make choices as to the type of cover, you make choices regards the amount of damage cost you will cover yourself, you decide to protect your "No Claims Bonus" or not ... all this is up to you!  Then in the agreement you accept the offer under the rules of the Insurer and Law of the Land...it's all very simple until something happens then according to many on this thread even though it's not your fault you end up blaming the insurance company who are YES making a profit but importantly protecting ALL the other drivers they insure.  If you hit a dog and do £1000 damage you make a choice to claim or not and forego the Grand.  You report to Police because it's the Law you don't have to report to Insurance.  Then on the other hand if two or more vehicles are involved therefore more than one party hopefully all insured then it is a must you notify your fault or not.  You should remember too that the dog may be insured!!! So the advice inform your insurer.  If you have your No Claims protected you have nothing to worry about...if you are NOT at fault you also have nothing to worry about...the insurance company decide that.  eg when inspected your car may have one tyre which hasn't enough tread left even though you're not to blame for the incident you are driving a vehicle with a weak link and illegally as it is no longer road worthy.  None of us like paying but that's the way it is...Insurance in my view isn't a rip off....it's expensive yes and the attitude of many towards their responsibilities in respect of it is a contributory factor as to why.  Unless you're living in cloud cuckoo land you all know that and that's why you purchased insurance in the first place.

[Shahpor]

In all honesty, if the dealer told me that my name isn't mentioned anywhere during the repair, then I wouldn't tell anyone about it.

[sorcerer]

That's absolute rubbish Paul @VrmmVrmm. Insurance IS a rip-off because it's the law of the land that you must have it so they can charge whatever they want for it. THEN, when you need to make a claim, they do all in their power to avoid paying out. Even if the accident is in no way your fault, they still increase your premiums anyway.

Not only that but everything is extra now. I remember the days when 'fully comprehensive' was just that - it covered everything. Nowadays, if you want this, it's extra; Oh, you want that as well sir? Courtesy car while yours is being repaired? I'm afraid that's extra, etc., etc.

[Shahpor]

I agree with you John.

What annoys me no end is your premium going up even if you make a no fault claim.  How is it fair for it to cost you more if someone else hits you?  It doesn't make it any more likely that you will be involved in another accident, and it is certainly no reflection on your driving skills.

[VrmmVrmm]

I'll say it again...along the lines of there's no such thing as a free lunch.  You get what you pay for!  It's very simple...by the way you will have noticed I never said it was cheap!

You're making a case along the lines of material things only,  remember Judges and Juries are rightly in my view handing out £Millions to unfortunates who are crippled for life and need 24-7-365 care for the rest of their lives.  This whole discussion stemmed from the OP posting about the need to report most of my response was in response to that.  Then a few started going off topic talking of fraud and rip off etc etc.  My post asked contributors to take into account all factors to include being able to see the big picture.  I'm quoting the reality as things stand....you call that rubbish which is to be in denial of what your responsibilities are and what the facts are regards claims...remembering too that I pointed out you make your own choices.  If you want just "Third Party" that's fine by me and that's the only min requirement in Law is that you insure the other persons and their property...insuring yourself that's entirely up to you. There's no extras if you don't want them!    As for your premium going up if you make a no fault claim....that is not true.  Your premium goes up because of everyone else's claims as well. Not forgetting inflation being 3% p.a.  

 I would recommend you read your policy before you make your next informed purchase!...no use whinging afterwards.

Call it rubbish if you will but correct me if I'm wrong....constructively!

[VrmmVrmm]

26 minutes ago, Shahpor said:

I agree with you John.

What annoys me no end is your premium going up even if you make a no fault claim.  How is it fair for it to cost you more if someone else hits you?  It doesn't make it any more likely that you will be involved in another accident, and it is certainly no reflection on your driving skills.

The scam whereby individuals pull away at a roundabout then brake abruptly and you a highly skilled driver crash into the back of them is based on the fact that you a highly skilled driver should be able to STOP at all times...not a leg to stand on unless you can prove otherwise.  Insurance is there for all eventualities right or wrong. lets hope that we get by without such eventualities occurring...right or wrong matters little so long as people aren't crippled for life...your policy pays for about 2 hours of their care.

 

[Shahpor]

14 minutes ago, VrmmVrmm said:

As for your premium going up if you make a no fault claim....that is not true.  Your premium goes up because of everyone else's claims as well. Not forgetting inflation being 3% p.a.  

 I would recommend you read your policy before you make your next informed purchase!...no use whinging afterwards.

No, I am not talking about premiums going up in general.

What I am talking about it is the fact that you making a claim - regardless of fault - affects your premium.

Or, how about when my missus did two insurance quotes and it came out cheaper (with the same insurance company) when she said it was her fault as opposed to a non fault claim?

Also, it has nothing to do with being informed before purchase, it is the fact that you have no choice either way!

11 minutes ago, VrmmVrmm said:

The scam whereby individuals pull away at a roundabout then brake abruptly and you a highly skilled driver crash into the back of them is based on the fact that you a highly skilled driver should be able to STOP at all times...not a leg to stand on unless you can prove otherwise.  Insurance is there for all eventualities right or wrong. lets hope that we get by without such eventualities occurring...right or wrong matters little so long as people aren't crippled for life...your policy pays for about 2 hours of their care.

 

Err, I am not sure why you mentioned this?  If, for whatever reason, you hit a car in front that has braked then it is your fault.  You should be prepared at all time to come to a stop just in case.

This has nothing to do with what I mentioned, namely a non fault claim eg sitting at a set of lights and getting rear ended, or your car being parked at the time.

[Linas.P]

2 hours ago, VrmmVrmm said:

I'll say it again...along the lines of there's no such thing as a free lunch.

Apparently there is .... insurance companies have free lunch on our account every single day.. 

Don't forget I had notification-only claim to my insurance like 3 weeks ago, when guy hit me and did not stop - police in front of HD video evidence said it is not in public interest to investigate. Bottom line, Police takes no responsibilities, Insurance takes no responsibilities... Government takes no responsibilities... why should I?! And another question... what is my responsibility? Inform dealership - done. Inform car insurer - done. Inform my insurance which has nothing to do with it.... why?!

If my car is totaled and I have Fully Comprehensive cover will insurance pay me what my car worth aka like for like. No they will pay the bottom price .. always! Fair ... not really

If I have no-fault claim will my premium go up? Yes it will... apparently it nowadays goes-up more for non-fault, than for fault. Fair... not really 

Why they are asking for my gender, occupation, my family position etc... none of their business! In other countries insurance only asks for 2 things: car registration and driving license number. That is it.. only what is relevant.

Not only that insurance in UK is one of the most expensive in the world, but insurance companies as well makes apparently no profit?! How comes?! - because system is inherently flawed. Why insurance covers personal injury when every single person is already covered by paying NI? Why should I pay for health insurance twice .. I actually pay it 3 times - once with my car insurance, then for NHS and then private health cover and insurance?! and all because NHS is awful, apparently underfunded, but they find funds for breast enlargement and gender reassignment... Doesn't sound like they have right priorities... I know yet another topic.

What I have experienced so far - Car insurance is systematically designed to reduce car ownership, by pricing out entire demographics e.g. young male, by inconveniencing drivers as much as possible, by never paying out fair amounts, by being secretive and not transparent, by asking everything they don't need to know, by being unfair, by using some kind of reverse logic in every occasion...and just generally being awkward.

Now just legal stuff:

One way or another - I red all my insurance agreement condition and it does not say I have to inform insurance about this as of now. When I am joining insurance company I need to disclose all accident I had in last 3 years. This is not a law - just internal arbitrary raised insurance condition, technically they have no legal right to ask me that, nor I have legal obligation to disclose it.

The only place where I can find it mentioned is my Insurance schedule: "Details of the claims, accidents or losses in the last 3 years for all the drivers" - currently it states - "none disclosed", but it can be assumed that if I would be about to join this particular insurance company they would verbally ask me to disclose it.

Now in broken UK legal system Insurance company can access (technically) illegal database which is without my permission contains my details which were collected by my previous insurers. If anyone know what GDRP is - then mere existence of such database is directly in violation of it.

Not disclosing is not against the law, it is merely against agreement between myself and insurer or in this case verbal not legally binding request over the phone. As I have already notified my insurer about another non-fault accident earlier I would inform my new insurer about it. Not because I need to, but because I know that via illegal channels and violating my legal rights under several EU and UK personal data protection regulation insurers can find out about my previous accidents and decline my policy. It is paradox that insurance company can prevent you driving in UK, by illegally obtaining you details and sharing with other companies via cartel agreements... Insurers are legally nothing ... just some fraudulent profit seeking companies, but Government allows them to have control over who drives and who don't.. how low life...

I would not be informing them about second accident with Lexus Loaner, because not only it was non-fault and non-claim, it was actually non accident as no recorded damage was caused - legally it did not happen and it cannot be proven otherwise. 

In terms of previous accident, it did not happen either as police was not bothered to investigate it. In country with some sort of legal system - that would be equivalent of non-accident... but what I am talking here.. in country with legal system police would have investigated it...

Disclaimer: read your terms and conditions as these are not a law, each insurance company can have their arbitrary rules to which you have agreed contractually and which might vary and (unlike for me) require you to disclose such accident. 

[Shahpor]

I agree with all you say Linas, except the part about the NHS.  I have recently needed to make use of their services and, as always, it has been excellent.  I am actually very thankful for the healthcare system we have in this country.

Anyway, perhaps the reason there are no profits is the people at the top taking it all?  For example:

http://www.poauk.org.uk/index.php?press-releases&newsdetail=20161121-10_car-insurance-ceos-get-multi-million-pound-reward-packages-as-premiums-continue-to-rise

This website claims that Admiral's CEO made £37.82M in 2015.  Also, these companies are returning dividends for shareholders, which is very nice for them, but not something you do if you are broke.

 

[VrmmVrmm]

Many are missing the point of the agreement being a contract...as opposed to insurance companies making laws which they cannot do...vs ...making conditions to the contract which they can do.  As Linas points out they vary!!  As I point out if you have no claims protection in your agreement you're premiums do not rise.  If you have to pay more to have this protection that's called consumer choice.  It's not compulsory but "caveat emptor"...KNOW WHAT YOU'RE PURCHASING.  Just for good measure you can purchase NEW for OLD insurance also.  Some policies are chalk some are cheese....some know about these aspects of insurance some don't.

Finally some think it's good value others don't...YOU GET WHAT YOU PAY FOR.  Every situation is different fault or no fault doesn't matter it's what did you purchase that matters.

Me...Fully Comp...Life Insurance...Personal Injury....NEW for OLD...etc etc...

Cheap? ...NO WAY!!  

Good Value?... YES!!

Was it tailored to my requests?...YES!!

My bottom line is that if I'm spending as I did €53k on a NEW car (which I did) then I need to have it covered, me covered and other road users covered.

My insurance company would charge almost the same for a €5k value...that's because it's not really about the car it's about road users....nothing to do with fault but everything to do with RISK...If you don't tell an insurance company something that's your choice but should they find out they don't trust you, they don't want your business, they don't know what else you're not telling them...and YES they'll hike the premium for all its worth to get rid of you.  Reality sometimes comes back to bite some people in the backside...no matter what the insured thinks about whose fault it is ....they'll decide. Like I said earlier and like others have pointed out you may be innocent as in sitting at a traffic lights and get rear ended...but if you've got even one tyre that isn't legal...then you're in the wrong place at the wrong time with a car that shouldn't LEGALLY be on the road.  So now the question arises are you insured at all? The Third Party may well be and you may not be?  But hey lets keep blaming insurance companies....is someone having a laugh?  Hopefully not at my expense!!

 

[Shahpor]

Paul, most of what you say is true and I agree, but there are a couple of things that stand out.

The main crux of the issue that you seem to have left out of your observations is that car insurance is compulsory, so it is not just a case of buyer beware.  If you don't like the terms, you can't just do without.

So, no household contents insurance and get robbed?  Completely down to you.  Lose your mobile phone and have no insurance? Tough luck.

However, the problem arises that insurance companies are given free rein to do as the please AND we have to use their services!

This gives them the power to decide on things, such as charging you more for a non fault claim, and there is no regulation to stop them.  Let say, for instance, that all the companies decided to hike premiums up 50% for no reason tomorrow, would you be ok with that?  Because, as things stand now, there is nothing anyone could do about it other than just pay the extra.

This, in my view, is wrong and I would welcome some regulation/clarification on how premiums are calculated to make sure that the reason I am paying more isn't just to line the pockets of the CEO of that company.

[VrmmVrmm]

Quote my previous post:

If you want just "Third Party" that's fine by me and that's the only min requirement in Law is that you insure the other persons and their property.

Competition does not give them free rein...regulators observe cartel behaviour...it's a shop around situation for best cover you can get at a price you can afford.  For many it's Third Party or at best Third Party Fire & Theft.  Each company suffers loses and gains in totally different ways...like I said it's not really about the material side of things it's more about injury and disablement of road users.  Some companies can get away some years and other companies get clobbered...it's a given in the industry.  However not too many insurers can afford getting clobbered one year after another.  Underwriters may well buy some of the risk and pool different risks...doesn't affect your cover but may affect it the following year and you or any driver with a no fault claim without a "No Claims Cover" clause in their policy wonders why...my main point is cheapest can be more costly over time and certainly not best.  Do they the insurers want your money most certainly!!   Again I point out that I actually agree with you and others ...IT IS NOT CHEAP.  Is it worth it NO not always....until SOMETHING GOES REALLY WRONG.  This isn't about grazes and broken headlights / grills.  This is really about the multi-million £££ claims...every time we go out on the road that's the risk we take collectively and that's the risk we collectively pay for...pro-rata...bad record = high premium, not forthcoming with the truth as per contract = high premium.  Note the latter is nothing to do with driving or ability. It's about abiding to rules you agreed and paid the cash for your premium only.  This whole conversation doesn't allow for comparing like with like because insurers do not work that way...every premium is calculated on customer need, customer category, track record and trustworthiness.  How many are driving around with all sorts of mods...never declared...etc etc. Amongst all road users there's risk takers and certainly honest road users should be miffed for having to pick up the tab but as the saying goes and as insurers dictate...someone's got to do it.  I don't work in the industry never have...calling insurance a rip-off may be valid if you're 18 years old driving a 2 litre high performance  turbo vehicle @ £3000 premium but that group of customers are classed as high risk...often REFUSED!  It's not just about the individual its being also associated with driver risk categories...there's a myriad of variables...it's far more complex than we appreciate....safe driving one and all.

 

[bernieeccles]

I have read in the past of people who have had their parked empty car damaged by another motorist. Said motorist being the honest sort, admits to the damage and his insurance foots the bill.

The driver of the parked car, also being the law abiding type, informs his insurance company of the facts but emphasises that he is not making a claim.

When he gets his renewal, the premium has gone up more than usual as his insurance company tells him because he has been involved in an accident, he is statistically more likely to have another accident.

How does that work !

[normski2]

Exactly what Admiral tried to do to me.

Told them to do one at renewal point. Its a load of 'dangly bits' ...can't put the word as it will likely be auto censored ... but you get my drift.

[rich1068]

As this has turned into a general thread about motor insurance I really do urge people to consider their local insurance broker rather than the big insurance companies. You may be pleasantly surprised. Even if the premium isn't the cheapest around the level of service will be far superior to that offered by the big names. It's particularly nice to have a person answer the phone who knows who you are rather than "we're experiencing a particularly high number of calls right now" which is big company speak for "this business is permanently understaffed so we can offer a higher return to our shareholders".

 

[Linas.P]

I believe @Shahpor is exactly on point - there is nothing to do with buyers awareness. Insurance is mandatory and is strongly enforced, but insurance agreements are not regulated. It is not like you can choose to insure or not. @VrmmVrmm really plays devil's advocate - yes law only requires you to have "third party" cover - have you seen prices of it? Here is your answer - insurance cartel decided that they going to make Third party only insurance so expensive that nobody can afford it and have to choose Comprehensive cover instead.

It is not... "not cheap" ... it is rip off which I don't need, but goverment forces me to have it. Not only that - government is not interested to regulate it properly to make sure agreements are legally sound. Going back to data protection point - insurance companies have no legal right to ask you to disclose you previous accidents or penalties, but not only they do ask it, they as well obtain this information illegally and can decline you the insurance cover!

So government forces me to buy insurance, but insurance company have a right to decide not to cover me... not based on law, but merely on their contract. This effectively means they have a right to decide who can participate their human rights and freedoms and who don't. This is equivalent to criminal law where for terrible crimes goverment can lock you up in prison.. but why private insurance companies are given such powers?

@rich1068 - I disagree, your local insurance broker is merely middle man between yourself and the same big company. In UK there are few underwriters, the rest are just brands of brokers selling same insurance and charging you commission for it. The conditions are decided by underwriter and just passed on you by the broker... so what is your gain by going local? You still obliged by the same rules, just need to pay extra for brokerage service?

@VrmmVrmm Again... it does not matter if you have no claim protection or not - your premium will go up by no-fault accidents regardless. That is because insurance company ask you and by their contract which is technically illegal (you have to disclose) all accident. You will still have e.g. 5 years of NCD, but you as well will have accident in your policy which regardless of show fault it was will increase your premium. 

And finally @Shahpor - my point about NHS was not that it is actually bad, but that government seems to pretend it is, they keep making claims that it is underfunded, that EU migrants makes pressure etc... whilst NHS actually founds money to send on services which not particularly in public interest ... and whilst my car insurance premium is directly increased because of personal injury clause which should not exist in car insurance as it is covered my my tax paid into NHS.