Claim question - which insurance company will settle the claim

RootX

Hi all,

I'll try and keep this short. We're a 2 car household, one car is insured in my name with the wife added as a named driver while the 2nd car is insured on her name with me named.

Wife had a tip at a parking lot, driving the car she's a named driver on.

Called my insurance company, advised of the tip and the agent asked whether my wife has her own policy on another car, which I confirmed.
The agent then provided me with a claim number to pass to the 3rd party but he advised for my wife to notify her own insurance company as well and he mentioned something along the lines the claim will be settled by my wife's policy.

Now, I was at work back then and didn't question his advice but now that I'm home thinking about it, I get the notify the wife's insurance but how would the claim be settled by her insurance policy while the accident happened when she was driving my car and she's a named driver on?

Did I completely misunderstood(the lines are closed now so can't call back until tomorrow) or is there anything I'm missing and her insurance company could actually settle the claim?

Many thanks in advance.

grogi

RootX wrote: »

Hi all,

I'll try and keep this short. We're a 2 car household, one car is insured in my name with the wife added as a named driver while the 2nd car is insured on her name with me named.

Wife had a tip at a parking lot, driving the car she's a named driver on.

Called my insurance company, advised of the tip and the agent asked whether my wife has her own policy on another car, which I confirmed.
The agent then provided me with a claim number to pass to the 3rd party but he advised for my wife to notify her own insurance company as well and he mentioned something along the lines the claim will be settled by my wife's policy.

Now, I was at work back then and didn't question his advice but now that I'm home thinking about it, I get the notify the wife's insurance but how would the claim be settled by her insurance policy while the accident happened when she was driving my car and she's a named driver on?

Did I completely misunderstood(the lines are closed now so can't call back until tomorrow) or is there anything I'm missing and her insurance company could actually settle the claim?

Many thanks in advance.

Typically driving other cars endorsement kicks in when no other policy is in force. In this case there was.

Sue Pa Key Pa

If your wife has driving of other cars which doesn't exclude a spouse's car, her policy picks up the 3rd party damage and your policy picks up own damage

If her driving of other cars excludes a spouse's vehicle, your policy picks up both aspects

RootX

Thanks guys for clarifying this for me, I'll check her policy so.

CiniO

Sue Pa Key Pa wrote: »

If your wife has driving of other cars which doesn't exclude a spouse's car, her policy picks up the 3rd party damage and your policy picks up own damage

Very smart. Then next year NCB will be lost on both policies and claim loading will be applied to both policies effectively skyrocketing both of OP's and his wife's premiums.

Someone is surely using their brains up there in insurance industry.

Kristopherus

CiniO wrote: »

Very smart. Then next year NCB will be lost on both policies and claim loading will be applied to both policies effectively skyrocketing both of OP's and his wife's premiums.

Someone is surely using their brains up there in insurance industry.

In other words, screw the customer in every way possible:mad:.

Sue Pa Key Pa

CiniO wrote: »

Very smart. Then next year NCB will be lost on both policies and claim loading will be applied to both policies effectively skyrocketing both of OP's and his wife's premiums.

Someone is surely using their brains up there in insurance industry.

The cause of the loss is the driver's negligence. If the driver holds a specific policy to cover that event, why shouldn't it come in to play? Given that this cover is usually 3rd party only, you must look to the policy where you are named for the own damage aspect. Why do you think that you can add a driver usually for nothing or even to get a discount?

Sue Pa Key Pa

Kristopherus wrote: »

In other words, screw the customer in every way possible:mad:.

There's a framed poster to that effect in every insurance office that I've worked in :rolleyes:

grogi

Sue Pa Key Pa wrote: »

The cause of the loss is the driver's negligence. If the driver holds a specific policy to cover that event, why shouldn't it come in to play? Given that this cover is usually 3rd party only, you must look to the policy where you are named for the own damage aspect. Why do you think that you can add a driver usually for nothing or even to get a discount?

Negligence? Negligence is failure to take proper care over something. If you run the red light or ride on slick tyres - that's negligence.

But that's not always the case, some accidents are, well... accidental.

Sue Pa Key Pa

grogi wrote: »

Negligence? Negligence is failure to take proper care over something. That's not always the case, some accidents are, well... accidental.

3rd party cover deals solely with negligence. Yes, of course I know it was an accident, a little tip that any of us can have on any given day but the technicalities are it was negligence.

grogi

Sue Pa Key Pa wrote: »

3rd party cover deals solely with negligence. Yes, of course I know it was an accident, a little tip that any of us can have on any given day but the technicalities are it was negligence.

It goes down to semantics I guess. But I really don't agree with that wording...

If a relatively new tyre blows and causes you to drive into a someone's fence to avoid head-on collision, I wouldn't call you negligent nor your prior actions negligence, as there was nothing negligent - you did take care and maintain the vehicle, did not behave recklessly by speeding and you even acted to reduce the effects of the malfunction. Yet the 3rd party insurance will still cover that.

Mistake does not equal carelessness nor negligence. Malfunction does not either.

Sue Pa Key Pa

I'm not going to debate this all day, but there is strict liability on use and ownership of a vehicle. If there is a defective tyre on your vehicle, you will be held liable for damage that ensues.

grogi

Sue Pa Key Pa wrote: »

I'm not going to debate this all day, but there is strict liability on use and ownership of a vehicle. If there is a defective tyre on your vehicle, you will be held liable for damage that ensues.

Of course there is, there is no debate about that. You're missing my point...

Sue Pa Key Pa

To relate your point about a defective tyre and the OP's query. If the wife was able to prove that a problem with the car was the cause of the tip and not the was she drove it, then the husband's policy has to pick up the 3rd party's loss

Sue Pa Key Pa

grogi wrote: »

Of course there is, there is no debate about that. You're missing my point...

Don't get hooked up on the word 'negligence', it's just a term and doesn't infer that the driver was driving like a mad person or isn't as good a driver as anyone else out there. It just means she was responsible for what happened, when it shouldn't have normally

RootX

So, wife's policy states she's not covered driving spouse's cars so my insurance will be picking up the bill. Damage to our car is minimal and below the excess so no interest claiming for damage to our car.

A couple of questions if you don't mind me asking.

a) Shall wife notify her insurance company of the tip now, after the claim is settled or upon renewal?

b) When it's renewal time for me, which claim boxes am I supposed to tick? claim under additional driver only, claim under my name only or both?

c) Come renewal time for her, same as b, which claim boxes?

Many thanks in advance guys, appreciate all the feedback.

Sue Pa Key Pa

So your wife does not have cover to drive your car under her driving of other cars extension. Therefore there is only one policy where she is covered and that is as a named driver under your policy. They will deal with it in full. As for your other queries

a) She only needs to notify her insurers of an incident which could give rise to a claim and it can't happen under this scenario. HOWEVER, I'm sad to say that there are an increasing number of individuals employed in insurance these days who are not sufficiently educated in the principles and practices of insurance and they could create difficulties if it comes to light you did not advise them. You would win the argument at the end of the day, but it is not worth it. Advise them what happened, it should have no effect on the policy

b) At renewal, you need to disclose to potential insurers that you had a claim.

c) Your wife needs to disclose that she had an accident, but no claim.

CiniO

RootX wrote: »

So, wife's policy states she's not covered driving spouse's cars so my insurance will be picking up the bill. Damage to our car is minimal and below the excess so no interest claiming for damage to our car.

A couple of questions if you don't mind me asking.

a) Shall wife notify her insurance company of the tip now, after the claim is settled or upon renewal?

b) When it's renewal time for me, which claim boxes am I supposed to tick? claim under additional driver only, claim under my name only or both?

c) Come renewal time for her, same as b, which claim boxes?

Many thanks in advance guys, appreciate all the feedback.

Are you sure damage to your car is below excess? It looks like as you'll have a third party claim for that accident on your policy anyway, then claiming for your own car won't make any difference to your future premiums or NCB.

And your questions.

A - imo your wife should inform her insurer that she had accident in your car and your policy is taking care of that.
B - during renewal your insurer should be aware of the claim so they shouldn't be asking you. I would answer to question about accidents that only your named driver (wife) had accident, not you, but for question about claims I would answer that you had a claim but not your wife (as it was your policy that claim is going through).

C- same as b. She had accident, you had a claim

That's my understanding anyway.

CiniO

Sue Pa Key Pa wrote: »

The cause of the loss is the driver's negligence. If the driver holds a specific policy to cover that event, why shouldn't it come in to play? Given that this cover is usually 3rd party only, you must look to the policy where you are named for the own damage aspect. Why do you think that you can add a driver usually for nothing or even to get a discount?

I just think it's cheeky.
While it's not the case with op apparently, but it very often would be the case, where one spouse causing accident in other spouse's car result in penalising both policies with lost NCB and premium loadings.

Insurers should decide which way to go so they penalise either the driver who was liable at accident or policy holder/vehicle owner - not both.

Penalising both is just a cheeky trick they are using to make more profits, purely exploiting lack of adequate legislation regulating car insurance market In Ireland.

RootX

CiniO wrote: »

Are you sure damage to your car is below excess? It looks like as you'll have a third party claim for that accident on your policy anyway, then claiming for your own car won't make any difference to your future premiums or NCB.

Thanks, yeah, damage to our car is very small, a dent at the corner of the rear bumper of a 05 rav4, can be repaired relatively cheap.
Depending on how much the 3rd party claim would be I may opt to re-reimburse the insurance company so I didn't want to add the hassle of claiming for mine which depending on where they'll send me, I may have to fork out more money to buy out the claim.

Wife notified her insurance company who came back advising the claim has nothing to do with them and it should be handled by my insurance instead.

Sue Pa Key Pa

CiniO wrote: »

Insurers should decide which way to go so they penalise either the driver who was liable at accident or policy holder/vehicle owner - not both.

Penalising both is just a cheeky trick they are using to make more profits, purely exploiting lack of adequate legislation regulating car insurance market In Ireland.

An insurer has a duty to it's policyholder to minimise any loss. If a driver who caused the loss is entitled to indemnity elsewhere, they are fulfilling their obligations by making sure that policy is brought in to play.

This is standard industry practice in other countries as well as in Ireland.

grogi

Sue Pa Key Pa wrote: »

An insurer has a duty to it's policyholder to minimise any loss. If a driver who caused the loss is entitled to indemnity elsewhere, they are fulfilling their obligations by making sure that policy is brought in to play.

This is standard industry practice in other countries as well as in Ireland.

Insurer has a duty towards its shareholders to minimize the loss. It has very little to do with the policyholder... That duty will cause the policyholder to pay more in the long term.

Sue Pa Key Pa

grogi wrote: »

It has very little to do with the policyholder... That duty will cause the policyholder to pay more in the long term.

The opposite. If an insurer can send the bulk of the claim to a driver's own policy, it will reduce the claims experience and therefore reduce any proposed loading. The less an insurer pays, the better for the policyholder

NUTLEY BOY

grogi wrote: »

Negligence? Negligence is failure to take proper care over something. If you run the red light or ride on slick tyres - that's negligence.

But that's not always the case, some accidents are, well... accidental.

Some accidents involve no negligence.
Some accidents do involve negligence.