OT: Insurance claim advice

Protected NCD usually means you're allowed for example, 3 claims in 5 years without loss of NCD. Any payout by an ins Co will count as a claim, allowing only 2 more claims within the 5 year period in the example above. So, providing your claims do not exceed those allowed, I can't see what difference it should make. Personally I'm a little suspicious of protected NCD, as it doesn't prevent them raising the premium instead. Mike.

AFAIK _some_ ins Co's give PNCD after so many years of having maximum NCD. I know they have done so in the past as I've received free PNCD myself. Whether they still do so, I've no idea.

I'm not sure if it's taken account of, but what I do feel sure of, is that your history of claims, accidents etc, plays the greatest part in the calculation of your premium. Mike.

[...]

Good point. And you have to pay for the NCD protection, i.e. eating into the NCD.

But I think you can even transfer a protected NCD status to another company as if the claim wasn't there? Although I'm not sure all will do that. Any comments?

You're almost certainly right, but I've had max NCD insurance for over 14 years, and a second insurance with over 6 years max NCD, so I've no personal experience either way.:-) Mike.

Yes, the accident history has to be stated in any case for the new insurers. This is part of the material facts.

However, without PNCD you're normally set back 2 years after a claim, e.g. from 4 years NCD to 2 years NCD. Then the new insurers will normally accept the 2 years NCD even though you just had an accident.

Hence by implication, it is quite possible that the new insurers will also accept a NCD status derived from PNCD?

Thanks for that. I agree your suspicions could be right and the only way to know would be to try and check their overall premium increases, though I admit it would be difficult.

So far they've acted very efficiently and I have no reason to be suspicious.

Andy

Hello,

Give us more details of the accident.

I was offered 50/50 after a taxi drove into my back door/wheel from crossing a Give Way sign and decided to fight it all the way and won. Long story, but down to a group of bent taxi drivers, a solicitor doing no win no fee finance agreement claims and a repair place that solicitor gives work to for a commission - ALL running an insurance scam. The garage and solicitor even advertise on taxis! The taxi drivers staged accidents in the Merseyside area and claimed to have their mates in the car, but didn't realise I would check up on them. The same people in the car turned out to be witnesses etc, some on a disability scam/benefit fraud and one in prison at the time he was in the car! I was with CIS insurance and they were useless. They had contradictary statements from the other driver and his friends, but chose to carry on instead of bringing criminal proceedings for making a fraudulent insurance claim. A private investigator followed them and proved the drivers and "friends" were related and all kept having accidents. That's when they were not using the same plate number on different cars and lending them out so unregistered people could make a bit of money. That was only one of many and due to the Insurance Database being a joke, it wasn't possible to see similar claims as CIS stated not all insurance companies will co-operate and use the database. So there is no real way of preventing fraud. I had to go to court and the judge decided in my favour after 5minutes of silly questions by a barrister, then asked what I was asking the whole time - why did CIS not contact the police in the first place and was it to only claim the £20k costs involved. he then said HE would be doing the taxation hearing and thought the whole action an abuse of process. Needless to say I wouldn't bother with CIS again! It took TWO years to sort that out.

The latest thing for the same group of drivers is slowing down at traffic lights, waiting for someone to stop and ramming them in reverse. The other one was to get friends to stand on a junction and signal when a car was approaching, the taxi would drive out and get hit, then it would be a nightmare proving whose fault it was. The usual thing is to say that the person on the main road should be watching out. Very unfair. They tried that method on me, got the timing wrong and hit the BACK of my car!

If anyone wants the details of who the drivers are, plate numbers, company they all work for etc and live in Merseyside, I'll email them.

"Andy Pandy" wrote in message news: snipped-for-privacy@4ax.com...

"klf" wrote:

Well, I was cautiously pulling out of a garage, across a stationary line of cars going into town, when an overtaking scooter brushed across the front of me. He put out his leg in an attempt to protect his brand new scooter and unfortunately broke both bones above the ankle.

The High Court case I referred to, was a car being allowed out of a turning in similar circumstances, when the blame was attributed 20/80, driver/rider

As I stated on the accident report my only other option was to turn left which I might well do in similar circumstances, as the topography of the exit, combined with a line of solid traffic, gives a somewhat restricted view to both individuals.

I don't have a problem accepting the offer. Just wondered if I was missing anything significant for the future.

Andy

E-mail address, hopefully self-explanatory Andy

In article , Andy Pandy Sun, 8 Aug 2004 12:01:24 writes

Why not ask them. I'm not sure why they are even asking you. Normally they take the whole matter out of your hands. If they ARE asking, why not tell them you agree - subject to not affecting your NCB and see what they say.

I did. :-) But as you may be aware Insurance companies are not

*always* quite as frank as you would like and I wanted to hear other peoples' experiences,

I'm assured it's just a question of attributing 1 accident on the NCD record, otherwise as you say, they are dealing with the matter.

Andy