Insurance Claim Advice needed

3690 Views 18 Replies 16 Participants Last post by sugdenr, May 13, 2009

mike_in_london

Discussion Starter · May 6, 2009

Hi

My motorhome was hit by a 3rd party, and they admitted liability and all has been repaired. Whilst my motorhome was off the road (3 weeks), I was given a hire car. Insurer, Allianz, does not provide motorhomes as replacement vehicles in this situation.

Now having to use a car instead of a motorhome causes additional expenses. You are forced to eat out, and you have to stay in hotels. Also, as a hotel is not necessarily where your evening's entertainement is, you are forced to take a taxi if you have had a few to drink.

We went to a party, and would normally have parked outside the house where the party was. As had hire car, had to stay in a hotel that was a few miles away, and had to take a taxi to and from the party.

The insurer is happy with the hotel expenses. But they are refusing to pay for taxis. Their view is that as they had provided a hire car, I should have refrained from drinking and driven !!!

I find this unnacceptable, and to be honest, quite patronising.

The insurer is saying that they will only pay for "forseeable expenses", and therefore will not cover taxis or additional subsistence expenses. I can't find a definition of this, and besides, in my view, taxis in these circumstances are forseeable expenses.

I reckon that the insurer is not used to motorhome related claims like this.

So am after some pointers to advice on claiming out of pocket expenses etc.

Thx.

1 - 19 of 19 Posts

suffolkian

· #2 · May 6, 2009

Sorry to hear about the damage to your motorhome, hope it's repaired quickly for you.

Re the insurance, I think that as you were provided with a rental car they have met their obligation and your decision to have a drink at the party is not for them to pay you for a taxi back to your hotel.

If you had your motorhome on the road presumably you wouldn't contemplate drinking and driving.

EJB

· #3 · May 6, 2009

My common sense suggests that if you are provided with a car how can you also expect Taxi fares??
If you wish to travel to some distant location would you claim for a train ticket because...it's too far to drive or the hire car is not reasonable for such a long journey??
If you have to drive.....You don't HAVE to drink!!!!!!!!

SpeedyDux

· #4 · May 6, 2009

Mike in London,

As the other party has admitted liability, you are in a strong position to bring an "uninsured loss" claim against him or her for your loss including out of pocket expenses.

Any solicitor should be willing to act for you on a no-win-no-fee basis because only the amount of damages you can claim will be in dispute. The solicitor will advise you on what should or should not be included in such a claim.

SD

thieawin

· #5 · May 6, 2009

If it is your own insurer, forget it, these are not insured losses

If it is the other sides insurer and this is an uninsured loss claim they clearly think you are pushing it a bit far

You have a repaired vehicle

You have had a substitute vehicle

You voluntarily chose to go to the party, drink, take taxis and stay in a hotel, which increases the claim. Your duty as claimant is to mitigate your losses not inflate them, simple basic rule. Stops you having a Rolls when your car is a mini or a night in a hotel when you cvould have stayed at home.

You won't win at Small Claims, forget it

Good try however. I am sure you will not like te advice but it is correct

See less See more

bikemad99

· #6 · May 6, 2009

Mike in London. it is people like you who cause insurance costs to be so high. You are part of the compensation culture.I am sorry about your accident but don`t wish you luck with your excesive claim.
Reg.

mike_in_london

Discussion Starter · #7 · May 6, 2009

Guys - some of you are missing the point.

You have a motorhome, you drive it to a party, you drink, you sleep in it.

Someone crashes into your motorhome and all you are given is a hire car.

You have a car (not out of choice), you drive it to a party, you drink, you cannot drive so you have to stay in a hotel and get a taxi.

What is so wrong with that?

All I am after is a refund of expenses over and above what I would have spent had I had my motorhome ! After all, the accident wasn't my fault and liability is not being questioned.

I could have insisted on having the 3rd party insurer hire me a motorhome for 3 weeks at £800 per week totalling £2,400 !!! This is many times the expense claim !!!

See less See more

LazyRover

· #8 · May 6, 2009

mike_in_london said:
Guys - some of you are missing the point.

Sorry Mike, I think it is you who is missing the point.

As stated by thieawin (a lawyer) you are under an obligation to mitigate your losses.

You might just as well claim for a new pair of shoes on the grounds of excessive wear caused by the hire car's throttle pedal being more frictious than that of the motorhome.

suffolkian

· #9 · May 6, 2009

If you drove your motorhome to the party with the intention of sleeping in it you could still be done for 'being in charge of a vehicle whilst over the limit' if it was parked on a public road.

Waggy

· #10 · May 6, 2009

Mike

The insurance company can only give their opinion as to the amount you are claiming. Ultimately the County Court must decide. Some courts/judges are more generous than others. With no personal injury claim this would be a small claims matter with no costs payable and a "no win no fee" solicitor would not be interested.

You may be lucky (a judge who has a motorhome? 8O ) but for reasons already explained more likely not

JohnsCrossMotorHomes

· #11 · May 6, 2009

mike_in_london said:
I could have insisted on having the 3rd party insurer hire me a motorhome for 3 weeks at £800 per week totalling £2,400 !!! This is many times the expense claim !!!

You could gave claimed against the third parties insurance full stop, then you would have had a valid claim including replacement motorhome but I bet it would not have got resolved so easily and you would still be argueing the toss.

Peter

sersol

· #12 · May 6, 2009

Is this just another case of GREED, SCREW who WE CAN for WHATEVER we can get.
No wonder the costs are so high :x .

Gary

tonka

· #13 · May 6, 2009

I think you should be very grateful you have received as much as you have already !!!! 8O is it worth the stress for a few taxi fares ??
We had our van smashed in April (03) and got it back from repair in the November !!!!
No hire car, no replacement van.. NAFF ALL... Van repaired, thats it..

Circumstances were different as it was someone in a stolen car, so no third party to claim off...
See avtar .!

Penquin

· #14 · May 6, 2009

My car was hit by a driver who admitted full liability, as did her insurance company (she drove into me on a roundabout by not looking to her right at all - where I was going round the roundabout), my expenses did not include the extra fuel the (larger) hire car used, or the telephone calls I had to make so I did end up slightly out of pocket.

BUT my car did not have the wear and tear of me driving it for 4 weeks while it was sorted and it now has 500 miles less than it would have had on the clock, so I was not displeased.

Accept what you have been given and don't try to take it too far - in the end it only puts the cost up for all of us, and YOU chose to go to the party and drink alcohol which prevented you from being able to drive - your choice not the other driver's.

I am sorry that you will not like this comment - it does not support your point of view but does represent my views (and that of many other posters).

duxdeluxe

· #15 · May 6, 2009

mike_in_london said:
Guys - some of you are missing the point.

You have a motorhome, you drive it to a party, you drink, you sleep in it.

Someone crashes into your motorhome and all you are given is a hire car.

You have a car (not out of choice), you drive it to a party, you drink, you cannot drive so you have to stay in a hotel and get a taxi.

What is so wrong with that?

All I am after is a refund of expenses over and above what I would have spent had I had my motorhome ! After all, the accident wasn't my fault and liability is not being questioned.

I could have insisted on having the 3rd party insurer hire me a motorhome for 3 weeks at £800 per week totalling £2,400 !!! This is many times the expense claim !!!

Sorry but I'm not sure that you're on the same planet as the rest of us. They provide a hire car which is reasonable but they are not effectively subsidising nights on the booze as well, which is (whichever way you look at it) what you are claiming for.

Why don't you try one of the ambulance chasing law firms and as a result further increase all of our insurance premiums? I always thought that insurance was based upon acting as if "prudently uninsured" and with utmost good faith and the law was based on what is reasonable. Other may disagree but I think that you meet none of those criteria.

As an afterthought, perhaps we should all make a claim against parties for our insurance premia rising next year..........

TJ101

· #16 · May 6, 2009

Just read through this topic,, and had the same view after reading your original post,,as i and it would seam, all the other subsequent replies have,,

You are taking the Michael,, Why should i pay for you to stay in hotels, taxi fares etc,,just because you did not have your motorhome,,,,
How they agreed to pay for the hotel, in the first place is beyond me,,

SaddleTramp

· #17 · May 6, 2009

When you had your accident, You were offered a Hire Car, You accepted it. That is the end of that.

As it was your accommodation you were offered a Hotel, You accepted it.
That is also the end of that.

So all in all you got your transport and your lodgings for the period it took to repair your vehicle.

BUT the most important fact is that YOU ACCEPTED BOTH, You cannot now claim extra.

End Of Story and Claim.

thieawin

· #18 · May 7, 2009

Mike in London

you would not have got a motor home from TP insurers, you cvould have hired your own and then risked a claim

It would be unreasonable and not mitigation UNLESS you were full time and needed a home in which case a hotel might have been cheaper any way or if you had a holiday booked and wenjt on it.

Otherwise a car is all you will get

You voluntarily went to the party, booked the hotel etc knowing it would put up the claim, sorry, not cricket, with any district judge.

sugdenr

· #19 · May 13, 2009

You are assuming that you are entitled to like-for-like in replacement vehicle, this is not the law.

You not only have a duty to mitigate your loss, you also have to accept and any alternative which 'does not cause undue hardship'.

1 - 19 of 19 Posts

This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.