Disputed Car Insurance Claim

[faceofstone]

Not sure where to put this one, though am sure it will be moved if necessary.
Early September I was involved in a collision in a supermarket car park with the supermarket's delivery vehicle.
Fortunately, my dashcam showed that the other driver was entirely to blame.
Insurance companies, came and duly took pictures. My broker was given a copy of the dashcam recording, which was duly
passed on to my insurers. All fine up till then. They declared as it was the 3rd parties fault, then they should pay for the repairs.
Paperwork, dashcam recording etc etc was passed onto them.
All went quiet, no contact from either insurance company, mine or the 3rd parties. After numerous phone calls and emails
from me, the 3rd party insurer has now declared (this week) that because the collision was not on a public highway but in the car park (which by the way has no
signs stating that the car park is used at your own risk) then the claim is to be called ":knock for knock". Of course my insurers are not happy
with this as it was definitely not my fault and are not agreeing to this. So, what to do. Stuck in the middle comes to mind. If it should be agreed
to go knock for knock by the insurers (and only if) I will lose my no claims bonus when next my premiums are due...not to mention
subsequent years of building up a no claims again! My brokers only seem to reply when I ring or email them...and I am now wondering what the hell to do next!
Any ideas from anyone, please, that may help. Short of naming and shaming on here which I am at the moment reluctant to do.

[juliesewell]

I was always under the impression that any accident on a supermarket or private car park is one of those "sticky" issues where neither parties insurers will agree to the claim from the other party (if no physical injuries occurred).

I seem to think this is still the case in UK too and that it's unlikely the police will ever attend such an incident. Mainly because these kind of accidents take place at slow speeds. They will attend however, if there is some kind of an injury to the occupants of the vehicle/s.

In which case, knock for knock describes it pretty accurately....

[keving]

A few years ago I was involved in an accident in a supermarket car park in England. The other driver and I exchanged names, addresses, phone numbers and registration numbers.

I informed my insurance company what happened and the damage to both cars, as did the other driver to his insurance company.

My insurance company agreed to settle the claim presented to it by the other driver's insurance company and paid the cost of repair to my car. I did have comprehensive insurance.

[Happy in Cyprus]

A few months ago my daughter's car was stationary in a Lidl car park when a Lidl truck driver reversed into her at slow speed. After the shunt, the driver wanted to move his truck out of the way as it was now causing an obstruction, but she refused to let him until the insurer's representative had visted the site and taken photos, measurements etc.

Long story short, Lidl accepted responsibilty in fairly short order and paid for the repairs in full. Which I would have expected.

faceofstone, with all the evidence you have you should threaten legal action; I fear naming and shaming on CL will not make an iota of difference.

Further thoughts, do your insurers not give you "no claims bonus protection"? We insist on this with our insurers and it only costs a token amount annually. This means that in the event of a claim for which we are at fault, we do not lose our NCB. We also insist on legal protection insurance, which means that in the event of a dispute like this our legal expenses are covered. We are with Abbeygate.

Final thought, you need to sack your brokers at the next point of renewal and move to a broker who will look after your best interests.

[KG]

The fact that the incident took place on private land is irrelevant. Your claim is against the third party liability of the other driver who damaged your vehicle. The public road aspect is only relevant in respect of the potential for an offence under the road traffic laws to have been committed.

Incidentally, a no claims diccount is a discount for not claiming. It is not a no blame discount. It is common policy for insurers to share the cost of the damage.

[debs21]

Forgive me if I am stating the obvious here but if you have the dashcam footage which obviously proves without a doubt the fault lies with the 3rd party then why are your insurers not presenting this as a fact. Why have a dashcam as an extra precaution if its evidence is totally ignored? Where the accident happened is in this case irrelevant. I had a Royal Mail van reverse into my car while it was in their car park as I was collecting a parcel, driver simply didn't see me (I had a large people carrier at the time), straight away they admitted liability as their security camera picked it up. Similar incident when someone reversed into me in a hospital car park.

[Happy in Cyprus]

NCB protection means that in the event of a claim on youre insurance, you do not lose your NCB at the time of next renewal and have to start accruing brownie points all over again.

[Keoking]

NCB protection means that in the event of a claim on youre insurance, you do not lose your NCB at the time of next renewal

Exactly that, it means you don't lose your no claims bonus. Your premium will probably go up though, so whichever way, you pay more next year.

[faceofstone]

Many thanks for your replies.
A few points that some of you have brought up and I have tried to reply...

There was a policeman parked next to my car...he came from the supermarket..had a quick look , got into his car and drove off without comment!
In fact part of the dashcam evidence of the 3rd party driver is reflected in his vehicles rear window as well!!!

I do have fully comp insurance.

No, as far as I am aware I don't have No Claims Bonus Protection, although my broker did inform me that if it's taken knock for knock then my
premiums will go up when next due for renewal. Though as said, my insurers a not happy knock for knock as dashcam evidence shows I was in no way to blame.

The dashcam evidence was sent to the 3rd parties insurers..despite this they do not wish to pay the full costs, which is why they have suggested knock for knock.
My brokers, at the time, said that they wished all drivers had dashcams to prove who is to blame in collisions.

Oops! Forgot one other thing....my vehicle was actually stationery at the time. I had pulled out from a parking place, seen the 3rd party reversing straight towards me
stopped and shouted at him to stop..he obviously did not either see nor hear me......this is all shown and can be heard on the dashcam footage, including the speed he was reversing at!

So still up a creek without a paddle as they say!

[Jim]

In the UK they practice knock for knock on the smaller claims, well they did when I lived there..I agree about those dash-cams would not be without them on our cars..needed them once.

[Firefly]

A similar thing happened to my car when I was shopping in a UK supermarket, the driver drove off after the collision, but was seen by a supermarket employee who took the Reg. No. thank goodness. I reported the incident to my insurers who found out who the car owner was. The driver said that he had no recollection of hitting my car, so I told my insurer that I had an eye witness. My insurer still wasn't happy about 'pushing' the matter with the other insurers, as ' there wasn't much they could do about it' I then told them that if they didn't pursue my claim, I would apply for a default summons, as it was then, in The County Court, hey presto, the other insurer paid up. Pity you can't do that in Cyprus.

Jackie

[Admin]

They buy a shot gun here....

[Firefly]