Page 2 of 2 [ 24 posts ] Go to page Previous  1, 2



Author## Message
 Post subject: Re: Bad experience
 Post Posted: Thu Jan 15, 2015 6:06 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Dec 28, 2013 3:25 pm
Posts: 158
Location: Lancashire
Vehicle: MPS3 mkI aero
Has thanked: 0 time
Been thanked: 1 time
Bhp: 300
lbf·ft: 322
Colour: Sunlight Silver Metallic
Are ULR not just your legal cover?

Are they trying to claim directly via the TP insurers, this meaning your company have only been notified for information purposes (ie no claim through them so just note it on record as a none fault claim).

It's a shitter but the other party could be saying the exact same thing on itsnotamps.com.

Without evidence it's hard to prove, I hope shes is not in a hire car?

Hope Dan can shead some light on it for you.


Top 
 Post subject: Re: Bad experience
 Post Posted: Thu Feb 05, 2015 8:30 am 
Offline
MPSOC Member
User avatar

Joined: Fri Apr 16, 2010 9:56 am
Posts: 4030
Location: North east
Vehicle: MPS6
Has thanked: 1 time
Been thanked: 1 time
Bhp: 0
lbf·ft: 0
Colour: Black Mica
So an update,

Dan thanks for your futile effort, but all I got was a callback. ULR are terrible.

See attached for their response to my questions below. Its beyond embarrassing now. They cannot even bother to proof read their response.

My original questions below:

Hello,

Following my telephone conversion with one of your colleagues yesterday, it seemed that the third party/third party insurers would like to settle by 'bearing own loses'.

After your technical assessment, you have come to the conclusion that its 50/50. I would like someone to justify this 50/50 claim by going through my wife's account of what happened and also commenting on all 6 points below in my reply to the third parties 'account' of what happened.

This 'bearing of own loses' troubles me. Can you send me the quotation that the third party received to fix their vehicle? If it is anywhere near the quotation that we received (around £1k) then this would be an amicable 50/50 'bearing of own loses' split (even though she admitted fault and shouldn’t have lied to appease her father and insurer). However, if this amount does not equal that of my wife's repair estimate, how on earth would suggesting 'bearing own loses' would benefit my wife and be more beneficial than a 50/50 split? It was even agreed on the phone to her father (see my wife's account) that they would cover all the costs at their local garage to avoid the insurance claim)

I look forward to your detailed justification of how this can be a 50/50 split by analysing the evidence provided (By responding to each of my concerns below where is says 'ULR REPONSE'). I would also like someone to comment on the photographs of my wife's damage and justify how she could have been reversing at the same time i.e. what damage is present to suggest my wife was reversing (I have already done this and presented to you to justify how she wasn't reversing, so it is only fair that you provide me with the same to support your conclusions of a 50/50 split).

See below:

'In reference to the information we have received from the third party who reversed into my wife I would like to point out a few issues with her statement.

1. The diagram shown shows my wife already at an angle before she was hit. This would show evidence of damage to the right hand side of my wifes car. It does not have any damage to the side of the car.

ULR RESPONSE >

2. If the lady was looking behind her when she reversed, she would have seen my wife's car behind her and would have stopped. If she wasn't looking when she had reversed, how did she know there was a car reversing 'to her left'? She couldn’t have. It was either one or the other - she was not looking when she reversed (which is what she told my wife at the scene admitting full liability) and didn’t see my wifes stationary car(half out the parking bay waiting for traffic to clear) or she did look behind see what was behind her and continued to reverse into a stationary car with a small child in the back.

ULR RESPONSE >

3. The lady mentions a car reversed 'to my left'. If that was the case, where was the damage to the 'side' of the third parties car? The photograph we produced clearly shows my wife positioned behind the third parties car with damage to the rear. (I have already discussed nature of the damage to my wife's car being caused by a 90 degree impact to the rear bumper, again see the arch gap between the bumper and rear quarter panel being intact (i.e a uniform gap). If my wife had reversed as well there would have been a force that would have pushed this towards the rear quarter and the gap would either be reduced or not there at all if she had impacted the other car)

ULR RESPONSE >

4. The lady claims she was travelling at '2mph' - how would she know this other than looking at her speedometer at the time when she was reversing, which means she was not looking behind her when she reversed.

ULR RESPONSE >

5. At 2mph there would hardly be any damage to my wife's car (This is a very very slow speed). There is a significant dent in the rear bumper from a 90 degree impact at more than 2mph. Again physically impossible as the evidence of the damage to my wife's car shows. 2mph is barely moving at all, and surely not a speed you would reverse at when trying to avoid somebody who 'suddenly started' reversing towards you (as the third party mentions in her statement).

ULR RESPONSE >

6. She accused the driver in front of her now as the 'cause' of the accident and conveniently walks away.'

ULR RESPONSE >

An additional point is that the third party reversed the wrong way down a one way street before colliding with my wife's car, how is this 50/50?

ULR RESPONSE >

After 4 months of battling this claim, and the amount of evidence we have provided, we do not feel we have had any justification from yourselves as to why it should be 50/50. There has been no other evidence provided by the third party either, other than her account to which I tore apart as it didn't add up.

When my concerns in this email have been addressed and replies have been sent back in writing, my wife and I will then discuss our options.

I look forward to hearing from you

Thanks
Darren


My current response to their letter attached

Hello,

It is with my great frustration that I have to formally lodge a complaint against your company due to the contempt that your colleagues have shown towards my wife and I.

Our incident happened on 15th September 2014 and is still going on because ULR are not acting in our best interests at all and have done nothing to support our case at all.

The recent letter we received in response to my email dates 13th January is embarrassing and very unprofessional. This was written by somebody in a senior position as well.

It is attached, and the errors are highlighted (You will see how it has not been proof read and embarrassing for ULR to have produced such a document). It also does not answer my questions on my original email.

It seems that ULR have supported a made up story from the third party (L Cross and Tescos Insurance) and have not thoroughly looked at our evidence in any way or form. It seems they have done everything to discredit our account of what happened and support Miss Cross’s very very poor statement provided months after the incident (when ours was provided with photos within days) when ULR should be working for us to support our case and if not, where has our insurance company been to fight for our side?

In response to your attached letter, I will go through each point (again in more detail)

1. If my wife’s vehicle was at that angle, the damage would have been to the SIDE of the vehicle, not the very back right corner of the bumper. The bumper would could NOT have been hit and caused the damage it has (this is common sense when looking at the drawing)
2. Question not answered – If she didn’t look, how does she know what was behind her and thus support her claim of my wife was reversing? Her version of events, as you describe, make no sense. How can someone claim another was reversing when they didn’t look behind? Is she psychic? The whole accusation of Miss Cross claiming my wife was reversing was based on what?
3. Sentence is written in terrible English and does not make sense. I am requesting another, full clarity photograph of the damage to the third parties vehicle, as the original photograph is beyond poor quality. The damage assessor from Tescos Insurance even said in the report ‘Direction of impact is from o/s to n/s’ (offside to nearside). There is no mention of my wife’s vehicle travelling in the reverse direction, and again the damage shows that she was not as there is no evidence of the bumper being pushing into the vehicle (all bumper gaps are the same) which would be present if she was travelling backwards. It also states that they require an inspection of their policy holders vehicle to compare heights and level of damage between the two vehicles. Has this been carried out, and if so, can I have evidence of the report? Thanks
4. Here is an example of ULR supporting the thirds parties statement again, and not representing our own interests. My original question was to support how poor Miss Cross’s account of the incident was.
5. Again, this needs proof reading, its terrible English. Unprofessional again.
6. Read this response again. It does not make sense and reads terribly. Such a disappointment from a professional company representing ourselves.

ULR Closing statement : ULR are actually siding with Miss Cross, a driver who reversed the wrong way down a one way street into my wife’s car, who was already established on the road waiting for traffic to clear before performing the rest of her manoeuvre. This closing statement proves that ULR are suggesting my wife WAS reversing out of her parking space, rather than stationary which the damage shows (I don’t know how many times I can say the same thing about the bumper not being pushed into car and only to the left). ULR say they cannot hold Miss Cross accountable for reversing the wrong way down a one way street to try and avoid incident and subsequently causing another (Bear in mind my 1 year old daughter was in the car at the time when she crashed into my wife), but can suggest that all the evidence that I have provided holds no ground in this case? Unbelievable. The sentence ‘ Therefore the onus would be more on yourself to make sure the road is clear and your vision has been obscured’ does not make sense. This is really embarrassing for ULR to send a response as poorly worded as this. ULR describe the road is also described as a ‘major carriageway’….it was a small one way car park.

This entire process has been a disgrace from day one. We should have either gone to the garage and have Miss Crosses father sort it out by avoiding insurance altogether (as suggested shortly after the accident) or phoned a ‘No Win No Fee’ Solicitor who would have acted in OUR best interests.

Again, I would like to ask where OUR own insurance company have been? I have had nothing from them at all.

If indeed the insurance claims that we are to ‘bear own loses’ and our loses are up to £1000, what are Miss Cross losses? (Her Insurer has requested an estimate for her car). IF we were to claim the losses through our insurance company, would they pay out, or are our insurers stating they will not pay out either? If we are to ‘bear own losses’ then what is the point in paying an insurance premium in the first place?

I am honestly shocked at how this has been handled so far, and require somebody far more senior and professional to handle this now.

Your swift response is appreciated

Darren


You do not have the required permissions to view the files attached to this post.

_________________
To do: keep it on the road.


Top 
 Post subject: Re: Bad experience
 Post Posted: Thu Feb 05, 2015 10:22 am 
Offline
RM BIK
User avatar

Joined: Mon Jan 02, 2012 12:27 pm
Posts: 21054
Location: Oldham
Vehicle: other
Has thanked: 12 times
Been thanked: 251 times
Bhp: 9
lbf·ft: 18
Colour: Titanium Grey Metallic
Well, that was quite a read, I'm disgusted at the after care tbh :(

_________________
100% Meth / Fully forged / ACT 6 Puc & lightweight flywheel / monlar rods / wiseco pistons / arp studs / Versatune / corksport FMIC / Garrett GTX3076 / Brock Injector seals / Autotechs / Dreadnought & Juggernaut / GT RARB / Speedline front lower struts / Speedline lateral struts / corksport front braces / corksport rear upper braces / CS side braces /H&R springs / Bilstein B8's / CS BBK / Rear EBC Yellowstuff / JBR 5mm spacers / JBR OCC / Forge V2 / AWR 80a REM / 3" DP / Jetex / 3.25" Sure intake / Sure BSD / SURE TIG / Butterfly delete / EGR blockoff / Hel brake lines / Xcarlink / kendo SSP & Bushes / Step colder NGK 0.6mm gap / Fog and Driving light HID's / MKii alloys
Build thread http://tinyurl.com/otzp6qw
Helpful threads http://tinyurl.com/kjykgbd
www.KarlAndKenny.com
AVOID TOTAL MPS viewtopic.php?f=64&t=20073


Top 
 Post subject: Re: Bad experience
 Post Posted: Thu Feb 05, 2015 11:04 am 
Offline
Scottish Rep

Joined: Sun Sep 07, 2014 3:39 pm
Posts: 673
Location: North Lanarkshire
Vehicle: MPS3 mkII
Has thanked: 56 times
Been thanked: 28 times
Bhp: 0
lbf·ft: 0
Colour: Velocity Red Metallic
Total pish wat u have to do....if its not bad enough u have been in an accident that you have to go through all this wen it wasn't even your fault....feel for u mate I've been there before ....it's not that wen they are taking the money out your bank....

_________________
Image
J-TUNED,Autotech HPFP,cobb v3,cobb REM,TIP,JBR 3" tru widepath intake,Kinugawa banjo bolt,2nd de cat,ultimate racing cat back,NGK spark plugs,HR springs on koni strt, ,Powerflex ARB bushes front+back,MPS mud flaps,GFB BOV, spamface ssp,HDi FMIC,catless DP, cobb 3 port EBCS, bnrs3,3 bar map sensor an harness,JBR egr block off plate,couple struts and braces,sure anchors,south bend stage 3 clutch,stoptech brakes all round..front and rear lips and side skirts,rear spoiler extension,front eyelids,flat bottom steering wheel,carbon fibre scoop,JBR drivers side engine mount,Sure Transmission Mount,JBR RARB,Damond OCC,valve cover breather,
CANT ADD REST AS NO MORE ROOM


Top 
 Post subject: Re: Bad experience
 Post Posted: Thu Feb 05, 2015 3:01 pm 
Offline
MPSOC Member
User avatar

Joined: Fri Apr 16, 2010 9:56 am
Posts: 4030
Location: North east
Vehicle: MPS6
Has thanked: 1 time
Been thanked: 1 time
Bhp: 0
lbf·ft: 0
Colour: Black Mica
Disgusting isnt it, and one thing is that I have not heard once from my wifes insurance company to defend her or even try to fight her corner.

Tesco seem to have done a great job is swiveling the truth for the third party, perhaps they are the ones to go with next. Have fought tooth and nail for their lying client.

I may even try to get some of her insurance premium back as they have not acted at all. This is what we pay it for in the first place!

_________________
To do: keep it on the road.


Top 
 Post subject: Re: Bad experience
 Post Posted: Wed Feb 18, 2015 7:34 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sun Feb 08, 2015 3:24 pm
Posts: 446
Location: Buckinghamshire
Has thanked: 74 times
Been thanked: 13 times
Bhp: 0
lbf·ft: 0
Mr. T wrote:
Very sorry to hear, I'd highly recommend investing in dashcams ..


Sad but it is the only way to do it these days!

This is why I employ my own legal team rather than the insurance appointed ones. Last time I allowed the insurance company to sort it, I nearly ended up losing 100% despite being hit from behind by the 3rd party!

ETA: OP, I hope you get it sorted in your favour. It may be worth seeking a Solicitor who are not associated with any car insurance companies.


Top 
 Post subject: Re: Bad experience
 Post Posted: Fri Feb 20, 2015 10:47 am 
Offline
MPSOC Member
User avatar

Joined: Fri Apr 16, 2010 9:56 am
Posts: 4030
Location: North east
Vehicle: MPS6
Has thanked: 1 time
Been thanked: 1 time
Bhp: 0
lbf·ft: 0
Colour: Black Mica
Itlle be no win no fee next time before i even consider phoning an insurance company

_________________
To do: keep it on the road.


Top 
 Post subject: Re: Bad experience
 Post Posted: Fri Feb 20, 2015 2:11 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Fri Jan 23, 2015 6:05 pm
Posts: 49
Location: Wirral
Vehicle: MPS3 mkII
Has thanked: 3 times
Been thanked: 2 times
Bhp: 256
lbf·ft: 0
Colour: True Red Solid
bad situation mate.

after reading all of this i cant believe how bad ALL insurance company's are. Why is it when there is full evidence that they still try and go for a 50/50 claim. i have no faith at all in insurance company's and as soon as i can afford i'm getting front and back veideo recording equipment installed.


my brother last year got a letter off of an insurance company saying he was involved in a traffic incident and someone was claiming against him. After two years they decided to claim he hit them, they didn't want money for the car just the whiplash. after two years wtf. he's never been even close to were they said it was. His car he's had since new 1995 and never had a bump ever. he had to get assessors to check his car for damage, the other party kept on changing there story about it. but the insure kept on saying they pay out.

In the end he sorted it after months and months of work, and it was only because he was prepared to go to court they dropped it.

the whole insurance system is a joke.


Top 
 Post subject: Re: Bad experience
 Post Posted: Fri Feb 20, 2015 5:33 pm 
Offline
User avatar

Joined: Sat Dec 28, 2013 3:25 pm
Posts: 158
Location: Lancashire
Vehicle: MPS3 mkI aero
Has thanked: 0 time
Been thanked: 1 time
Bhp: 300
lbf·ft: 322
Colour: Sunlight Silver Metallic
No all Companies are bad, it's sometime more the legal system.

If an insurer feels that if the case went to court they would be made to pay anyway plus the additional costs it's cheaper for them to settle without the added court costs.

Believe me I see claims paid that are ridiculous, and it's at times wrong.

On the flip side I have seen a insurer pay in excess of £30.000 defending a claim in the courts.

Forget no win no fee solicitors as they usually now take 25% of your injury compensation.

If you have legal cover your best bet is to use them (only really work for none fault claims) and ask them to treat the claim as if you only had Third party cover. This can delay the claim though.

What you have to remember is the other side could be saying (possibly lying) the same to there company that it was your fault.

I can't imagine any insurance company want to part with money and if they feel they might not have to it is also in there interest to defend or repudiate it.


Top 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
 
 Page 2 of 2 [ 24 posts ] Go to page Previous  1, 2





Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

 
 

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

cron
E-mail friendE-mail friendE-mail friend