I was involved in a non-fault incident, will it affect my future premiums?

[omarion]

My car was hit by another driver who have admitted liability. If I go through insurance and lodge this as a non fault claim will the fact that I have been involved in an incident affect my premiums in the furture?

I have heard that insurers still factor in non fault accidents in premiums.

Is this true?

[sandmaster]

I had a no fault claim last year and it had no affect on my no claims bonus.

[chas2008]

It shouldnt affect your premium assuming the claim goes through ok, there are non fault accident assist companies (helphire etc) out there so you dont even have to get your own company involved.

[fiesata]

Don't they still load your policy as you are seen as a bad risk?
That happened to me nearly 20 years ago when a van hit my parked car - is it still the same now?

[gouldc]

Even a non-fault incident can affect your premium - the reasoning behind this (no idea where they got the stats from though), is that you are more likely to be involved in a fault accident after having a non-fault accident.

I know we rate premiums this way, but unsure how other insurers do it.

On the flip side, an increase in your premium due to this scenario could co-incidentally fall in line with an overall reduction in premiums in general, and so you may not notice any difference!

[R1Geezer]

I wouldn't even tell my insurance company if I'm not claiming they want to know all the ins and outs of a Cats ar5e and may well load the premium. You only need to tell them if you are claiming off them, just claim off the other guys insurance. If you are having to claim because there is no other insurance to clain off then you will lose NCB but if you have it protected then you should lose too much but they do tend to load premiums, it almost seems as if they think you are a bit unlucky or something.

I have had several claims from other peoples insurance and I never tell anyone my insurance details,(other than old bill if they ask) it's completely irrelevant if it's not your fault.

[BertiWooster]

R1Geezer

What if your insurer finds out about accidents you have had , which you did not inform them of .
Surely they would more than likely cancel the cover .

Even worse you are involved in a subsequent accident , when they find out , and you are left to defend claims from the other party / parties , particularly if the accident was a serious incident

Is it worth the risk , not informing them ?

gouldc
What would your company do in the above scenario ?

[R1Geezer]

Accidents where I have claimed against my insurer are there business, others are not. Berti, like a lot of people you proceed from a myth.

[R1Geezer]

I'll give you an example. Someone reversed into my bike whilst it was parked, damage was done, fortunately the chap was decent enough and waited around for me to return to my bike and gave be his details. His insurers contacted me and once I'd jumped through some of their hoops they paid me out, all very satisfactory. At no point did I fell any need to contact my insurer as they where not relevant to this situation at all.

[gouldc]

R1 Geezer and Bertiwooster, the terms and conditions of your policy will state that you must insform them of any incident - this is regardless of fault.

Granted, if neither party involves their insurers, then don't bother, but if you make a claim via the other party's insurers, it will be logged on a database.

Your insurer will then pick up that claim if they do the relevant checks (or a new insurer when you have a new quote), and your premium will be loaded accordingly.

Even non-fault claims can affect your premium (as previously noted), and so you run the risk of your policy being voided from inception if you fail to disclose the aforementioned claim.

Insurance is based o nthe prionciple of utmost good faith - we rely on the policyholder to provide correct information. By failing to disclose claims, this is a breach of contract. It is unlikely that the failure to disclose a non-fault incident will lead to any real action being taken by your insurer, but is it worth the risk?

[gouldc]

In regards to insurance myths, the most common myths I see all the time are:

1. Insurers will refuse to pay if you have no MOT (not the case - more complicated than that)
2. We're not wise to people putting their 18 year old son/daughter on the policy to reduce premiums - most insurers will now rate on the highest risk driver so it makes no difference
3. Reject the first offer - by all means waste your time for the sake of it. We're obliged to use trade publications to value a vehicle. They are occasionally incorrect, and a simple check of Autotrader will confirm this one way or the other. When I do settle claims (as I am a fraud handler first and foremost), I rarely get a dispute over the valuation, and when I do, 90% of the time I do not increase. People go to the ombudsman, and they subsequently reject the complaint.

Don't get me wrong, there are some ****-poor companies out there - generally anyone who passes the claims side of things to India to cut costs - they have no clue, and annoy me more than anyone. These companies continually make losses as they have no idea how to deal quickly and efficiently with claims. The company I work for makes a profit year on year, and our customer base increases each year as well.

You see the Norwich Union (or whether they are called) advert saying they've taken back 60000 customers - doesn't state how many 100's of thousands they have lost though does it?

There are many myths about insurance - I bought into a lot of them before I starting working for insurance companies. People believe what they want to believe - if my answers are ignored, rejected or mocked, fine - I know what I'm talking about and I hope it comes back to bite people in the ass

[R1Geezer]

ok gouldc, can you answer me this, I know that a non fault accident can increase premium, why could that possibly be? Are they saying well this bloke is in some way unlucky or perhaps at fault, I just cannot get my head around the mind set that's all.

[gouldc]

In all honesty R1, beats the hell out of me - seems very unfair, but you'd need someone who deals with the pricing side of things to answer that in more detail - sadly we're the people who end up telling the policyholder's that despite the fact the other party's insurer's have admitted liability and reimbursed us in full, they will possibly still get penalised for it.

Al I know is what we're fed down by the suits in the big, air conditioned offices.

Statistics show that if you have a non-fault accident, you're more likely to be involved in a fault accident within the next twelve months - no idea why this is the case, but that's why the premium increases initially. I would suspect the premium drops again the next time around.

[woozer]

Gouldc certainly knows his stuff - and I empathise with his feelings re non UK claims departments - they are absolutely horrendous to deal with. I have been a broker for too many years and know exactly what he means. Mind you, I also get really annoyed when insurers do not chase settlements from TP insurers and the client has to pay increased premiums at renewal - I know they will be reimbursed eventually - but it is irritating.
My mother in law (love her) had several accidents which were technically not her fault - she would break at inappropriate moments (like if her hat slipped, or if she was making a point in conversation) and the poor devil behind would hit her in the rear she was a nightmare and I believe she was loaded for having non faut accidents - and I can see why !

[gouldc]

Cheers for that Wooster - our recoveries department is not the best either - don't know why, but in my opinion the lazier people gravitate to these departments and little gets done.

The previous company I used to work for would give an insurer 14 days to pay and then instruct solicitors (mind you, we were dealing with commercial stuff then, and those policyholders do chase a lot more!)