All my life I have had comprehensive insurance. When in a not at fault accident. I still lodge a claim with my insurance company and let them deal with the other party. My car is fixed away I go.
But today the repairer said I should always make the claim with the St fault parties insurance. That way my insurance company doesn't record a claim. And premiums stay the same. Further more I can claim extras such as replacement car and choice of repairer at no extra cost.
Is this all correct?
No. No expense on my end. All I ever received is the repair. But I've never gotten a replacement car or other extras. But I am expecting a premium increase next year now as a result. I just assumed that was how the cookie crumbled.
I could be wrong here but my understanding is that if you want your own insurer to provide a replacement car, you’ll have to pay the excess. The other party’s insurer may or may not provide it depending on the policy involved on their end. Getting your car repaired at zero cost is still a great outcome.
The other party's insurer must provide/pay for it… they can't just cover the car repairs but not a reasonable temporary hire car.
No, you pay excess if you are at fault or the I surance company can't get a hold of the at-fault driver. If you are not at fault and you provided them with the details of the at-fault driver - you don't pay the excess.
Whether you get a rental or not depends on the conditions of your insurance contract. All insurers I've dealt with give you an option of a rental car at a cost of $50-$100 or so higher premium. If you picked that option when you signed up and you are not at fault, and they have the other driver details - you don't pay the excess.
@andrek: You can also pay excess if the at-fault driver can't be determined but it'll be refunded if you're found not at fault.
Source: Personal experience from when I got T-Boned last year and car got written off. Took five months for my insurance company to deem me not at fault.
@the1doood: NRMA. We both said the other person ran the red light. The other party was deemed at fault as they were turning and I was going straight, so got my excess refunded after five months.
@the1doood: To figure out who was at fault in the end, yes. The car got written off two days after the accident. The payout for my written-off car (because unlike many people here, I have comprehensive insurance) took a week (accounting for Easter).
As long as it wasn't my fault (and I still maintain it wasn't my fault), I didn't care how long they took to figure it out. The excess was deducted from my payout (then refunded).
If you haven't pay any excess, then your premium shouldn't increased based on your Not at Fault claim.
Your No Claim Discount disappears though if you make a claim, even when you're not at fault
@DreadPirateRoberts: You sure? According to worst insurer in Ozb, budgetdirect, its not.
https://www.budgetdirect.com.au/car-insurance/car-insurance-faqs/no-claim-discounts.html#:~:text=A%20no%2Dclaim%20discount%20(NCD,free%2C%20the%20bigger%20your%20discount.
But its not clear for GIO/AAMI
https://www.gio.com.au/faqs/general/no-claim-bonus.html
https://www.aami.com.au/faq/what-discounts-can-i-get-on-my-p….
and then further reading, https://www.aami.com.au/car-insurance/safe-driver-rewards.ht…
AAMI says, it doesn't has any affect, for not at fault claims. Who knows, same apply to GIO as well I guess.
I can confim, its not going to affect on Alianz/ AAMI / budget, I bet GIO as well, I cant be bother reading PDS.
Except if you get a new quote online, it'll ask if you've made a claim in the last ~5years.
I guess you could test whether the price changes if you change from 0 to 1/2/3 in a dummy online quote.
@Ughhh: I checked with AAMI, no price deference, people just assume too much here without contacting the insurer or go through the PDA.
Based on what I googled, not-at-fault claim does NOT affect your policy.
/thread
@boomramada: Yeah…nah…I can't remember who I was insured thru at the time, but my wife got sideswiped by another car (his fault 100%) we only had 3rd party property on this car and he kept telling his insurance company that it was our fault (gotta have dashcams people!!) we kept telling them to speak to our insurer who wouldn't let us raise a claim with them because it clearly wasn't our fault.
In the end we never got our car fixed so we donated it to Kids under cover to auction off and got the tax deduction for it. But our insurer said later that our premium was higher because there had been a claim on an accident we were involved in - yeah…the OTHER party made a claim to fix HIS car and we didn't make a claim at all because it was 3rd party and it wasn't our fault. They don't listen to sense. Of course we shopped to a new insurer who in the disclosure forms ask "have YOU made any claims" so of course we said "no…no we haven't!!!" BECAUSE WE HADN'T!!!!!!!
If the SOB had just accepted responsibility for his careless driving and paid his $500 excess and admitted fault - BOTH cars could have been fixed. But no…he gets his car fixed and we're left with panel damage all up the left of our car. Thanks a-hole, thanks a lot you snowflake.
EDIT: not ranting at you Boomramada…only to the stupid driver who has highlighted how f&rked our insurance systems are and why we all need dashcams because nobody can be trusted to tell the truth any more.
@backpaqer: Yeah sure, but that could be to do with the insurance you were with, the policy, and what was in their PDA at that time. In all the examples I quoted, their premium does not change as a result of not-at-fault insurance.
I even road-test the Aami with a 2010 Camry as an example, price does not change for not-at-fault, but it does for a year ago at-fault claim. Sorry, I can't answer for everyone's company out there, but for the three example, I got, no changes to the premium.
EDIT: Your case is bit confusing, so you didn't fix the car, he did or he didn't? sorry hard to understand. And you end up with a black mark? something dodge going on there. I would of chase up with the AFCA.
@backpaqer: I got rear ended by a truck last year and thank god my forward-facing dashcam footage was enough for my insurer to deem me not at fault and waived the $650 excess.
Funnily enough, have had the same issue in the last week. Have comprehensive insurance, was in a not-at-fault accident and when I booked into the repairer they told me to go with the other driver's insurance, not mine. Seems odd when not-at-fault accidents don't affect premiums or ratings. Perhaps with only one insurance company involved, there is less scrutiny of the crash repair bill? I don't know. I just want my car fixed. In SA every crash repair is booked out for a couple of months at least.
That way my insurance company doesn't record a claim.
Doesn't matter. These insurance companies have a big black book of who has claimed and what cars have been repaired. Added to this, when you go to get insurance again, you have to tell the insurance company that the vehicle has repaired accident damage (because it has) and they will often ask if you have been in any accidents, regardless of who is at fault. Refusing to answer or giving an incorrect/false answer could see your policy denied.
yep…but remember…wording is everything and that gives a little wiggle room. Also, they can only deny a claim (or a policy) if your omission would have created a situation where they were taking on additional risk. Technically, you could leave out a detail like some meth-head sailed through a stop sign and t-boned your car into oblivion because you were 100% not at fault.
Though if you did claim against your policy because said meth-head had no insurance or life prospects, there was zero chance you would ever see a shiny shekel being extracted from his sphincter with a big rusty pair of pliers wielded by a gorilla…then you might have a hard time omitting that…but still you weren't at fault…right?
you have a violent imagination, it's entertaining.
Yes. You can do this, but… it creates more work for you if you need to chase the other insurer or negotiate etc.
Be aware of ‘ambulance chaser’ rental car companies and repairers. They may tell you they will do all the work with the other insurer for you, but they’ll be charging tool dollar for a rental car, trying to get extra repair work done, not doing repairs properly etc. using your own insurer removes this form the equation.
you pay for comprehensive insurance, you are paying for the service of YOUR insurer to chase up the other at-fault partys' insurer for payment.
you should not be doing anything besides telling them about the accident and making the car available for appraisal.
Bold move to assume the other party actually has insurance.
I’ve never been told this, but I go to the same repairer every time
Further more I can claim extras such as replacement car and choice of repairer at no extra cost.
Yes, but you will have to oversee all the admin work yourself. Its just easier to get it done via your own comprehensive insurance.
You are paying for the service. why not use the service as well.
Some OZBarginers reckon that premiums will go up even if it is a not at fault claim. I still dont understand why.
Well OP can always ring the insurer and ask?
More claims made = less profit for company. Plus, if you’ve been involved in an incident, even not at fault it could be a sign that your driving isn’t ideal. Ie you aren’t driving defensively enough.
If its not at fault, other than requiring some labour hours to claim from the 3rd party's insurance company (which I always thought was also invoiced but never had any insider confirm), how that that affect bottom line?
Plus, if you’ve been involved in an incident, even not at fault it could be a sign that your driving isn’t ideal. Ie you aren’t driving defensively enough.
I had a claim recently where I was waiting at a red light and the car behind me hit me as the driver was distracted. It is not a fair assumption to say people's driving is not defensive. If you were stabbed on the street, is the accused gonna argue in court that you didnt run as fast as a marathoner as such you should take blame for being stabbed?
I had a claim recently where I was waiting at a red light and the car behind me hit me as the driver was distracted. It is not a fair assumption to say people's driving is not defensive.
No, it’s not fair, it’s statistics and numbers. Your example was absolutely not at fault and nothing you could have done, just like the one I just made where my car was parked wholly within a parking space and someone backed into me. that doesn’t mean that all not at fault are completely blameless. Often people put themselves in situations that are less than stellar.
How would you assess a driver that had been designated not at fault but had made half a dozen claims in a couple of years? Surely you’d start to think that something they were doing wasn’t right?.
Overall, the statistics are probably going to indicate that a driver with not at fault claims is less safe than without any claims. Insurance doesn’t work on individual incidents, it works on trends, statistics etc.
Also don’t forget that lots of these insurance ‘companies’ are just subsidiaries of others and are underwritten by a few big insurers. A claim for xxxx against yyyy could well come out of the same pot. A claim costs them money.
How would you assess a driver that had been designated not at fault but had made half a dozen claims in a couple of years? Surely you’d start to think that something they were doing wasn’t right?
As that driver, I would say it's due to bad luck. I've been rear ended three times, not given way to once despite ample road markings and signs, and was T-Boned in April, resulting in my car being written off in my previous car alone. All not at fault. Pray tell how I'm supposed to stop people from rear ending me when I do the right thing and they're not paying attention to their surroundings?
@kerfuffle: Man, that sucks. I dunno how it works, they probably just increase your risk rating based on your area or something similar. Yes, you weren’t at fault but you’ll be a greater risk to an insurer than someone who hasn’t made a claim.
I’ve just made a claim for being hit in a local carpark. If that carpark has a bad reputation, I’m sure that’ll be factored in to my renewed premium purely because I’ve visited it despite parking there hundreds of times with no claims. Actually, now I think about it, maybe I shouldn’t park there anymore. Just remember I Got reversed into in same carpark in the last year as well while my kid was a learner. there was no damage to mine (steel bumper, no claim) but his tailgate got pushed in.
Maybe because Insurance is so random. I had an at fault claim, and it hasn't affected my premiums at all.
Makes you wonder if the increase in premiums due to claims is mostly a scare story from insurers to discourage people from claiming.
I'm sure plenty of people have had increases though.
I thought the insurance company chased the other insurance company for the repair/loan car etc.
Going to the other party's insurance seems pointless. why would they even respond to you? you're not their customer.
They are required to.. in order to settle a valid damages claim. Whether they deal with your lawyer, your insurance company.. or you personally, they have to deal with it.
Only when their customer has already made a claim.
If no claim has been made, they are not going to listen to you.
Imagine if you could just ring up insurance companies and lodge damage claims against other people's policy without their involvement.
True.. but it'd be pretty stupid to not make a claim on insurance that you've already paid for. And if you drag it out, you might find that not involving your insurance up front means they'll deny you cover entirely. So instead of paying for excess, you'd be up for the full damages bill
@Thrawn: This happens a lot more often than you think.
There have been heaps of posts on here about people with no insurance who are hit by someone else who refuses to admit liability or lodge a claim with their insurer. Some people are unethical and do not want their insurance premiums to rise after making a claim even if they were at fault, particularly if their own car has little or no damage.
The uninsured then needs to commence legal action to attempt to recover the debt, which is often too hard/expensive if there are no witnesses etc.
As long as you have not made any admissions of fault or otherwise breached your PDS, you can make a claim up to 6 years after an accident. They cannot deny your claim because you "didnt involve your insurance up front".
https://www.lawaccess.nsw.gov.au/Pages/representing/lawassis…
From my recent experience, your premium will be affected by any accidents whether at fault or not. Even seems to be the case if a listed driver (not the vehicle owner) has had an incident where they are not at fault.
Remember there are only a few underwriters across all these insurance companies so going with a diff one might mean the same underwriter carrying the risk. And as other commenter mentioned the data is shared anyway
But today the repairer said I should always make the claim with the St fault parties insurance
Thats only if the other party initiate a claims and gives you the claim number. If they refuse to make a claim (even if they do have insurance), their insurance doesn't need to respond to you.
If the other party are decent people, use their claim to fix your car. If they showed any signs of dodgyness ie. dishonest, tried to blame you when its obviously their fault, didn't want to give details etc , save yourself the headache and claim through your own. Some seemingly decent people can turn into a turd when they're told to pay or know you don't have backup (insurance).
That way my insurance company doesn't record a claim. And premiums stay the same.
Not at fault claims don't go against you. Only at fault claims. Repairer is wrong. Most likely your insurance company doesn't like their prices and screws them down.
oh yeah I had a strange experience ages ago - went to a repair shop for a quote, the guy was friendly through the process until I mentioned I was with AAMI….his face darkened and said he can't do the repair.
Never understood why.
Just go through your insurance - saves you time regardless of what the mechanic says.
Eg. You'll need to go get one or several quotes, you'll need to liaise with the other's insurance party, you'll need to pay the mechanic and hope that the other's insurance pays you back correct amount.. etc etc..
When in a not at fault accident. I still lodge a claim with my insurance company and let them deal with the other party. My car is fixed away I go.
This is also what I've always done and will continue to do in the future.
Just browse all the hoo-haa on here on how people try to get out of things, give you the run around, or just flat out disappear. All the while, your car remain unfixed and I'm sure as often as not people end up out of pocket.
Contrast this will simply giving all these details to your insurance company and letting them deal with all the rubbish. Your car is back on the road, all repairs under warranty, and you never have to deal with the other party again.
What's that word insurance people like to use … simples!
You should make a claim even with third party and not at fault. Another car failed to give way to me and was totalled. It was a hire car and the hire car firm sent me a demand letter for$23000 within 10 days of being notified ( without even considering witness statements etc). I spoke to my insurance and they agreed to represent me in the argument. So glad they did, I would have had a huge battle taking on this big hire car firm. My insurance should get involved since they would have had to pay any bill if I was determined at fault. I was clearly not at fault but the hire firm still took 10 months to settle. My insurance was not increased after and the claim was not registered or any excess paid after everything settled.
Advice is incorrect - Repairers advice is self serving
In theory you can do what you want to get your car repaired and then send the At Fault party's insurer the bill
So you can run up bills and claim it back - in theory
The AF person insurer can then negotiate - they don't have to pay an exorbitant bill
There is a whole industry around giving loan cars at over-the-odds prices include Right2Drive
Most insurers will only pay fair hire rates for up to 2 weeks of loan car
Also when the repairer works DIRECTLY for the insurer they check the repair quotes quite closely to control costs
When you pay for a bill yourself the repairer quotes can be inflated a little or a lot
The at fault insurer will probably just pay it if it isn't too bad - but might reject if exorbitant
So I suspect the repairer is trying to 1. charge a bit extra for repair and 2. get a kickback from the loan car company too
"If you’re not at-fault in a multi-vehicle accident, you may be entitled to a rental car with the rental costs recovered from the at-fault party, or more typically their insurer, whilst your car is repaired or claim is settled"
https://www.right2drive.com.au/your-rights
Same applies to motorcycles, as I found out when I was hit by a learner, and my bike spent 5 months at the workshop during covid waiting on parts to arrive from Japan.
You MAY be entitled and Yes you are - but entitled to what and for how long
The additional cost is by negotiation generally
Right 2 Drive and others would have you believe you can just sign up with them and they can charge you whatever they like and the At Fault person's insurance will pay
Have you ever dealt with an insurance company before?
Most insurers won't pay for 5 months of a hire car - even though I don't doubt repairs took that long
FYI pre-pandemic the industry standard was 2 weeks
Having gone through this recently. Wife was front car, stopped at lights. 3 car nose-to-tail because driver fell asleep.
Claimed on our policy as we didn't have to wait for other driver to initiate any claim.
Had issues with repairer, so glad that I was dealing through my insurer as they were looking out for me rather than other party.
Did you pay the excess when making the not-at-fault claim?