Car insurance company dragging me into dispute

[Spocksmum]

About 18 months ago, whilst I was stationary at traffic lights, a Yodel van drove into the back of my car, shattering the window, glass all over my DCs, everyone in shock - but not injured.

Driver of Yodel van admitted full blame and stayed with us by the side of the road, whilst police/paramedics and finally - afer 4 hrs in the cold - my emergency services arrived to take us away from the scene.

Went through all the insurance procedures, had car fixed, other side admitted full blame....thought nothing further....

But the third party insurers have failed to pay up and my insurance company - Allianz - have now employed solicitors to take them to court. I thought all this should go on behind the scenes but apparently I'm now fully involved.

I've got to sign some documents accepting I'm employing the solicitors and will be responsible for all fees and disbursements and other costs - although there is a tiny clause in the letter explaining they have a CCFA (Collective Conditional Fee Agreement) with my car insurance company, saying my insurance company will pay everything if costs not recovered from third party insurers.

Should this completely put my mind at rest and should I sign and go along with everything they now need - which will include interviews, possibly attending court, providing documents etc etc? I'm really really worried however that there are tiny clauses hidden in my car insurance documentation that might say I have to foot the bill, even though i haven't even employed the solicitors myself.

Can I claim for loss of earnings (I'm self employed) for court attendance at my usual hourly rates, including for travel or childcare? Why have the Yodel insurers not paid up when their driver admitted full blame? Does that mean he's now changed his story, 18 months later?

Why am I paying my car insurance each year, expecting insurance companies to sort out their own disputes between each other - when in a case where the third party refuses to pay up - the victim gets pulled back in and has to handle all the paperwork, the stress and possibly the fees incurred?

Can anyone advise me, as I'm really panicking about this? The car accident was traumatic enough but we recovered from it. Now this is dragging me back there and I'm worried I'm going to be faced with a bill in the thousands for something I wasn't to blame for and for legal action which I'm not choosing to take.

[3littlefrogs]

I would be talking to your insurers and CAB.
Did you have any witnesses?

I have had bad experiences with car insurance companies in the past. We have no choice but to pay it, but sometimes the insurance companies are pretty useless.

Ask the insurance company to explain the clause in question and put a full explanation in writing.

[CrotchMaven]

No, you're fine fees wise. It has to be in your name because you are the one insured. In order to recover the costs of your repairs, your insurer has to go through this process and it'll be in you t&cs .

It may well be that the other insurers are shit / disorganised / behind on their post and not dealing with the claim, so issuing proceedings is the only way to get their attention. Rest assured, there will have been plenty of attempts to resolve this without getting you involved.

Speak to your insurers and/or the solicitors and they can explain. Do you have legal expenses cover with your insurance too?

I'm sorry you've had a horrible experience and that the third party are being difficult.

[CrotchMaven]

This article explains why it has to be in your name

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Subrogation

[Coffeeinapapercup]

What crotchmaven said.

some companies are shockingly appalling at settling claims. Sometimes try and get out of it by saying they can't identity the driver/van. Doesn't usually wash.

Your insurance company isn't sorting out their dispute. They are sorting out YOUR dispute on your behalf.

You pay insurance to pass on the cost of any accident onto the insurance company. Pretty awesome idea really. If you didn't have insurance (you wouldn't be able to drive legally) you would have to pay for any costs and injuries yourself and claim it back through the courts yourself.

More to point, if you did have an accident that was your fault and killed or maimed multiple bystanders, your insurance company would be paying out not you.

We seriously underestimate the value of insurance ans what insurance companies do

[Sixgeese]

My insurance company has had to do the whole court bit when a builder drove into my stationary car while I was watching from across the road. I had to fill in some paperwork for them saying I was prepare to go to court.

The threat worked as after the paperwork was filled in they other insurance company paid up and we didn't need to go to court.

[Spocksmum]

Thanks for all the advice. I'm just a bit shocked that suddenly I'm dragged into something that even on the day, I thought was a cut and dried case - as the driver of the van - who gave me his personla name and address as well as his company's details, admitted full fault.

I just can't understand why a big company like Yodel wouldn't have the wherewithal to settle the claim straightaway when no one was disputing their driver's fault.

I'm not sure if my insurance company policy includes legal expenses but I assume it must if the solicitor's letter is saying they've agreed to pay the fees. I think before I sign the actual contract with the solicitors, I'll actually put in writing on the contract what they say in their letter - that my insurance comapny ha sa CCFA with them and will pay all fees and costs if the third party don't pay up. Hopefully, if this is on the contract as well as the letter, it's more legally binding?

I often see the same Yodel van driver out and about on a route near our home - so he can't exactly get away with retracting his story I hope. I also vaguely remember a witness coming forward who may himself have bene connected to some local solicitors and giving me his card and saying if I needed a witness he'd be fine to act as one. I never gave this a second thought as the driver was standing there admitting full guilt to all and sundry, including the police.

Must see if i can still find that witness' card. I also remember now that the apologetic Yodel van driver was saying at the time that Yodel made them work such long long shifts, that no wonder his concentration had gone and he was v tired. Maybe he's making a claim against Yodel himself?

I'm going to have to find some time now to write up a statement of what happened, which will be tricky as it's over 18 months ago now. Thanks for the help today.

[CrotchMaven]

Yes, find the witness details. Always get a witness statement, even if you think it's clear cut at the time. And, yes, write a statement. Have you not been asked for this?

Also, I did a little search earlier - it seems that yodel couriers need to provide their own vans and insurance? So, don't think that this is a yodel issue - it may be that there is a problem with his insurers indemnifying him. Or they are just rubbish. Hit in the rear cases are usually pretty straightforward.

You have 2 types of legal cover. One is for your insured expenses, such as your repairs. The other is for your uninsured losses, like your excess. You pay for the latter and I would always urge anyone to have it.

You are not being dragged into anything. In a sense, your insurers are being dragged into your claim, although that's what you pay your premium for. You'll have better peace of mind if you can get your head around that.