My fault but should I pay for the damage?

[CountryGirl17]

I can admit that it was totally my fault that I drove accidentally into my employee’s VW Transporter in the car park at work. When I told him, I was devastated and he was obviously annoyed.

As I am insured with a social, domestic and commuter policy, I thought the process would be very straightforward, but it’s not. When my employee looked into his policy, he only had social and domestic insurance and then immediately changed his policy to include commuting after the incident. When he told me, my heart sunk as I had technically hit an uninsured driver as he was using his car to travel to work. Though, as it wasn’t his fault, my insurance would cover it. I told him that it wouldn’t be an issue, but he wasn’t confident or comfortable about that.

But, that wasn’t the only issue, as he advised me that he made some modifications to his vehicle, increasing its value and I am not 100% sure that he notified his insurer (that’s my suspicion). He did say to me that he was concerned that any repairs may not factor in the cost of the modifications or could effectively right off the vehicle. Another reason to not go through insurance. Again, my insurance should cover the cost of the damage.

The damage to my car is over £1,500, so I have to make a claim and I am okay pay the £250 excess. Though, my colleague has been really paranoid and doesn’t want to go through his insurance for the reasons that he wasn’t insured at the time and his car was modified. He doesn’t want to take any risks. As he doesn’t want to go through insurance, he has decided to get his car fixed by recommended bodyshop repairer. This repairer offered to do my car too, but they are not recommended by my insurer. This is his choice.

To protect him, I’ve submitted my claim but not involved my colleague. They haven’t questioned it and the claim is going through just fine, which is good. My colleague isn’t bothered that I not telling the complete truth to my insurance company. Now, our HR department has gotten involved because my employee is upset about paying for the damage that my insurance would have covered. I can understand his annoyance, but the complications are not my fault and it was his choice to not go via insurance. If we went through insurance then he wouldn’t need to pay anything! The company has offered to loan me the money to pay for his damage, but I would have to pay it back, which basically means they are encouraging me to pay for his damage. It’s a lot of money and this is a nightmare!!!

AIBU to not pay out as I am insured or should I pay out as he works for me and it’s not his fault? I don’t know what the right thing is? Thanks.

You must go through your insurance company if he’s done modifications & not declared them tough fucking luck on him fit being a twat; he’s learnt a valuable life lesson; you don’t need a loan to pay go through the legal route go through tge insurance company

He’s claiming on her insurance, he’s the victim.

They would fix the vehicle but only to the original spec rather than how it was modified.

it’s irrelevant that he drove to work as he wasn’t driving to work when the car was hit as it was parked and although they have driven without insurance they weren’t doing that when the vehicle was hit.

HeyDemonsItsYaGirl · Yesterday 13:01
Are you in the UK? I've never heard of a policy not covering commuting. It's business use (which doesn't include commuting) that you often need to add separately.

I’ve just viewed the conditions of use on my insurance policy which I amended when I retired a few years ago & no longer needed to commute to work, the amendment reduced the premium quite dramatically, to under £200 per annum. I’m in 🇬🇧

Wording from my policy:-
Limitations to use
“Use for social, domestic and pleasure purposes only.
Excluding use by any person for travel to and from their place of paid employment or use for any business purpose.”

"I can admit that it was totally my fault"

Just pay up for your mistake and stop trying to wriggle and writhe your way out of it.

He doesn’t want to take any risks

He’s already taken the risk - of not insuring his vehicle comprehensively. It’s his bad luck that gamble hasn’t paid off.

You should be 100% honest with you insurer, as this could all blow up in your face. You’ve offered to go about things the right way. If your colleague has an issue with that, it’s HIS issue, not yours. Your employer shouldn’t be encouraging you to do things outside of the proper procedure, either.

To protect him, I’ve submitted my claim but not involved my colleague. They haven’t questioned it and the claim is going through just fine, which is good.

You've lied to the insurance company. There could be major consequences for you.

Now, our HR department has gotten involved because my employee is upset about paying for the damage that my insurance would have covered
.......
The company has offered to loan me the money to pay for his damage, but I would have to pay it back, which basically means they are encouraging me to pay for his damage. It’s a lot of money and this is a nightmare!!!

You should obviously tell them NO. "I have insurance which covered the damage and he didn't want me to go through the insurance, obviously I'm not going to take a loan from you to pay for it when my insurance would have covered it" Tell them to stop being so silly 😂

However, would he be able to report it now? or has his car already been repaired?

Also it doesn't matter if he wasn't insured for commuting, because he's not claiming off his own insurance.

I've only read the first page as I'm really tired, so I hope I'm not repeating someone else's comments.

I not only agree that you shouldn't pay a penny, since it's his choice not to go through your insurers, but furthermore I'd be looking into employment law, or at least keeping a close eye on this employee going forward, because the guy's not just a chancer, he's actually a criminal - it's just as illegal to have inadequate insurance cover as it is to drive with no insurance.

And furthermore from what you wrote, he's well aware that his modifications would void his policy and is deliberately committing fraud.

...he's actually a criminal...

This is actually bollocks.

No-his choice. He can get it paid via your insurance or he pays himself. You do not personally pay.

I think he’s been lucky- if he’d hit something/one he’d be finding out his insirance wouldn’t pay for his OR the other persons damage/injuries due to being in an undisclosed modified car, OP has done everyone a favour! I wonder if he’s being cagey because he’s banned from driving? There is simply no sensible reason why he is reluctant in not wanting OP to claim on her insurance as it was her fault for crashing into him

@Avatartar
I wonder if he’s being cagey because he’s banned from driving? There is simply no sensible reason why he is reluctant in not wanting OP to claim on her insurance as it was her fault for crashing into him

Good question actually. I bet he's banned or has no insurance at all.....because it makes no sense to think that in the event of another person crashing into him that it would matter if he was insured to commute or not.

I can understand the OP getting in a tizzy over it and believing what he told her...because people who cause accidents are often upset/ashamed/extremely apologetic in the aftermath but I don't buy that he thinks that.

If you use your vehicle to drive to & from work you may need more cover than social, domestic & pleasure (SDP) insurance gives you or your insurance does not cover you for the journey to & from work. SDP doesn't necessarily cover you for commuting so some companies require you to select "commuting", or "business travel".
You should also be aware that SDP plus commuting may only cover you for travelling to the same place of work each day.
Most insurance policies only apply when commuting to one place of work - and going out of your way to drop off a friend or family member could mean you're not covered.
A diversion from your normal route could give your insurer a way to wriggle out of a claim - especially if you were knowingly doing so.
However some insurance companies allow you to commute to a different place on different days, as long as you only commute once a day.
Flexible working, for example if you hot desk at multiple offices, could also mean a regular commuting policydoesn't cover you.

You hit his vehicle so you go though your insurance to fix it.
If there are modifications on his vehicle that he hasn’t informed his insurers of then that is his issue & loss to deal with not yours. It won’t mean he is uninsured but it will mean that some of his vehicle is not covered by his insurance.

Do not let him blackmail you into fixing everything on his vehicle as it is not insured for it all due to his stupidity not yours.

@Grrrrdarling
You hit his vehicle so you go though your insurance to fix it.

I don't think she can now as her claim is already being processed. She can't really go back and say "actually I hit another car".

Well she can, and she might have to, but there could be serious consequences for her.

They can invalidate insurance though . I bet that’s the true story .

To never ever work for another effing charity again

I'm not going to elaborate on my current position.
Just wabt8ti allow you lovely folks to have a vent.

She has insurance to cover her mistake. If he doesn't want to go through her insurance, it's on him. She is responsible for his irresponsibility.
Why doesn't he want to go through her insurance? Something is fishy.

What if she tells them that she thought he was going to use his own insurance but now he isn't, so she has to use hers?

Sorry, I really don't understand how UK auto insurance works. But I am suspicious that he wants it done at a certain place, no quotes from other car repair shops and wants to not put the claim through her insurance.

@Nanaof1
I was assuming she lied to the insurance company, based on her saying this in her OP.

To protect him, I’ve submitted my claim but not involved my colleague. They haven’t questioned it and the claim is going through just fine, which is good.

But maybe you're right, and maybe she did tell them that she hit someone, but he didn't want to go through her insurance because the car was modified so he wanted to get it fixed himself 🤔
I suppose if they hadn't heard from the man or his insurance company then they would have no reason to question her version of events!

So maybe I've got it wrong!

His insurer won't be bothered about anything as it's your fault.
He though is a DH for modifying his vehicle and not declaring it and not declaring his use of the vehicle properly.

This all must go through insurance or its akin to fraud. Your HR dept are OOO suggesting you pay out of your own pocket, wtf is wrong with them?

Confirm you will use your insurance and his probs with his insurer are his probs. End of.

I'd also give a lawyer a quick call if you have an employee assistance programme to get the full sp on the law here.

Good luck.

This all must go through insurance or its akin to fraud.

What do you mean by "akin to fraud"?

Not lately it hasn't, you have to actually tick the box stating you are using for travel to and from place of work in most cases now.. one of many sneaky changes in last couple of years

Personally, I think he's only done this because he's actually uninsured. Either that, or the insurance on the vehicle is in someone else's name. If he claims on your insurance, they will automatically check he has a valid policy

I think this is quite likely too. Although not unheard-of, most people with camper vans also have a standard car for everyday use - that's one of the reasons why a decent 30yo camper can still be worth a considerable amount of money: because it might only have done 500 miles a year.

It could also be something to do with the tax, as a lot of people with camper vans and motorhomes only tax them for half the year and SORN and keep them off-road during the colder months. Maybe his everyday car was in the garage for a couple of days, so he thought he'd chance it using his untaxed camper van to go to work for a day or two. In fact, that would make perfect sense for somebody not to also insure a vehicle that is specifically designed for use for leisure/holidays for commuting to work.

I'm still not sure whether his issue with the modifications is that he could have invalidated his insurance by not telling the insurer, or if they're just more interior fittings that he's spent a lot of money on and is concerned that, should his van be written off, he will only get a payout based on the value of the standard van, without all the extras he's spent loads of money on.

Most fully comp insurance policies always used to include as standard commuting and third-party cover when driving other borrowed cars (often only once you're over 25, granted), but it seems like these are being quietly taken away now, unless you pay extra. I suppose shrinkflation is so rife everywhere else, we probably shouldn't be surprised that the insurance industry is getting in on the act as well!

More incorrect assertions and assumptions about what camper van may or may not have done with his insurance, and what he may or may not get paid out.

It's categorically incorrect to say OP's insurance would only pay for a standard vehicle if the camper was written off. If he claims against OP he is entitled to have his property returned to its pre-accident state or he compensated for its pre-accident value.

It makes zero difference whether it was insured as standard, but in reality had a fighter jet engine and 24ct gold taps on its diamond encrusted sink, or even whether it wasn't insured at all.

Sounds like he has really over conlkicated things.
You have said you were at fault so the whole thing can go through your insurance.
His insurance only need to be informed which is probably the bit he is uncomfortable about but as they won't be paying anything out it really shouldn't matter.
The reality is his costs would have been paid if he'd agreed to go through your insurance.
I am really surprised HR have got involved and are suggesting loaning you the money. That's just strange.
Tell both HR and him that your are 100% willing to incur the costs BUT only through an insurance claim through your insurance. This is why we have insurance