Is this a standard response from the car insurance company re. accident?

[justanotherneighinparadise]

So earlier this year my car was hit whilst parked legally by a very identifiable vehicle. There was a witness. The police were involved and the insurance company were following it up with the haulage company. I did manage to extract the number plate from a third party but unfortunately it seems to have been written down incorrectly.

The last I heard the insurance company contacted the haulage company and were awaiting a response. Then covid appeared and everything closed it seemed. Now we find out the insurance company has closed the case and I am now listed as ‘at fault’ and my insurance has sky rocketed.

Is there anywhere to go with this or is it just one of those things that happens and there’s nothing you can do?

Do you have the police report? For them to put you at fault I would think they have concluded this due to their report?

Seems the haulage company have denied involvement and with no evidence your insurance company cannot prove it was them.

I wasn’t with the vehicle at the time and it was parked legally. So I definitely wasn’t ‘at fault’. They’ve just said that due to not being able to claim the costs from the third party that’s what the accident is now listed as. My partner thinks it should be ‘unrecovered’ or similar. I’m going to ring them later, I just wondered if this was standard or whether the definition is inaccurate.

I've been in a similar situation and I'm a year later, still arguing with the other party. I have been marked as 'at fault' for an accident that was 100% the other parties fault. I'm absolutely fuming! Having googled it, unfortunately it's very common and I have to suck it up as there is no irrefutable evidence to prove the circumstances either way. It's infuriating.

Unless you have some sort of cover against the uninsured losses as an add on to your policy, then there is absolutely no incentive whatsoever for your insurer to do any more than repair your car. If you want someone to pursue the 3rd party for you, you need to either have a policy that does that (usually in itself from a 3rd party) or do it yourself.

Since the insurer has been unable to recover their monies from the 3rd party, they take it out on the next in line. In this case you.

Ah that’s great. At least I know! I’ve been driving for three decades and never been in this situation before. I do have a witness but whilst they heard the ‘crunch’ and the vehicles involved they didn’t actually see it take place. So I’m not sure it’s worth pursuing that. I also suspect the police did precisely nothing as no one was injured.

@justanotherneighinparadise

Ah that’s great. At least I know! I’ve been driving for three decades and never been in this situation before. I do have a witness but whilst they heard the ‘crunch’ and the vehicles involved they didn’t actually see it take place. So I’m not sure it’s worth pursuing that. I also suspect the police did precisely nothing as no one was injured.

They don't teach insurance in school

I'd wager a lot of people think "Fully Comp" means that their insurer will go after anyone that hits them, when all it means is the insurer will pay for damage to your car. If you want more than that you either bolt on the policy tickbox for "Uninsured losses" (or whatever they hide it as) or you take out separate cover to chase up any errant 3rd parties.

I was hit from behind on roundabout, totally other drivers fault and admitted it. Didn't go through my insurance but my premium has still gone up 🙁 which seems unfair, but at least I was lucky and it didn't get classed as my fault or both at fault. That seems very unfair on you OP