Bus hits parked car and I'm expected to pay excess

[Berberis]

 

Your first paragraph accuses me of not admitting to being wrong.

 

Your second paragraph just paraphrases my earlier post (the one you accused me of being wrong about, and are now accusing me of not admitting to being wrong about).

 

Logic error, I can't compute

 

L00b you are getting confused. This is how the thread has proceeded.

 

munster is being asked to pay the excess despite the 3rd party admitting fault.

 

Bus hit my car pretty much written off and my insurance expect me to pay £250 excess even though bus driver admits liability is this right

 

I pointed out that when I had the same experience I was not asked to pay the excess and linked this difference in experience to cheaper premiums.

 

Not my current insurer. When I was hit my another driver, who accepted liability immediately I did not have to pay a penny.

 

Your response to this was to contradict the two above comments, stating that when the 3rd party admits fault you dont pay the excess.

 

You didn't in that case, because the other party was at fault and admitted it immediately: the other party will have paid their excess to their insurer.

 

You clearly state that if the other drivers admits fault, you dont have to pay the excess but (and I have quoted the OP for your convenience) the OP is being asked to pay the excess. This is where I have commented about the difference between insurance premiums that differ in price but have the same amount of cover.

 

Therefore your assertion that when a 3rd party admits fault, you are not required to pay the excess is clearly wrong in this instance when factoring in the experiences of munster.

 

I hope this clears up the confusion

[999tigger]

L00b you are getting confused. This is how the thread has proceeded.

 

munster is being asked to pay the excess despite the 3rd party admitting fault.

 

 

 

I pointed out that when I had the same experience I was not asked to pay the excess and linked this difference in experience to cheaper premiums.

 

 

 

Your response to this was to contradict the two above comments, stating that when the 3rd party admits fault you dont pay the excess.

 

 

 

You clearly state that if the other drivers admits fault, you dont have to pay the excess but (and I have quoted the OP for your convenience) the OP is being asked to pay the excess. This is where I have commented about the difference between insurance premiums that differ in price but have the same amount of cover.

 

Therefore your assertion that when a 3rd party admits fault, you are not required to pay the excess is clearly wrong in this instance when factoring in the experiences of munster.

 

I hope this clears up the confusion

 

You are confused about the issue because I pointed out 3 reasons why you might not have had to pay any excess. It doesnt have to be just about how much you paid.

[L00b]

L00b you are getting confused. This is how the thread has proceeded.

 

munster is being asked to pay the excess despite the 3rd party admitting fault.

Bus hit my car pretty much written off and my insurance expect me to pay £250 excess even though bus driver admits liability is this right

I pointed out that when I had the same experience I was not asked to pay the excess and linked this difference in experience to cheaper premiums.

Not my current insurer. When I was hit my another driver, who accepted liability immediately I did not have to pay a penny.

Your response to this was to contradict the two above comments, stating that when the 3rd party admits fault you dont pay the excess.

[this is the full post]

 

Berberis, both 999tigger and you are right, but I fear you're not one the same wavelength.

 

The premium will invariably vary up and down according to how much of an excess the insured consents to, with 'no excess' = highest premium level.

Not my current insurer. When I was hit my another driver, who accepted liability immediately I did not have to pay a penny.

[bit quoted by Berberis in bold:] You didn't in that case, because the other party was at fault and admitted it immediately: the other party will have paid their excess to their insurer.

 

If you'd been at fault instead, you'd have paid the excess to your insurer (and nothing further in either case).

 

Perhaps the other party would still have had to pay their excess, perhaps not: there are insurers who require that you pay your excess first, and most insurers will require it to be paid regardless if the claim process is started before the fault has been attributed to a party (i.e. if the fault has not yet been admitted/determined).

 

That's how excesses usually work

<see below about this next bit>

 

I hope this clears up the confusion

No confusion my good man.

 

I've emboldened and reddened the relevant bit, for your convenience.

 

And completed with the rest of my post which you didn't quote, so all readers can clearly see what's what.

You clearly state that if the other drivers admits fault, you dont have to pay the excess but (and I have quoted the OP for your convenience) the OP is being asked to pay the excess. This is where I have commented about the difference between insurance premiums that differ in price but have the same amount of cover.

 

Therefore your assertion that when a 3rd party admits fault, you are not required to pay the excess is clearly wrong in this instance when factoring in the experiences of munster.

If my post was all that you quoted and nothing more, indeed that would have been the case.

 

But there was more to my post, Berberis, wasn't there?

 

Notice duly taken of your 'debating' ways. And that's my last on this topic.

Edited October 5, 2016 by L00b

[Revel]

Maybe I'm missing something...

I don't understand how insurance companies are still being allowed to charge excess, be it for cars, homes, phones, or anything else. It's a rip-off. The damn insurance premium itself should cover the damage!

[999tigger]

Maybe I'm missing something...

I don't understand how insurance companies are still being allowed to charge excess, be it for cars, homes, phones, or anything else. It's a rip-off. The damn insurance premium itself should cover the damage!

 

They arent charging you excess, that's the whole point. It is not a charge.

They just leave the first £x or x% of the risk with you to deal with and start insurance coverage after. If you want to have no excess, then ask them and they will agree to do so for a higher premium.

[RonJeremy]

No. You should claim from the other party for your "uninsured losses". Ask your insurance company to do it, if they won't, write to the bus' insurers direct.

[monkey104]

A couple of years ago a car ran in to my parked car damaging it. Although the other driver admitted liability I still had to pay my excess which was eventually returned to me.

A month ago a national express coach totalled my car with me in it, driver admitted liability ( good old coach CCTV) and I didn't have to pay my excess.

I suppose each insurance company is different.