Admiral Insurance Drink and Drugs policy

Convicted Driver Insurance

Depressed Dad

Well-known member
I think despite all the new complexity that has been thrown in that Allday possibly has a simple case to deal with.

I wonder if you should write to Admiral, the TP Insurer and the car owner with a polite suggestion that you want to conduct your own assessment of the damage, using your own 'expert' with a view to avoiding going through insurers and putting the vehicle back to its pre-accident condition.

At the very least an independent and honest assessment will remove any possibility of inflated repair costs or unnecessary write off.
As Tom mentioned there is the opportunity for the owner to select a repairer after you've assessed the damage.

As mentioned previously the superficial damage might conceal other severe damage so prepare for the worst and hope for the best

As John (Price) has pointed out there is no need to go through the insurers. This is a key point and I think it is remiss of Admiral to not make this an option. They cancelled your policy and cut you adrift. Possible grounds for an FOS complaint.

If either insurer has already made an assessment or carried out work, or written off the vehicle you should still be allowed to challenge and also point out the work has been carried out without your consent (they probably don't need it), before you've had time to seek advice on your options.
 

Alldaybreakfastin

Well-known member
I think despite all the new complexity that has been thrown in that Allday possibly has a simple case to deal with.

I wonder if you should write to Admiral, the TP Insurer and the car owner with a polite suggestion that you want to conduct your own assessment of the damage, using your own 'expert' with a view to avoiding going through insurers and putting the vehicle back to its pre-accident condition.

At the very least an independent and honest assessment will remove any possibility of inflated repair costs or unnecessary write off.
As Tom mentioned there is the opportunity for the owner to select a repairer after you've assessed the damage.

As mentioned previously the superficial damage might conceal other severe damage so prepare for the worst and hope for the best

As John (Price) has pointed out there is no need to go through the insurers. This is a key point and I think it is remiss of Admiral to not make this an option. They cancelled your policy and cut you adrift. Possible grounds for an FOS complaint.

If either insurer has already made an assessment or carried out work, or written off the vehicle you should still be allowed to challenge and also point out the work has been carried out without your consent (they probably don't need it), before you've had time to seek advice on your options.
Thanks, I will consider adding that to my letter.

I imagine the car has been assessed at least if not repaired after a month?! I did think of requesting an independent assessment initially but with the shock and court and everything else I hid from it for a bit.

I’ll have a good think and draft up a letter over the weekend.
 

Depressed Dad

Well-known member
A point for others to consider if they have been, or are being pursued as the policyholder not the named driver.

The FOS case I mentioned above says that under MIB Section 75 only the driver can be pursued. You can see that the wording in the policy document has been changed accordingly.
 

Depressed Dad

Well-known member
Further to the above, I have also seen this in the Hastings online policy:
Item 12 on page 27:

“In all the circumstances listed in general exceptions and general conditions, no cover will be provided to you under the Policy. Instead, your Insurer’s liability will be restricted to meeting the obligations as required by Road Traffic Act or alternative laws that apply in the country in which the loss occurs. In such circumstances, Insurers may seek to recover from you, or the driver, any sums paid by the Insurer to discharge that person’s liability, whether in settlement or under a court judgement.”


That perhaps answers the question “where does it say in the policy about 3rd party claims”......
I wonder if Hastings wording is correct given the changes Admiral have made.
 

Depressed Dad

Well-known member
Here is another case from the FOS to consider. It is important because it also mentions legal costs fro the insurance company (who have said there is no cover) as regards settling the third party costs.
I think it worthy of consideration that if there is a damage only claim, it can be worth settling direct with the third party. There is no obligation to go through insurance for an acccident, and as they say there is no cover provided, they could not object to a direct settlement, thereby avoiding insurance legal costs....

John, is this the right case. There's no mention of legal costs in the case you linked to.
That case is yet another one where the FOS investigator sides with the insurer and supports the insurer settling the claim without giving the policyholder the right to challenge the costs.

The FOS rarely seem to support the policyholder in these DD cases.
The one I quoted also sides with Admiral taking over the settlement of the claim without regard to the law (needs a judgment) or the needs of the driver (No cover but no recourse to settle directly with the TP). Their argument is the need to respond quickly to reduce the costs.

It's very disappointing.
 

price1367

TTC Group
John, is this the right case. There's no mention of legal costs in the case you linked to.
That case is yet another one where the FOS investigator sides with the insurer and supports the insurer settling the claim without giving the policyholder the right to challenge the costs.

The FOS rarely seem to support the policyholder in these DD cases.
The one I quoted also sides with Admiral taking over the settlement of the claim without regard to the law (needs a judgment) or the needs of the driver (No cover but no recourse to settle directly with the TP). Their argument is the need to respond quickly to reduce the costs.

It's very disappointing.
Sorry, Depressed Dad, Iam not having a good day... I was reading several adjudication and pasted the wrong one.
The one that mentions legal costs as being OK to put on top of the claim is here:

 

Alldaybreakfastin

Well-known member
Sorry, Depressed Dad, Iam not having a good day... I was reading several adjudication and pasted the wrong one.
The one that mentions legal costs as being OK to put on top of the claim is here:

So by going straight to TP I’d avoid legal costs?

If I did go to TP, would I have a leg to stand on asking for a breakdown of cost - receipts etc? And any chance of contesting inflated costs?

Also, if I did speak to the TP, would my insurer wash their hands of me and remove their offer to handle the claim?
 

price1367

TTC Group
You would avoid the added legal costs from your ‘insurer’.You would be fine with asking for a breakdown of costs, if the costs are inflated you would have to show that they are, not just moan about the totals.
I think that if your ‘negotiations’ did not work out then your ‘insurer’ would have to pick it back up. But to be on the safe side I would make the approach quick and decisive.
Are you in a position to pay a lump sum, or a tidy amount and the rest in decent instalments? If not then there is no point in going to the other insurance and saying “let me settle direct for £xx a month over 5 years?”
 

Alldaybreakfastin

Well-known member
You would avoid the added legal costs from your ‘insurer’.You would be fine with asking for a breakdown of costs, if the costs are inflated you would have to show that they are, not just moan about the totals.
I think that if your ‘negotiations’ did not work out then your ‘insurer’ would have to pick it back up. But to be on the safe side I would make the approach quick and decisive.
Are you in a position to pay a lump sum, or a tidy amount and the rest in decent instalments? If not then there is no point in going to the other insurance and saying “let me settle direct for £xx a month over 5 years?”
So it’s ultimately be cheaper than letting my insurance handle it? From what I can gather they don’t seem to challenge claims much so their figure would probably just be TP figure + legal costs.

If I disagreed with an aspect of the TP claim could I complain to the ombudsman?

I’m terrified of making the wrong choice. But it really is decision time!

Making the approach quick and decisive - what if TP has no idea of estimate at this point, as my insurers don’t seem to. Or will they be more willing to provide a figure?

Any idea how much car hire is - that’s almost scaring me the most. As far as I’m aware the car is still in (place is en route to shops).
 
Last edited:

Depressed Dad

Well-known member
Sorry, Depressed Dad, Iam not having a good day... I was reading several adjudication and pasted the wrong one.
The one that mentions legal costs as being OK to put on top of the claim is here:

Nothing to apologise for John.
I've confused myself so many times in the past looking at so much information.

Thanks for finding these cases. It all helps.

In this particular one it all appears to have been covered in the T&Cs.
Some people raise FOS cases without having a reality check.

Putting the policy T&Cs aside, the insurers have the upper hand and do what they want.

A damaged vehicle usually needs to be repaired/replaced ASAP but as you have pointed out it doesn't need the insurers to be involved. However, the insurers seem to shut out the person who will pay and do as they please with little or no communication. It is an area that could be improved.
 

Depressed Dad

Well-known member
There is also this decision that says it is unreasonable for the insurance company to withhold documents relating to the cost of the claim (suitably redacted)

A sensible outcome for a change.
Admiral being completely unreasonable and irrational.
Admiral disclosed the TP name and address through their own incompetence in my son's case.

Unfortunate that the FOS don't allow you to cite previous decisions but well worth using this to remind Admiral if they don't play fair.
 

Alldaybreakfastin

Well-known member
This forum is fantastic.

I’ve contacted the third party (car owner) offering any settlement beforehand but as it’s been a month I think I’ll be way too late, and will possibly fall on unhappy ears.

Plan is to try and get an estimate and possible payment for TP insurer on Monday morning and write to mine asking for more information on the claim and an estimate before probably having to just sign the indemnity if nothing else can be done.

Question: as I am not a consumer to TP insurer, if I felt the charges were incorrect, could it go to the ombudsman as I am not a customer of theirs?
 

Depressed Dad

Well-known member
Well done. It is time to grasp the nettle.

Is the car still there? Has it been repaired? Hopefully he will give you some information about what's happening.

I don't think you can complain about the TP insurer.

If either insurer has taken it out of your hands then you are still be able to challenge the costs. Look at the FOS case John (Price) posted about insurer releasing documents. I suspect Admiral will end up dealing with it if you've missed the chance to deal directly with the owner. If that's the case you can definitely go to the ombudsman if you have a valid complaint.

Some info on credit hire HERE
 

Alldaybreakfastin

Well-known member
Update: reply from car owner:

‘I had to go through my car insurance, your insurance company sent me a letter and I signed it so they will cover the initial repair costs so I am not financially impacted. I won’t be taking matters any further as my car has now been fixed. Plus I wasn’t in the car so there’s nothing else for me to get compensated for. The matter is now settled for me’.

So the cars fixed, not written off.

Question - why did my insurers say they would wait for me to sign the Indemnity before asking TP for the assignment and agreement form?

In my letter could I say that I’d not agreed for them to handle on my behalf, as I’d not yet signed the letter and as they stated they were not obliged to settle until an unsatisfactory judgenent?! So they’ve paid up... while I’m technically not covered.. without consent?! Could I say I was intending to settle with TP insurer direct and they gave me no time to reply in writing with this decision?

And if they’ve settled, why no estimate yet?!!
 

price1367

TTC Group
So I believe the term is they have been ‘disengenuous’ (lying)
At the time they sent that letter they had already agreed to pay for the repair, yet they try to pressurise you to sign the indemnity as a ‘legally binding agreement’ on the basis that the consequences might be a CCJ against you from the third party who cannot get their car repaired......
You should write to them pointing this out, saying you will not sign the indemnity as they went ahead without your agreement.
Ask to be given a complete breakdown of their ‘losses’ in this matter, so that you can ‘consider my position’.
 

Depressed Dad

Well-known member
So I believe the term is they have been ‘disengenuous’ (lying)
At the time they sent that letter they had already agreed to pay for the repair, yet they try to pressurise you to sign the indemnity as a ‘legally binding agreement’ on the basis that the consequences might be a CCJ against you from the third party who cannot get their car repaired......
You should write to them pointing this out, saying you will not sign the indemnity as they went ahead without your agreement.
Ask to be given a complete breakdown of their ‘losses’ in this matter, so that you can ‘consider my position’.

I'm still way too slow with my replies ;)

Totally agree with John.

If I take a rare optimistic view for a moment, it may have actually worked in your favour.
Despite Admiral withdrawing cover they are still on the hook as MIB section 75 insurer so they step in early to 'contain the costs'.
They don't know if they have any chance of getting payment from you so get it fixed ASAP. The costs might be fair. They might have avoided expensive credit-hire.

They are certainly disingenuous asking you to sign the indemnity, or choosing other options although the timing of the repair and sending the letter will be important. If it was repaired before the letter was sent it really wouldn't surprise me. I don't know if it's their usual incompetence or an underhand ploy to get you into a more watertight agreement to pay.

Do as John suggested. Get your mate's opinion on the engineers report and subsequent repair costs. If the costs are obviously OTT then you can negotiate to reduce the figure. If they won't release the documents you can quote the FOS case that John found.

Weigh it all up and decide if there's enough to raise your own FOS case. It won't get you off the hook but it will highlight unfair treatment by Admiral and the FOS might recommend a few quid compensation for unfair tactics, opportunities to deal direct denied and the anxiety it caused.

If you do eventually raise an FOS case I suggest you write it yourself rather than using their case handler. I am happy to help you craft it and I'm pretty sure John will pitch in too.

Lesson for others is to get in early to see if you can deal with the third party directly, as is your right if cover is withdrawn.
 

Alldaybreakfastin

Well-known member
So I believe the term is they have been ‘disengenuous’ (lying)
At the time they sent that letter they had already agreed to pay for the repair, yet they try to pressurise you to sign the indemnity as a ‘legally binding agreement’ on the basis that the consequences might be a CCJ against you from the third party who cannot get their car repaired......
You should write to them pointing this out, saying you will not sign the indemnity as they went ahead without your agreement.
Ask to be given a complete breakdown of their ‘losses’ in this matter, so that you can ‘consider my position’.
Great thank you, theres no chance the car would have been returned without payment?

They gave me the option to sign the indemnity within 21 days, after which they would contact TP. Seems this has been done way before I even got my letter (less than a week ago).

Thanks for the advice, they will be getting a letter from me! As they say, they are under no obligation to pay until an unsatisfied judgement, so why have they when I said on the phone I was seeking advice before proceeding (unless cars back and they’ve not paid yet, don’t know if that happens) ?
 

Alldaybreakfastin

Well-known member
I'm still way too slow with my replies ;)

Totally agree with John.

If I take a rare optimistic view for a moment, it may have actually worked in your favour.
Despite Admiral withdrawing cover they are still on the hook as MIB section 75 insurer so they step in early to 'contain the costs'.
They don't know if they have any chance of getting payment from you so get it fixed ASAP. The costs might be fair. They might have avoided expensive credit-hire.

They are certainly disingenuous asking you to sign the indemnity, or choosing other options although the timing of the repair and sending the letter will be important. If it was repaired before the letter was sent it really wouldn't surprise me. I don't know if it's their usual incompetence or an underhand ploy to get you into a more watertight agreement to pay.

Do as John suggested. Get your mate's opinion on the engineers report and subsequent repair costs. If the costs are obviously OTT then you can negotiate to reduce the figure. If they won't release the documents you can quote the FOS case that John found.

Weigh it all up and decide if there's enough to raise your own FOS case. It won't get you off the hook but it will highlight unfair treatment by Admiral and the FOS might recommend a few quid compensation for unfair tactics and the anxiety it caused.

If you do eventually raise an FOS case I suggest you write it yourself rather than using their case handler. I am happy to help you craft it and I'm pretty sure John will pitch in too.

Lesson for others is to get in early to see if you can deal with the third party directly, as is your right if cover is withdrawn.
Fantastic thank you, so first port of call is highlighting them jumping the gun with the TP form and a breakdown of costs, then query them?

I’ve no huge issue in paying, I’ve issue with being taken for a ride.

Will definitely take you up on offer of help with letter. I can write formally fairly well but I don’t know what I’m talking about here!
 
Enter code DRINKDRIVING10 during checkout for 10% off
Top