(Admiral) Received the Consent and indemnity letter - seeking advice

[Depressed Dad]

They can make threats and set deadlines all they want.
It's a game of brinkmanship as well as a test of Admiral's competence.

You'll get prior warning of official court action and it has to be seen as a last resort. There will always be opportunity to settle the claim before it gets to court. If they win in court you have a month to pay it in full before the CCJ is recorded and affects your credit rating.

 

[Hardluck]

They can make threats and set deadlines all they want.
It's a game of brinkmanship as well as a test of Admiral's competence.

You'll get prior warning of official court action and it has to be seen as a last resort. There will always be opportunity to settle the claim before it gets to court. If they win in court you have a month to pay it in full before the CCJ is recorded and affects your credit rating.

Oh I know. I've just seen Guy suggest his yolo bin strat before in other threads and it's still not a good idea lol

 

[Hardluck]

Finally got some time off work, writing my lengthy reply to send now. They have already made a mess again though- the deadline for my reply is end of tomorrow, but they already transferred my case to claims management as of yesterday! They have flouted their own stated deadline, and I am sure this is not allowed but I can't remember where such is stated in law- any thoughts?

 

[Depressed Dad]

Finally got some time off work, writing my lengthy reply to send now. They have already made a mess again though- the deadline for my reply is end of tomorrow, but they already transferred my case to claims management as of yesterday! They have flouted their own stated deadline, and I am sure this is not allowed but I can't remember where such is stated in law- any thoughts?

When you say 'claims management' do you mean 'debt recovery'?

 

[Hardluck]

When you say 'claims management' do you mean 'debt recovery'?

Sorry misnamed it, letter says:

"Please note your file has now been passed to the Claims Collection Team." Followed by bank details, and notice that if they don't receive payment/contact within 21 days they may pass my details to their solicitor to pursue.

Feels like they're jumping the gun quite badly.

 

[Depressed Dad]

Sorry misnamed it, letter says:

"Please note your file has now been passed to the Claims Collection Team." Followed by bank details, and notice that if they don't receive payment/contact within 21 days they may pass my details to their solicitor to pursue.

Feels like they're jumping the gun quite badly.

They're just ramping up the pressure.
Stuck to your guns and keep negotiating with them.

 

[Hardluck]

They're just ramping up the pressure.
Stuck to your guns and keep negotiating with them.

Shall do! All they've done is got me to submit another complaint about their professionalism and threaten to involve the FCA if they continue to behave so aggressively towards me.

My email today was three pages in the end, after going back and including past queries I'd made that they have ignored to date. We shall see what information they give over in their next contact- presumably sometime next month

You certainly weren't kidding in your past posts about how awful they are to deal with. Never shall EUI see a penny from me again (after this).

 

[dd1979]

I’ve just had the the letter from Claims Collection Team giving me literally two weeks to pay in full. Or provide evidence of all of my outgoings to negotiate a settlement plan.

At my wits end over this. Haven’t gone to FCA but may well have to now.

What’s the best next step here? I’ve had the email for Subject Access Request; just not had time to do anything with it yet.

 

[Depressed Dad]

I’ve just had the the letter from Claims Collection Team giving me literally two weeks to pay in full. Or provide evidence of all of my outgoings to negotiate a settlement plan.

At my wits end over this. Haven’t gone to FCA but may well have to now.

What’s the best next step here? I’ve had the email for Subject Access Request; just not had time to do anything with it yet.

Have you reached the end of the road to challenge the amount they are asking for?
Has the figure changed since they first told you how much they asked for?

If you still dispute the amount then tell them you are not prepared to settle the claim without understanding how it is made up.
Be prepared to make them an offer to settle in full, or by a repayment plan.
If you have disposable income then I'd be reluctant to share your financial details with.
There's no legal requirement to share your financial data with them at this stage. They are just probing for how much you can afford.

They will set deadlines to try to push you into settling the claim. You could point out to them that you are prepared to negotiate if they share the details of the claim for you to validate. A judge will expect both parties to have tried everything to reach an agreement before going to court. if you feel that is not the case then make that clear to Admiral and that their 'threats' are causing you stress.

If you have grounds to raise a case with the FOS then do it, but make sure you have followed the Admiral complaints process first.
Make sure the FOS claim is clear and concise. Read the FOS examples posted in this thread to get an idea of how previous cases have been dealt with.

 

[dd1979]

Thanks for you reply.

I found out how much I owed (just shy of £34k) a few weeks back. Outrageous for amount of damage caused, plus the usual hire car extortion, a couple of PI claims and court fee.

I spoke with them over the phone after I wrote back saying I still didn’t think that it was fair. I was prevented from exchanging any details, assessing any damage myself, and still have no idea what car I even hit; due to being arrested and detained on the spot by an undercover who witnessed the accident.

I also wrote saying I didn’t believe I was 100% at fault in spite of the conviction, and had been convinced/coerced into admitting so going by what the officer was saying.

I also don’t feel that I’ve been uncooperative as they initially alleged. I merely didn’t get back to them after asking for legal advice before signing letter of indemnity (which I didn’t). It then went quiet for 2 whole years.

So I don’t really know what the next step is. I’m concerned that entering a negotiation implies that I will pay. When I still think all this has been handled very badly by them.

Just want to keep kicking it into long grass I guess. But don’t know whether to try and challenge a ruling that has already seemingly been through a court (I was never told about this, however), or start that negotiation process. Or complain instead. Whatever buys the most time I guess.

 

[Depressed Dad]

Thanks for you reply.

I found out how much I owed (just shy of £34k) a few weeks back. Outrageous for amount of damage caused, plus the usual hire car extortion, a couple of PI claims and court fee.

I spoke with them over the phone after I wrote back saying I still didn’t think that it was fair. I was prevented from exchanging any details, assessing any damage myself, and still have no idea what car I even hit; due to being arrested and detained on the spot by an undercover who witnessed the accident.

I also wrote saying I didn’t believe I was 100% at fault in spite of the conviction, and had been convinced/coerced into admitting so going by what the officer was saying.

I also don’t feel that I’ve been uncooperative as they initially alleged. I merely didn’t get back to them after asking for legal advice before signing letter of indemnity (which I didn’t). It then went quiet for 2 whole years.

So I don’t really know what the next step is. I’m concerned that entering a negotiation implies that I will pay. When I still think all this has been handled very badly by them.

Just want to keep kicking it into long grass I guess. But don’t know whether to try and challenge a ruling that has already seemingly been through a court (I was never told about this, however), or start that negotiation process. Or complain instead. Whatever buys the most time I guess.

The first step is always to ask for the details and have the opportunity to challenge the validity of the costs and also understand the process they have followed.
You cannot be expected to pay them without knowing the details of the claim.
Raise an official complaint with them.

From what I understand they are supposed to wait until the third party has taken you to court and they become liable for the claim if the CCJ is not settled within 7 days.
They typically shortcut this process and get the Third Party to sign up with them to avoid it going to court.
Then they pursue you for the money. Under the Road Traffic Act there are certain reasons they can't avoid liability for but can pursue the driver (or policyholder) for the money - the condition of the driver is one of these reasons.

Ask them if they are acting as the RTA insure or the Article 75 insurer. It's a grey area that the FOS pulled them up on.

If they as Article 75 insurers they operate outside of the Road Traffic Act and would settle the claim exactly the same way as the MIB.
That means if the third party is covered by other policies then they have to claim under those policies. So that means if they have fully comp insurance they claim off their own insurer. Likewise if anyone has personal injury cover.

It's a complex area of Road traffic Law, EU law and Uninsured driver processes. The ordinary consumer has little chance of unravelling it.

It needs a motor insurance legal expert to assess whether you have any grounds to fight them off. The FOS might shed some light on it but they are not experts. I recently found a QC prepared to have a chat with me but I baulked at the £500 + VAT cost.
However, if you are faced with a £34k bill it might be money well spent.

You might be able to delay proceedings by letting them know you are not willing to engage until they have provided details of the claim and that you wish to raise and official complaint with a view to taking it to the FoS if your issues are not satisfactorily resolved.

You really should seek some professional legal advice but it will be outside the knowledge of most solicitors.

 

[dd1979]

The first step is always to ask for the details and have the opportunity to challenge the validity of the costs and also understand the process they have followed.
You cannot be expected to pay them without knowing the details of the claim.
Raise an official complaint with them.

From what I understand they are supposed to wait until the third party has taken you to court and they become liable for the claim if the CCJ is not settled within 7 days.
They typically shortcut this process and get the Third Party to sign up with them to avoid it going to court.
Then they pursue you for the money. Under the Road Traffic Act there are certain reasons they can't avoid liability for but can pursue the driver (or policyholder) for the money - the condition of the driver is one of these reasons.

Ask them if they are acting as the RTA insure or the Article 75 insurer. It's a grey area that the FOS pulled them up on.

If they as Article 75 insurers they operate outside of the Road Traffic Act and would settle the claim exactly the same way as the MIB.
That means if the third party is covered by other policies then they have to claim under those policies. So that means if they have fully comp insurance they claim off their own insurer. Likewise if anyone has personal injury cover.

It's a complex area of Road traffic Law, EU law and Uninsured driver processes. The ordinary consumer has little chance of unravelling it.

It needs a motor insurance legal expert to assess whether you have any grounds to fight them off. The FOS might shed some light on it but they are not experts. I recently found a QC prepared to have a chat with me but I baulked at the £500 + VAT cost.
However, if you are faced with a £34k bill it might be money well spent.

You might be able to delay proceedings by letting them know you are not willing to engage until they have provided details of the claim and that you wish to raise and official complaint with a view to taking it to the FoS if your issues are not satisfactorily resolved.

You really should seek some professional legal advice but it will be outside the knowledge of most solicitors.

This is really helpful DD. Thanks.

I guess my next step is to challenge it. I have a breakdown of figures but they are grossly high; also one of my original queries/complaints was the number of claimants. It was a stressful day but remember the officer telling me that driver was moaning of neck pain, passenger was OK. Then a fictitious other passenger seemed to have emerged.

So I should start there and submit complaint at same time.

I think the old system would have applied since I know they changed their policy after 2020.

Once again, thanks so much. I have no assets but a pretty good job; I’ve not even recovered financially from the original hit my career, earnings etc. took from that day. So another point I intend to stress is what do they really hope to gain given all this.

 

[Depressed Dad]

This is really helpful DD. Thanks.

I guess my next step is to challenge it. I have a breakdown of figures but they are grossly high; also one of my original queries/complaints was the number of claimants. It was a stressful day but remember the officer telling me that driver was moaning of neck pain, passenger was OK. Then a fictitious other passenger seemed to have emerged.

So I should start there and submit complaint at same time.

I think the old system would have applied since I know they changed their policy after 2020.

Once again, thanks so much. I have no assets but a pretty good job; I’ve not even recovered financially from the original hit my career, earnings etc. took from that day. So another point I intend to stress is what do they really hope to gain given all this.

I'm pretty sure they changed the exclusion clause after the FOS pointed out they were 'probably' Article 75 insurers.
So the previous clause was technically incorrect. I believe that's why they changed it.

They acted as though there is no cover under the policy when in fact they are obliged to settle under the Road Traffic Act.
Due to the exclusion clause they treat you as an uninsured driver. In fact they now cancel the policy which they didn't before.

Claims against uninsured drivers are usually dealt with by the MIB but because there was a policy at the time of the accident Article 75 kicks in. Your insurer then deals with it as if they were the MIB.
MIB only cover uninsured losses and the claimant must use other cover they might have. Therefore MIB are unlikely to cover all of the claim.
MIB will also try to recover what they pay out but not the full cost of the claim.

I could be wrong about this but that is my layman's interpretation. It's a complex area that insurance companies take each other to court over.
Admiral do not seem to follow the expected path.

I am sure you can get the £34k reduced. They always seem to settle for a lower sum. In my sons case they dropped from £23k to £9k in the hope they would get something back.

Worth seeking advice from Citizens Advjce or Step Change on how best to deal with debt and creditors. There are different ways to limit the impact.

 

[dd1979]

I'm pretty sure they changed the exclusion clause after the FOS pointed out they were 'probably' Article 75 insurers.
So the previous clause was technically incorrect. I believe that's why they changed it.

They acted as though there is no cover under the policy when in fact they are obliged to settle under the Road Traffic Act.
Due to the exclusion clause they treat you as an uninsured driver. In fact they now cancel the policy which they didn't before.

Claims against uninsured drivers are usually dealt with by the MIB but because there was a policy at the time of the accident Article 75 kicks in. Your insurer then deals with it as if they were the MIB.
MIB only cover uninsured losses and the claimant must use other cover they might have. Therefore MIB are unlikely to cover all of the claim.
MIB will also try to recover what they pay out but not the full cost of the claim.

I could be wrong about this but that is my layman's interpretation. It's a complex area that insurance companies take each other to court over.
Admiral do not seem to follow the expected path.

I am sure you can get the £34k reduced. They always seem to settle for a lower sum. In my sons case they dropped from £23k to £9k in the hope they would get something back.

Worth seeking advice from Citizens Advjce or Step Change on how best to deal with debt and creditors. There are different ways to limit the impact.

Thanks DD

What they wrote a couple of months ago was as follows:

“We were obliged to deal with the third party claim under the terms and conditions of the Road Traffic Act 1988 and agreement between the Motor Insurers Bureau and Department of Transport.

As you have failed to co-operate with us we have proceeded to deal with this claim. The third party signed a form of Assignment and Agreement enabling us to do this. That transfers the right of recovery from the third party to us. We are now seeking reimbursement of our outlay from you.”

Worth noting here I did not fail to cooperate. I asked for time to seek legal advice after receiving indemnity forms, then the whole thing went quiet. Then COVID hit. It was a virtual 2-year hiatus in comms.

Earlier, back in 2018 (a few months after accident and conviction) they wrote:

“No cover under the policy will be provided and instead, liability will be restricted to meeting the obligations as required by Road Traffic Law. In those circumstances, we will recover from you or the driver, all sums paid (including all legal costs), whether in settlement or under a court Judgment, of any claim arising from the accident”

As you have breached General Condition 11 of your policy, we are unable to provide indemnity for this incident. This means we will be unable to deal with your claim.”

So not sure why they’ve gone ahead and just settled when I had nothing from the third party, no notice it would be settled or home to court, just silence?

Worth noting here that the policy was never cancelled. Instead they even renewed it a few weeks begins writing this. It renewed fine, albeit with a massively increased premium. Eventually I transferred that same policy over to my ex so she could continue driving the car whilst I was banned. Ultimately, I cancelled it when we broke up.

Worth noting I have had nothing in writing. Unless it went to old addresses, but no one at those addresses has informed me as such. I’ve continually told them to write to my current address where I’ve been for the last 2.5 years.

And I still have huge issues with how I was treated that day. I feel I was prevented from honouring the insurance contract, since I was pretty much forced to accept liability, and given no opportunity to assess the third party damage myself or even exchange details. I was detained on the spot.

 

[Depressed Dad]

Thanks DD

What they wrote a couple of months ago was as follows:

“We were obliged to deal with the third party claim under the terms and conditions of the Road Traffic Act 1988 and agreement between the Motor Insurers Bureau and Department of Transport.

As you have failed to co-operate with us we have proceeded to deal with this claim. The third party signed a form of Assignment and Agreement enabling us to do this. That transfers the right of recovery from the third party to us. We are now seeking reimbursement of our outlay from you.”

Worth noting here I did not fail to cooperate. I asked for time to seek legal advice after receiving indemnity forms, then the whole thing went quiet. Then COVID hit. It was a virtual 2-year hiatus in comms.

Earlier, back in 2018 (a few months after accident and conviction) they wrote:

“No cover under the policy will be provided and instead, liability will be restricted to meeting the obligations as required by Road Traffic Law. In those circumstances, we will recover from you or the driver, all sums paid (including all legal costs), whether in settlement or under a court Judgment, of any claim arising from the accident”

As you have breached General Condition 11 of your policy, we are unable to provide indemnity for this incident. This means we will be unable to deal with your claim.”

So not sure why they’ve gone ahead and just settled when I had nothing from the third party, no notice it would be settled or home to court, just silence?

Worth noting here that the policy was never cancelled. Instead they even renewed it a few weeks begins writing this. It renewed fine, albeit with a massively increased premium. Eventually I transferred that same policy over to my ex so she could continue driving the car whilst I was banned. Ultimately, I cancelled it when we broke up.

Worth noting I have had nothing in writing. Unless it went to old addresses, but no one at those addresses has informed me as such. I’ve continually told them to write to my current address where I’ve been for the last 2.5 years.

And I still have huge issues with how I was treated that day. I feel I was prevented from honouring the insurance contract, since I was pretty much forced to accept liability, and given no opportunity to assess the third party damage myself or even exchange details. I was detained on the spot.

I don't believe the old exclusion clause was correct. In the latest one I don't think they mention the RTA. That implies they are Article 75 insurer, working outside the RTA.

What seems to happen is they always ask the third party to sign the Assignment and Agreement as early as possible and then process the third party claim without any consultation with you.
Then they present you with the bill and expect you to share your financial information and pay up without question.

They say they do this to keep the costs down.
They also ask you to sign the indemnity form 'to look after your interests' but it just seems to be another way to get you contracted to pay. They will have already got the A&A signed so the indemnity form doesn't appear to be worth signing.

They seem to bypass the process where the third party (and I think their insurer) should take you to court and Admiral (I think) typically ask to become co-defendant in order to defend the claim. If the claim is successful you end up with a CCJ which Admiral have to settle if you don't pay within 7 days. Admiral can then pursue you for the money.

If they went to court with you to defend the claim I'm sure it would come under much greater scrutiny. However it's quicker and easier and cheaper for them to settle what looks like a reasonable claim. They don't go beyond a cursory check. I doubt they validate how many passengers were in the vehicle.

It would be handy to see the police report which I believe you can request from the police. It might shed more light on the incident.

 

[dd1979]

Thanks again DD

I submitted the FOI request yesterday, am going to draft a reply to Admiral also asking for more time or I’ll make a formal complaint. I can’t raise the money in that time any way and haven’t even attempted to negotiate (yet). Just want to keep kicking it away while it remains ‘civil’ (non-legal).

I do really appreciate your help.

 

[Hardluck]

After months of silence I finally received an email/letter last Thursday. A demand for payment with threat of solicitor involvement if I don't cough up. Zero mention of the letter I had sent them requesting further information/evidence to justify the £15k they had plucked from the air.

So I guess I'm now in the same spot as dd1979. My next day off is Thursday, so I suppose then I will write a similarly stern reply to them demanding they address the previous communication I had sent to them, inform them I will be filing yet another complaint against them for poor communication and lack of professionalism, and give them the same ultimatum date they have given me to cough up the cash, in which they must agree to provide the requested information or I will make a formal complaint to the FOS/FCA (whatever it is) and seek to make a claim against them for the stress and emotional anguish they have caused me that has negatively impacted my work and mental health.

 

[Sundog]

After months of silence I finally received an email/letter last Thursday. A demand for payment with threat of solicitor involvement if I don't cough up. Zero mention of the letter I had sent them requesting further information/evidence to justify the £15k they had plucked from the air.

So I guess I'm now in the same spot as dd1979. My next day off is Thursday, so I suppose then I will write a similarly stern reply to them demanding they address the previous communication I had sent to them, inform them I will be filing yet another complaint against them for poor communication and lack of professionalism, and give them the same ultimatum date they have given me to cough up the cash, in which they must agree to provide the requested information or I will make a formal complaint to the FOS/FCA (whatever it is) and seek to make a claim against them for the stress and emotional anguish they have caused me that has negatively impacted my work and mental health.

Ask for FOI request next. Say you need it in the event you can’t reach amicable conclusion (never say agreement) and you need all of info on file. This will buy you a few weeks. Don’t download it straight away either.

 

[Hardluck]

Ask for FOI request next. Say you need it in the event you can’t reach amicable conclusion (never say agreement) and you need all of info on file. This will buy you a few weeks. Don’t download it straight away either.

Thank you Sundog. I will be making the FOI request in my next letter to them, as I have already sent my latest letter demanding responses to my previous letters and highlighting the impact of the poor handling of the claim on myself, non-existent cooperation on their part, list of complaints already submitted and so on.

Once they have acknowledged and responded to those issues, should they still refuse to provide the required information, I will make a more formal FOI request. I made clear my intent to submit a complaint to the FOS should they continue to fail to cooperate in resolving this claim, we'll see if that means anything to them.


It baffles me that a company is allowed to behave the way Admiral Claims to.

 

[Sundog]

No worries. It’s a game of brinkmanship and keeping them going, and not saying the wrong thing. At least you’re doing letters and not phone calls. Best way to eke it out, and phone calls always work in their favour.