E90Post
 


ECS BMW
 
BMW 3-Series (E90 E92) Forum > BMW E90/E92/E93 3-series General Forums > Regional Forums > UK > UK Off-Topic Discussions > Should I be panicking???



Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
      04-04-2012, 08:56 AM   #23
rogerxp
Major General
rogerxp's Avatar
United Kingdom
73
Rep
5,925
Posts

 
Drives: M3 Comp Pack / QQ+2 Tekna
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Stockport, Cheshire

iTrader: (1)

Garage List
To continue this thread, I was fully expecting to receive a summons, but instread received the attached yesterday. I'm being asked to provide some evidence that I needed a hire car (particularily such an expensive one).

If the truth be known, I had no control over the hire car, the TT was waiting for me when I dropped off my Zed at the bodyshop. The Claims Management Company sorted it all out for me - I guess on a 'like for like' basis - or as close to as possible.

Now here's the thing, the Solicitor who sent this letter, share the same premises as the Claims Management Company, so are obviously in cahoots, or at least splitting the spoils from this whole debarcle. Can I just call this Solicitor and refuse to answer their questions (politely of course) and tell them to speak to the CMC next door and let them sort it between them. I'm being asked to justify something I didn't ask for.

Yes, I did need a hire car, whilst I have access to another vehicle, it's not practical. Did I need a TT, NO, but I'd have been mightly pissed off in a Corsa.

Do I simply play ball until they go away or start being an awkward sod as I seem to be doing all the running. Oh, they didn't enclose a copy of the 'defence' but will hold off calling them for a copy until I get a little feedback here.
Attached Images
File Type: pdf legal.pdf (317.3 KB, 51 views)
__________________
Current -: MW E92 M3 Competition Pack / Qashqai+2 Tekna 1.6dci
Gone -: 370Z GT Roadster; BMW X3 3.0d xdrive M Sport; E46 330i M Sport Coupe; Mazda RX8 231; Nissan 350Z GT Roadster; BMW E90 330d M Sport; BMW E92 335i SE; Maserati 4200; Nissan 350Z; Honda S2000; Astra Coupe Turbo; Ford Probe
Appreciate 0
      04-04-2012, 09:14 AM   #24
Hotcoupe
Major General
Hotcoupe's Avatar
United Kingdom
70
Rep
6,105
Posts

 
Drives: Don't know yet!
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: UK

iTrader: (2)

Garage List
Quote:
Originally Posted by rogerxp View Post
To continue this thread, I was fully expecting to receive a summons, but instread received the attached yesterday. I'm being asked to provide some evidence that I needed a hire car (particularily such an expensive one).

If the truth be known, I had no control over the hire car, the TT was waiting for me when I dropped off my Zed at the bodyshop. The Claims Management Company sorted it all out for me - I guess on a 'like for like' basis - or as close to as possible.

Now here's the thing, the Solicitor who sent this letter, share the same premises as the Claims Management Company, so are obviously in cahoots, or at least splitting the spoils from this whole debarcle. Can I just call this Solicitor and refuse to answer their questions (politely of course) and tell them to speak to the CMC next door and let them sort it between them. I'm being asked to justify something I didn't ask for.

Yes, I did need a hire car, whilst I have access to another vehicle, it's not practical. Did I need a TT, NO, but I'd have been mightly pissed off in a Corsa.

Do I simply play ball until they go away or start being an awkward sod as I seem to be doing all the running. Oh, they didn't enclose a copy of the 'defence' but will hold off calling them for a copy until I get a little feedback here.
I certainly wouldn't ring them (solicitor who sent the letter),I would refer them back to the CMC who put you in this present predicament,do it in writing.

I see your CMC as I would your insurer,they dealt with the claim,they can therefore deal with the shite that is now coming out of the woodwork.

Are you really interested in the 'defence'?

If it were me,I wouldn't give a toss frankly,my only concern would be getting my car back in the condition it was pre-accident,and the CMC to deal with everything,that's what the parasites exist for.
Appreciate 0
      04-04-2012, 09:26 AM   #25
rich1068
has left the building
United Kingdom
54
Rep
3,363
Posts

 
Drives: F30 330d M Sport
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: UK

iTrader: (0)

Cast your mind back. Did they ask what sort of car you required? Did they ask you questions regarding your status in the company, whether you visited clients and needed another prestige motor? In my experience they do. If they did then I'm pretty sure you'd remember that. If they didn't then the ball is in their court not yours.

And the last time this happened to me I did get those questions and I could tell they were itching to press the prestige/ button but I told them not to be silly and give me a Mini. On the day they ignored that and I got another E91. My case did seem to drag on and I got updates similar to yours. I've a feeling hire costs played a part there too. I'd have loved to have been asked the question you've been posed.

If you look further back on this thread I also said

Quote:
I've a feeling you'll have agreed to some sort of insurance cover if things did get out of hand. I recall something of the sort in my dealings with BMW's claim mananagement outfit. No additional costs for the insurance, just a mention and another ticked boxed iirc.

I wouldn't worry.
Appreciate 0
      04-04-2012, 09:44 AM   #26
rogerxp
Major General
rogerxp's Avatar
United Kingdom
73
Rep
5,925
Posts

 
Drives: M3 Comp Pack / QQ+2 Tekna
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Stockport, Cheshire

iTrader: (1)

Garage List
Thanks guys, I don't recall being asking if I'm honest, but that's not to say I wasn't. I know the chap who runs the bodyshop, he knew people at the CMC, so it was all dealt with fairly quickly and quietly. Must admit I was completely naive to it all having never made a 'non-fault' insurance claim before so just went along with it - kicking myself now - and didn't realise all this would follow.

I just don't want to say the wrong thing, the insurance company refuse to pay out, and the CMC come after me. Like you say there should be insurance to protect me, pretty sure I checked, and there is.

I might just answer their questions and get it off my desk. I can pretty much justify it by playing the 'Director', 'Client Facing', 'No Access To Other Car' cards so am not overly panicking.
__________________
Current -: MW E92 M3 Competition Pack / Qashqai+2 Tekna 1.6dci
Gone -: 370Z GT Roadster; BMW X3 3.0d xdrive M Sport; E46 330i M Sport Coupe; Mazda RX8 231; Nissan 350Z GT Roadster; BMW E90 330d M Sport; BMW E92 335i SE; Maserati 4200; Nissan 350Z; Honda S2000; Astra Coupe Turbo; Ford Probe
Appreciate 0
      04-04-2012, 12:09 PM   #27
JLR1969
Brigadier General
JLR1969's Avatar
United Kingdom
37
Rep
3,397
Posts

 
Drives: Ford GT Lawn Tractor
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Somerset

iTrader: (1)

Throw it in the bin, if they are serious they will call or send another letter.

How can they prove you even received the letter, unless it was recorded delivery.
Appreciate 0
      04-04-2012, 12:29 PM   #28
ihpj
Second Lieutenant
ihpj's Avatar
United Kingdom
2
Rep
220
Posts

 
Drives: BMW E90 330d M Sport
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: BUCKS

iTrader: (2)

I don't post here often, but do like to read the forum often as I learn much; however today I felt I had to contribute:

1. In asking/allowing/instructing the CMC to manage your claim on your behalf, you also agreed to co-operate fully with their enquiries and support of their efforts to claim the outstanding charges back from the at fault Third Party. Because you have had the use and benefit of the hire vehicle, you must now assist the CMC to claim back all charges, and this may mean attending Court.

The reasons are many fold, but essentially, for the CMC to prove that a car was provided, you need the hirer to attest to this. If you do not co-operate then you have contravened your complimentary legal expense cover and the balance owing will squarely fall on you.

2. You are entitled to a like for like replacement of the vehicle, because you are the victim; hence entitlement is not enough. The CMC must show you needed a particular type of vehicle and they will have asked you verbally to attest that you need that Audi but also in the paperwork you signed, there would have been a page you signed covering the reasons you had to have an Audi. You cannot now say that 'I didn't know what they were doing' or 'I never asked for that vehicle' as you have had the use and benefit of using the provided Audi.

3. I like to use CMC because the process for sorting repair and hire/replacement cars is simple and straightforward, plus I don't have to pay my insurance excess if I use a CMC. I like the way they handle claims as it is hassle and risk free for me. I have also found the CMCs are more motivated to fight for me than Insurance Co. who tend to be keen to settle claims on 50/50 basis more often than not. Also trying to claim through ones own Insurance Co. is a trying and painful experience and you will also face the prospect of having a non fault RTC held against you for future renewals and blemish on your record.

4. What you are going through is pretty normal practice that CMCs face when submitting hire car charges to the Third Party. They always dispute as they want to negotiate. Very few instancs go to Court, but to fulfil the terms of the agreement you signed and the complimentary hire car protection insurance you were provided, it is entirely reasonable for you to be asked to attend Court. Remember you can claim back any costs incurred from the other party too. Even if at Court the CMC lose, as long as you have met the terms of the policy, you will be indemnified against costs - so you really cannot lose.

5. The advice suggesting you 'bin' a legal letter is flawed. They law holds that certain letters, like Court summons and notices of repossession from your Lender are deemed to have been delivered and received by the person named; even if you do not actually receive them. Al they need to show is that it was sent. What they are asking from you is nothing more than your own Insurnace company would be asking, I suggest you comply and do everything they ask and your focus should be on meeting your legal obligations to them as the complimentary insurance will continue to indemnify you.

Like I said, I don't post often as I tend to learn more by other posters, but this is just my 2p worth based on my own excellent experiences in having used CMCs in the past and having gone to Court for similar instances.
Appreciate 0
      04-04-2012, 12:42 PM   #29
JLR1969
Brigadier General
JLR1969's Avatar
United Kingdom
37
Rep
3,397
Posts

 
Drives: Ford GT Lawn Tractor
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: Somerset

iTrader: (1)

Quote:
Originally Posted by ihpj View Post
I don't post here often, but do like to read the forum often as I learn much; however today I felt I had to contribute:

1. In asking/allowing/instructing the CMC to manage your claim on your behalf, you also agreed to co-operate fully with their enquiries and support of their efforts to claim the outstanding charges back from the at fault Third Party. Because you have had the use and benefit of the hire vehicle, you must now assist the CMC to claim back all charges, and this may mean attending Court.

The reasons are many fold, but essentially, for the CMC to prove that a car was provided, you need the hirer to attest to this. If you do not co-operate then you have contravened your complimentary legal expense cover and the balance owing will squarely fall on you.

2. You are entitled to a like for like replacement of the vehicle, because you are the victim; hence entitlement is not enough. The CMC must show you needed a particular type of vehicle and they will have asked you verbally to attest that you need that Audi but also in the paperwork you signed, there would have been a page you signed covering the reasons you had to have an Audi. You cannot now say that 'I didn't know what they were doing' or 'I never asked for that vehicle' as you have had the use and benefit of using the provided Audi.

3. I like to use CMC because the process for sorting repair and hire/replacement cars is simple and straightforward, plus I don't have to pay my insurance excess if I use a CMC. I like the way they handle claims as it is hassle and risk free for me. I have also found the CMCs are more motivated to fight for me than Insurance Co. who tend to be keen to settle claims on 50/50 basis more often than not. Also trying to claim through ones own Insurance Co. is a trying and painful experience and you will also face the prospect of having a non fault RTC held against you for future renewals and blemish on your record.

4. What you are going through is pretty normal practice that CMCs face when submitting hire car charges to the Third Party. They always dispute as they want to negotiate. Very few instancs go to Court, but to fulfil the terms of the agreement you signed and the complimentary hire car protection insurance you were provided, it is entirely reasonable for you to be asked to attend Court. Remember you can claim back any costs incurred from the other party too. Even if at Court the CMC lose, as long as you have met the terms of the policy, you will be indemnified against costs - so you really cannot lose.

5. The advice suggesting you 'bin' a legal letter is flawed. They law holds that certain letters, like Court summons and notices of repossession from your Lender are deemed to have been delivered and received by the person named; even if you do not actually receive them. Al they need to show is that it was sent. What they are asking from you is nothing more than your own Insurnace company would be asking, I suggest you comply and do everything they ask and your focus should be on meeting your legal obligations to them as the complimentary insurance will continue to indemnify you.

Like I said, I don't post often as I tend to learn more by other posters, but this is just my 2p worth based on my own excellent experiences in having used CMCs in the past and having gone to Court for similar instances.
Best to ignore my advice
Appreciate 0
      04-04-2012, 12:55 PM   #30
willhollin
Major General
willhollin's Avatar
England
123
Rep
9,918
Posts

 
Drives: VW T5
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: Worcestershire

iTrader: (1)

Garage List
Quote:
Originally Posted by JLR1969 View Post
Throw it in the bin, if they are serious they will call or send another letter.

How can they prove you even received the letter, unless it was recorded delivery.
__________________
Appreciate 0
      04-04-2012, 01:36 PM   #31
mjh93sa
Major General
mjh93sa's Avatar
England
59
Rep
5,079
Posts

 
Drives: M135i
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Gloucestershire

iTrader: (0)

Garage List
Quote:
Originally Posted by ihpj View Post
...
4. What you are going through is pretty normal practice that CMCs face when submitting hire car charges to the Third Party. They always dispute as they want to negotiate. Very few instancs go to Court, but to fulfil the terms of the agreement you signed and the complimentary hire car protection insurance you were provided, it is entirely reasonable for you to be asked to attend Court. Remember you can claim back any costs incurred from the other party too. Even if at Court the CMC lose, as long as you have met the terms of the policy, you will be indemnified against costs - so you really cannot lose.

...
This is the crux of the matter.

When placed in a similar situation after a goon in a 320d hit my (then new) 330d I was offered and went through a CMC. After a similar sort of period we approached the court process and justification of the need for and the type of car provided. In the end the matter was settled in full by the other insurers 51 weeks to the day from the incident.

You may find the following of use:

http://www.transportdirect.info/Web2...nnerInput.aspx

Use of things like this quickly established that without a car my normal 50 minute commute would take a minimum of three hours (including an hours walk!), and actually would be impossible to get to work on time without arriving the night before! This if nothing else proved the need for a replacement car.
__________________

Gone: Fiesta - Focus - E46 320dSE - E91 330dMSport - E82 135iMSport - R55 JCW Clubman
Now: M135i with lots of toys
Appreciate 0
      04-04-2012, 02:47 PM   #32
rich1068
has left the building
United Kingdom
54
Rep
3,363
Posts

 
Drives: F30 330d M Sport
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: UK

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by ihpj View Post
I don't post here often, but do like to read the forum often as I learn much; however today I felt I had to contribute:

1. In asking/allowing/instructing the CMC to manage your claim on your behalf, you also agreed to co-operate fully with their enquiries and support of their efforts to claim the outstanding charges back from the at fault Third Party. Because you have had the use and benefit of the hire vehicle, you must now assist the CMC to claim back all charges, and this may mean attending Court.

The reasons are many fold, but essentially, for the CMC to prove that a car was provided, you need the hirer to attest to this. If you do not co-operate then you have contravened your complimentary legal expense cover and the balance owing will squarely fall on you.

2. You are entitled to a like for like replacement of the vehicle, because you are the victim; hence entitlement is not enough. The CMC must show you needed a particular type of vehicle and they will have asked you verbally to attest that you need that Audi but also in the paperwork you signed, there would have been a page you signed covering the reasons you had to have an Audi. You cannot now say that 'I didn't know what they were doing' or 'I never asked for that vehicle' as you have had the use and benefit of using the provided Audi.

3. I like to use CMC because the process for sorting repair and hire/replacement cars is simple and straightforward, plus I don't have to pay my insurance excess if I use a CMC. I like the way they handle claims as it is hassle and risk free for me. I have also found the CMCs are more motivated to fight for me than Insurance Co. who tend to be keen to settle claims on 50/50 basis more often than not. Also trying to claim through ones own Insurance Co. is a trying and painful experience and you will also face the prospect of having a non fault RTC held against you for future renewals and blemish on your record.

4. What you are going through is pretty normal practice that CMCs face when submitting hire car charges to the Third Party. They always dispute as they want to negotiate. Very few instancs go to Court, but to fulfil the terms of the agreement you signed and the complimentary hire car protection insurance you were provided, it is entirely reasonable for you to be asked to attend Court. Remember you can claim back any costs incurred from the other party too. Even if at Court the CMC lose, as long as you have met the terms of the policy, you will be indemnified against costs - so you really cannot lose.

5. The advice suggesting you 'bin' a legal letter is flawed. They law holds that certain letters, like Court summons and notices of repossession from your Lender are deemed to have been delivered and received by the person named; even if you do not actually receive them. Al they need to show is that it was sent. What they are asking from you is nothing more than your own Insurnace company would be asking, I suggest you comply and do everything they ask and your focus should be on meeting your legal obligations to them as the complimentary insurance will continue to indemnify you.

Like I said, I don't post often as I tend to learn more by other posters, but this is just my 2p worth based on my own excellent experiences in having used CMCs in the past and having gone to Court for similar instances.
You should post more often.
Appreciate 0
      04-04-2012, 02:56 PM   #33
rich1068
has left the building
United Kingdom
54
Rep
3,363
Posts

 
Drives: F30 330d M Sport
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: UK

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by mjh93sa View Post
Use of things like this quickly established that without a car my normal 50 minute commute would take a minimum of three hours (including an hours walk!), and actually would be impossible to get to work on time without arriving the night before! This if nothing else proved the need for a replacement car.
I think the actual discussion about this was in a.n.other thread but the fact that someone needs a vehicle isn't in doubt. It's the cost/type/justification of vehicle that leaves a nasty taste in the mouth when dealing with CMCs. Someone somewhere pays for the inflated charges just to reflect 'status' and their entitlement to a like for like motor. That someone is everyone on this forum.

It's been said many times and I'll say it again, the whole motor insurance industry is rotten to the core.

Not having a pop btw, your post just reminded me again...
Appreciate 0
      04-04-2012, 03:52 PM   #34
rogerxp
Major General
rogerxp's Avatar
United Kingdom
73
Rep
5,925
Posts

 
Drives: M3 Comp Pack / QQ+2 Tekna
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Stockport, Cheshire

iTrader: (1)

Garage List
Quote:
Originally Posted by rich1068 View Post
You should post more often.
+1,000,000 Absol-bloody-utely . I started to panic when I noticed our resident police-man-officer posted and thought the handcuffs were getting warmed up (steady Will ) but pleased you came out of your posting semi-retirement.

The perfect response and really set my mind at ease. I'll play ball and just answer the questions honestly as I've got nothing to hide.

It's easy for me to get wound-up by the CMC, but they have looked after me at the end of the day, however am extremely confident that the cost of the hire-car is grossly inflated to a frankly eye-watering level which they'll be making a very very tidy profit.

You live and learn however and should I be faced with the same again I think I'll just go it alone as I do feel very guilty for the other party (not that it directly effects her beyond a standard hike in premiums). She did do the good thing of leaving her details on my windscreen whereas many many other would have just driven off I'm sure.

That said, the comment about using a CMC not affecting your insurance is very interesting, loads of people on here said my insurance premium would increase even though this was a non-fault claim - my renewal has just arrived (see other thread) and has reduced by about 15% (or something similar). Now THAT is a very good reason to use CMC's.

Thanks again. An extremely helpful post.
__________________
Current -: MW E92 M3 Competition Pack / Qashqai+2 Tekna 1.6dci
Gone -: 370Z GT Roadster; BMW X3 3.0d xdrive M Sport; E46 330i M Sport Coupe; Mazda RX8 231; Nissan 350Z GT Roadster; BMW E90 330d M Sport; BMW E92 335i SE; Maserati 4200; Nissan 350Z; Honda S2000; Astra Coupe Turbo; Ford Probe
Appreciate 0
      04-05-2012, 04:37 AM   #35
ihpj
Second Lieutenant
ihpj's Avatar
United Kingdom
2
Rep
220
Posts

 
Drives: BMW E90 330d M Sport
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: BUCKS

iTrader: (2)

I'm glad my post was informative and helpful; and as for the other comments in support
Appreciate 0
      04-05-2012, 04:51 AM   #36
kaishang
Colonel
25
Rep
2,198
Posts

 
Drives: 2010 E90 330d
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: London

iTrader: (0)

Quote:
Originally Posted by ihpj View Post
I'm glad my post was informative and helpful; and as for the other comments in support
That was a good post, thanks
Appreciate 0
      04-05-2012, 05:00 AM   #37
rogerxp
Major General
rogerxp's Avatar
United Kingdom
73
Rep
5,925
Posts

 
Drives: M3 Comp Pack / QQ+2 Tekna
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Stockport, Cheshire

iTrader: (1)

Garage List
My e-mail response is going something like...

Further to your letter dated 29th March 2012 I write in response to assist with the claims process.

I can confirm that whilst my car was being repaired by XXXXXXXXXXXXXXXX, between XXXXXXXXXXXX, I did not have access to another vehicle.

At the time of the repair I did not have the sufficient means available to me to fund a hire car personally and therefore opted for the credit hire car option. My car was replaced on a like-for-like basis as, being a Company Director, and client facing, it is important for my business profile to remain intact for the period I am without my own car.


Makes me sound like a right knob but hopefully it'll cover all bases. Any comments??
__________________
Current -: MW E92 M3 Competition Pack / Qashqai+2 Tekna 1.6dci
Gone -: 370Z GT Roadster; BMW X3 3.0d xdrive M Sport; E46 330i M Sport Coupe; Mazda RX8 231; Nissan 350Z GT Roadster; BMW E90 330d M Sport; BMW E92 335i SE; Maserati 4200; Nissan 350Z; Honda S2000; Astra Coupe Turbo; Ford Probe
Appreciate 0
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:02 PM.




e90post
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.0
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
1Addicts.com, BIMMERPOST.com, E90Post.com, F30Post.com, M3Post.com, ZPost.com, 5Post.com, 6Post.com, 7Post.com, XBimmers.com logo and trademark are properties of BIMMERPOST