dainton Posted September 12, 2006 Report Share Posted September 12, 2006 This might be of interest to some of you and I'd appreciate any feedback. A colleague at work had her M3 stolen in Feb 2006 and so far has had little luck in getting any cash. I'll outline the facts, what has happened so far and if anyone has anything to add please post away. *The car is a 2004 M3 customised by BMW and was bought for £63K *Gap insurance was taken out through BMW *Normal insurance was done through some back street broker. *The does not have a tracker fitted (eh?) However, with the insurance things get interesting. *The car is insured and registered to the mans mother in law. She and her husband are the only named drivers. *He is insured on a Smart car and paid extra to cover him fully comp on other cars (seems dodgy to me) *He is the only person to ever drive the car. After the car was stolen the insurance company started investigating the matter, so far they have interviewed. * The mother * The father * The son * The daughter in law * The next door neighbour (asking who drove the car) * Building around his office (asking if the car was ever parked there) * The dealership (asking about who paid, ordered, took delviery and brought it in for servicing.) So far they have not managed to give stories that tally with each other. The main points are that the mother admitted to parking the car the night it was stolen, unfortunately so has the son. The son claimed that the neighbours never see her driving it as she is scared to take it in and out of the garage, slightly nullified by the first point. Finally, everyone interviewed who was not related to the driver has said he is the main driver. The questions are * Has any fraud been committed? * Are they likely to get their money back? * How long can an investigation last? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gizze Posted September 12, 2006 Report Share Posted September 12, 2006 I would say there are a couple of main points here, one is he lied to get the policy, on that fact alone I would say he will not see a penny, simple as that. His only argument is if he lives at the same address as his monther and father and that is also where the car was stolen from, he could get a good laywer to argue the fact that it really doesn't matter who it was registered to if it was stolen from theirs. I would say he has to look at it as in he tried to save a few quid and has got his fingers burnt, what a stupid thing to do with a £63k car! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Atomic Posted September 12, 2006 Report Share Posted September 12, 2006 They certainly sniff something dodgy and that will lead to a lot of heartache... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Golfer Posted September 12, 2006 Report Share Posted September 12, 2006 It would seem odd to me that this guy would try to "save a few quid" on Insurance, to drive a £63K car, UNLESS he has other Insurance claims recent, many points on his licence or DD/ bans such like. Stinks a bit, and given the amount of fraudulent claims going in lately I think a payout is Distant if he's lucky. A good solicitor is the only route here if he is genuine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ari Posted September 12, 2006 Report Share Posted September 12, 2006 [ QUOTE ] It would seem odd to me that this guy would try to "save a few quid" on Insurance, to drive a £63K car, [/ QUOTE ] You would think so, but a lot of people who could afford to do things properly don't if they can save a few quid because they think they're being "clever". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ashleyadam Posted September 12, 2006 Report Share Posted September 12, 2006 That story is exactly the reason why we all end up paying more insurance year after year. Simple the claim is fraudulent there is not a penny due, if this is being looked into so closely by the insurance company I am sure their solicitor's will be ready & waiting. Sorry I could not give you some good news, I could obviously be wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dainton Posted September 12, 2006 Author Report Share Posted September 12, 2006 The car was financed by his parents re-morgatging their house to pay for the car. The insurance was 3K in his fathers name, 9K in his name. As I understand it after paying for the car they could not really afford to run it. The simple truth is that they could not really afford to own this car and needed every penny saving tactic possible. I'm convinced the issue really lies around fairness. As I see it they were not upfront an honest with the insurance company regarding drivers. However, the risk for the car being stolen is unaffected. As to the insurance company thinking it's a scam, I would. They live in a house which is not in the nicest of areas etc. and not in line with their earnings. So onto solicitors, can anyone reccomend one who deals with this sort of case, particularly in the Birmingham area? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ashleyadam Posted September 12, 2006 Report Share Posted September 12, 2006 His poor parents - Scam I take it you mean fraud. Also are you talking about a woman or man your post initially claims it is a woman, then further on in the read "mans mother in law" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ian_C Posted September 12, 2006 Report Share Posted September 12, 2006 Not the kind of answer I think you want to hear, but it serves him right. Two of my colleages are doing precisely this with their cars. One drives a standard 2001 Peugeot 206 1.4, lives away from home in his own flat and is a named driver under his mums name. Another drives a 2005 (Mk6) Fiesta Zetec S under his mums name, and likewise lives away from home. He recently wrote it off and replaced it with another exactly the same. Neither of their mums drive their respective cars. They are all basically paying a 50 year old female premium for a 20 year old male risk.* Why should my premium pay for his car to be replaced? I'm paying over half my 205 GTi 1.9s' purchase price on insurance - even with an insane excess, Cat1, garaged and limited mileage. If you want a fast car you have to earn the money and pay for it. Ian <font color="#666666">*ages will obviously vary, but merely as an example to highlight why it is blatant fraud. </font> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Golfer Posted September 12, 2006 Report Share Posted September 12, 2006 [ QUOTE ] The car was financed by his parents re-morgatging their house to pay for the car. The insurance was 3K in his fathers name, 9K in his name. As I understand it after paying for the car they could not really afford to run it. The simple truth is that they could not really afford to own this car and needed every penny saving tactic possible. I'm convinced the issue really lies around fairness. As I see it they were not upfront an honest with the insurance company regarding drivers. However, the risk for the car being stolen is unaffected. As to the insurance company thinking it's a scam, I would. They live in a house which is not in the nicest of areas etc. and not in line with their earnings. So onto solicitors, can anyone reccomend one who deals with this sort of case, particularly in the Birmingham area? [/ QUOTE ] Yes E-mail Address(es): [email protected] Phone Hilary give her the facts and she will give you an instant "chances" answer, BUT be honest and do not try and bullsh*t her. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dainton Posted September 12, 2006 Author Report Share Posted September 12, 2006 Sorry I should clarify the him her business. I work with his wife who is long suffering and responsible for dealing with all this. Her husband is the bloke driving the car and it is her in-laws who paid for it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ashleyadam Posted September 12, 2006 Report Share Posted September 12, 2006 Nice one! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dainton Posted September 12, 2006 Author Report Share Posted September 12, 2006 I don't think they'll get a penny. Maybe we should start a book on the odds of a reasonable payout. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pa55aT Posted September 13, 2006 Report Share Posted September 13, 2006 Just out of interest what insurance policy is she claiming on? If she is claiming on her mums policy (where the main insurance is) then they will not pay out if they can prove she was the last person to drive it as she is not insured on the policy. If she has claimed on her policy (the smart one) then I do not think that they will pay out on the vehicle as I am sure they will have exclusions on the policy and are trying to prove that she was the main driver rather than an occasional user. I think (but I'm sure Insurance Jon will be along shortly to help out) that the smart insurers will not pay out for the theft as she has no insurable interest in the car. Chris Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Golfer Posted September 13, 2006 Report Share Posted September 13, 2006 Please dont speculate guys, let the solicitors do the job, they know what can and can't be done, IF these people are genuine and read these pages they could end up having "kittens". The legal team I have recommended are Very good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ashleyadam Posted September 13, 2006 Report Share Posted September 13, 2006 Sorry john with have to disagree from the thread you can see it is fraud which is why it is being investigated. Although everyone is speculating we dont support criminals and it would be wrong too, again that is left up to the individual I prior the correct side of the law personally. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Golfer Posted September 13, 2006 Report Share Posted September 13, 2006 [ QUOTE ] Sorry john with have to disagree from the thread you can see it is fraud which is why it is being investigated. Although everyone is speculating we dont support criminals and it would be wrong too, again that is left up to the individual I prior the correct side of the law personally. [/ QUOTE ] Ash I'm not taking sides, I dont know if its a scam ( although it looks like one)The legal guys will sniff them out anyway, and of course they don't work for free I have been ripped off by a local man, The wife was caught out "tapping" the back of a car at zero MPH, He took us for £7500.00 wont go into detail but he took the P*ss, I informed the insurance Co of my suspicion, NO dammage to our car or his and then this astronomical bill!!!!. They did an investigation, dont know the outcome but he was driving a new car some weeks later. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sparticus Posted September 13, 2006 Report Share Posted September 13, 2006 That car will be in bits or buried in someones back garden ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
randellp Posted September 13, 2006 Report Share Posted September 13, 2006 Sam - please keep us informed of progress as I am intrigued to find out what happens. I'm also intrigued to discover how a young man has persuaded his parents to re-mortgage their house to buy a £60k car car AND get them on the main policy for insurance. Mine would have simply, and categorically told me to feck off. At first I felt sorry for the wife/family, but I now think they must all be more than a little bit naive to be swept along and contribute to this guy's "needs". He must be one hell of a charmer..... It's not over yet, but I will lay a bet on the fact that this will definitley end in tears for all involved. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Insurance Jon Posted September 13, 2006 Report Share Posted September 13, 2006 gizze's initial response was the correct one, when you insure a car you are stating your the main user and keeper. The premiums are only 9k, because it was a 9k risk. He's broke the rules to save a few quid, and got another sap to take the risk, at a time when even atilla the hun could get cheap finance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dainton Posted September 13, 2006 Author Report Share Posted September 13, 2006 UPDATE The insurance investigator has said everything looks OK but they have one issue. The kitchen window was open so it could count as negligence as the keys were stolen from inside the house. He said it might knock a few K off the claim. This is starting to sound even fishier than before as he followed up by saying the claim would probably pay out within 6 months or so. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ashleyadam Posted September 14, 2006 Report Share Posted September 14, 2006 Very unusual Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sponge Posted September 14, 2006 Report Share Posted September 14, 2006 Who told them the kitchen window was open? I've been reading on another forum that the whole issue of doing things like leaving windows open isn't negligence and there is precedence to prove it. But I can't remember the exact details. It goes along the lines of, it's not negligence but a reasonable oversight, and it shouldn't effect any claim. I'll see if I can dig it out... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Please sign in to comment
You will be able to leave a comment after signing in
Sign In Now