Jump to content
DOSBODS
  • Welcome to DOSBODS

     

    DOSBODS is free of any advertising.

    Ads are annoying, and - increasingly - advertising companies limit free speech online. DOSBODS Forums are completely free to use. Please create a free account to be able to access all the features of the DOSBODS community. It only takes 20 seconds!

     

Hastings Direct - Cheap for a reason


Recommended Posts

Do not insure your car with these people.  They caused me weeks of hassle for their mistake which they eventually admitted.

Another poor sod has become their victim.
 

Quote

 

A shipyard worker from Falmouth said he "couldn't sleep for weeks" due to worry after receiving a notice from an accident claims company seeking £13,000 for a hire car that he believed was provided free of charge from his insurers following an accident.

Duane Petrauske, a 58-year-old worker at Falmouth Docks, received the demand for payment out of the blue and is warning other motorists to be aware of falling into the same trap.

He said: “I had an accident in my own car and sent an accident report to my insurance company the same day. The broker, Hastings Direct, said they asked their approved accident claims company, Auxillis, to handle matters.

“Auxillis contacted me and offered me a like-for-like replacement car. I thought this was the free courtesy car which I was entitled to under the terms of my insurance policy.

"I had paid extra for a policy which included a replacement car and I thought I was dealing with the insurance company but it was actually the claims company working on behalf of the broker.

“I have been really worried about finding £13,000 to pay this and I’ve suffered a lot of sleepless nights over it.”

 

 

https://www.falmouthpacket.co.uk/news/18643161.hastings-direct-policy-holder-charged-13-000-courtesy-car/

Seperately to my aforementioned scam they referred me to a hire company for a replacement car but it was only quizzing the hire company that made it clear that most of the courtesy cars they were offering me came with a big additional bill.

 

If an insurer is cheapest on Go Compare or whatever there is a reason.

I have been with LV for several years now and they have been entirely honest; if not the cheapest.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Frank Hovis said:

Do not insure your car with these people.  They caused me weeks of hassle for their mistake which they eventually admitted.

Another poor sod has become their victim.
 

 

https://www.falmouthpacket.co.uk/news/18643161.hastings-direct-policy-holder-charged-13-000-courtesy-car/

Seperately to my aforementioned scam they referred me to a hire company for a replacement car but it was only quizzing the hire company that made it clear that most of the courtesy cars they were offering me came with a big additional bill.

 

If an insurer is cheapest on Go Compare or whatever there is a reason.

I have been with LV for several years now and they have been entirely honest; if not the cheapest.

More than, who i had been with for years, ramped my premium up when i left the capital for a rural area and took the ex off the policy. Doubled the premium.  o.O

Link to post
Share on other sites

I dont see how you can be charged for something without being explicit made aware that payment is going to be due. A contract requires offer and acceptance of terms (or continuation of previous T&Cs). However it could be as simple as them calling it a hire car rather than a loan car.

Edited by goldbug9999
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Frank Hovis said:

Do not insure your car with these people.  They caused me weeks of hassle for their mistake which they eventually admitted.

Another poor sod has become their victim.
 

 

https://www.falmouthpacket.co.uk/news/18643161.hastings-direct-policy-holder-charged-13-000-courtesy-car/

Seperately to my aforementioned scam they referred me to a hire company for a replacement car but it was only quizzing the hire company that made it clear that most of the courtesy cars they were offering me came with a big additional bill.

 

If an insurer is cheapest on Go Compare or whatever there is a reason.

I have been with LV for several years now and they have been entirely honest; if not the cheapest.

I learned that lesson the hard way too in my 20s. Cheapest is never the best with car insurance. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Frank Hovis said:

Do not insure your car with these people.  They caused me weeks of hassle for their mistake which they eventually admitted.

Another poor sod has become their victim.
 

 

https://www.falmouthpacket.co.uk/news/18643161.hastings-direct-policy-holder-charged-13-000-courtesy-car/

Seperately to my aforementioned scam they referred me to a hire company for a replacement car but it was only quizzing the hire company that made it clear that most of the courtesy cars they were offering me came with a big additional bill.

 

If an insurer is cheapest on Go Compare or whatever there is a reason.

I have been with LV for several years now and they have been entirely honest; if not the cheapest.

Had a ding done with these years ago.

A bike of mine got knocked and recovered by a company appointed by the police. I went to get it and one of the guys warned me t had been ragged and didn't sound right.

So I called Hastings up that day and told them I wasn't having it back, gave them the address of the recovery company.

Two months later their assessor wrote it off, £3500 grand of bike, they offer, I refuse, finally they offer £3300, I accept.

Check arrives, £1800, what the fuck.

Straight on the phone, the cheeky cunts deducted storage charges.

Apparently I never informed them it was being stored at a chargeable location. 

When I pointed that their assessor had been to the location they relented and ponied up, no qualms, like I happened every day.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Happy Renting said:

One thing I wonder about these 'loan cars'. Who is responsible for the insurance of the loan car while the original vehicle is assessed/repaired?

To add to my question above, I would assume that if a vehicle is a writeoff, there is no insurable interest in it; so any unspent insurance period should then be applied to a loan car.

Another point. If you take out 1 years insurance, and the following day it is written off in some mishap, what is the justification in being charged for the insurance for the remainder of the year?  Arguably, the insurance should be repaid to you, as there is no insurable interest.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Since we're moaning about insurance, here's another one. I handled a travel insurance medical claim for an elderly relative a year or so back and the hoops they made him jump through to get paid were crazy. It was enough money - about 3K GBP - that it was worth the fight but it cost him about 300 GBP of his own cash getting doctors letters, extra details and other stuff to get there. When they did finally pay, they did it at a shitty rip-off exchange rate (10% less than the spot rate for that day). When I complained, they just paid the right amount using the official BoE rate for the day without any fuss. Clearly it was standard practise in the hope that people would assume it was normal. It was this lot:

https://www.covermore.com/

Covermore? Coverless more like. Cunts.

Link to post
Share on other sites
30 minutes ago, Happy Renting said:

To add to my question above, I would assume that if a vehicle is a writeoff, there is no insurable interest in it; so any unspent insurance period should then be applied to a loan car.

Another point. If you take out 1 years insurance, and the following day it is written off in some mishap, what is the justification in being charged for the insurance for the remainder of the year?  Arguably, the insurance should be repaid to you, as there is no insurable interest.

I think that one falls into the category of never giving a sucker an even break - a basic tenet of the insurance industry.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, GBDamo said:

Had a ding done with these years ago.

A bike of mine got knocked and recovered by a company appointed by the police. I went to get it and one of the guys warned me t had been ragged and didn't sound right.

So I called Hastings up that day and told them I wasn't having it back, gave them the address of the recovery company.

Two months later their assessor wrote it off, £3500 grand of bike, they offer, I refuse, finally they offer £3300, I accept.

Check arrives, £1800, what the fuck.

Straight on the phone, the cheeky cunts deducted storage charges.

Apparently I never informed them it was being stored at a chargeable location. 

When I pointed that their assessor had been to the location they relented and ponied up, no qualms, like I happened every day.

Yeah, that racket’s been going a long time my gut feeling is there’s some collusion between insurance and recovery cos to mutual financial benefit.

I’m also almost certain there’s skullduggery between insurers and brokers with the brokers not as independent as they’d like people to think.

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, Sucralose Ray Leonard said:

They're all cunts 

NFU are IMO not ,touch wood i have only ever claimed off my own insurance once and they were brilliant they did exactly what it said on the box  but they claim to offer all sorts of cover but IMO they price themselves out the parts they are not interested in

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Happy Renting said:

To add to my question above, I would assume that if a vehicle is a writeoff, there is no insurable interest in it; so any unspent insurance period should then be applied to a loan car.

Another point. If you take out 1 years insurance, and the following day it is written off in some mishap, what is the justification in being charged for the insurance for the remainder of the year?  Arguably, the insurance should be repaid to you, as there is no insurable interest.

You contracted for a year's insurance, if you really wanted 365 x 1 day terms then you could seek to negotiate that.

Plus surely you could switch the policy to your next vehicle?

Of course after one day you would still be in your cooling-off period -- but cancelling would mean giving up your claim :)

Link to post
Share on other sites
15 hours ago, Frank Hovis said:

Do not insure your car with these people.  They caused me weeks of hassle for their mistake which they eventually admitted.

Another poor sod has become their victim.
 

 

https://www.falmouthpacket.co.uk/news/18643161.hastings-direct-policy-holder-charged-13-000-courtesy-car/

Seperately to my aforementioned scam they referred me to a hire company for a replacement car but it was only quizzing the hire company that made it clear that most of the courtesy cars they were offering me came with a big additional bill.

 

If an insurer is cheapest on Go Compare or whatever there is a reason.

I have been with LV for several years now and they have been entirely honest; if not the cheapest.

My cousin had similar with the AA. I think Saga are the same.

They told her to NOT accept hire car from the other sides insurer (other side was at fault so made the offer).

She duly did this, thinking the AA were offering her advice to protect her.

She was then contacted by the hire firm working for the AA. She only wanted a small hatch as a runaround (her car was a rear end shunt write off).

She then had foisted upon her, a Peugeot 3008 or a Nissan Crapquai, much too big, but making an absolute packet for someone in the middle somewhere.

She spent the whole time worrying that she would be making good any hire charge discrepancies,for a car she did not want.

As a result i leave that off of my policy now. I'll hire my own if i need one.

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, Bus Stop Boxer said:

My cousin had similar with the AA. I think Saga are the same.

They told her to NOT accept hire car from the other sides insurer (other side was at fault so made the offer).

She duly did this, thinking the AA were offering her advice to protect her.

She was then contacted by the hire firm working for the AA. She only wanted a small hatch as a runaround (her car was a rear end shunt write off).

She then had foisted upon her, a Peugeot 3008 or a Nissan Crapquai, much too big, but making an absolute packet for someone in the middle somewhere.

She spent the whole time worrying that she would be making good any hire charge discrepancies,for a car she did not want.

As a result i leave that off of my policy now. I'll hire my own if i need one.

I wouldn't say I was on my guard but when I was taken to the hire place and asked what I wanted I thought that surely that doesn't mean that I can pick a Range Rover or a Nissan Micra and asked them to explain what would be the result of picking each particular car - not every one you understand, just the two or three in which I was interested.

I did actually pay a slight premium for a decent powered diesel to avoid having a tiring commute in a one litre car whilst mine was being fixed. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Long time lurking said:

NFU are IMO not ,touch wood i have only ever claimed off my own insurance once and they were brilliant they did exactly what it said on the box  but they claim to offer all sorts of cover but IMO they price themselves out the parts they are not interested in

My experience too.

Rear-ended by a young driver, NFU very helpful on the phone and organised loan car at no additional cost.

A week later they decided the car was a total loss and asked what we would consider a reasonable settlement. Quoted an average of autotrader prices for similar mileage and age but NFU said they had done the same exercise and felt we were undervaluing by £500.......went with their offer!

Definitely more costly than many comparison site quotes but very efficient, quick to deal with queries and no nasty shocks when you need to claim.

Just wish a company with a farming/rural character could offer a better rate on a pickup: twice the price of Adrian Flux.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Duck said:

Just wish a company with a farming/rural character could offer a better rate on a pickup: twice the price of Adrian Flux.

Yep it`s a strange one that ,i had a claim on a motor home it was deemed an uneconomical repair which the assessor said he would not write the vehicle of if i wanted to keep the vehicle and repair it myself, within two months i re insured it with them once i had repaired it  ,but some time later asked for a quote on a car it`s was a crazy price 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Long time lurking said:

Yep it`s a strange one that ,i had a claim on a motor home it was deemed an uneconomical repair which the assessor said he would not write the vehicle of if i wanted to keep the vehicle and repair it myself, within two months i re insured it with them once i had repaired it  ,but some time later asked for a quote on a car it`s was a crazy price 

Did they put it under a cat c or cat d/n?

Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, Dave Beans said:

Did they put it under a cat c or cat d/n?

No cat, just an uneconomical repair as the damage was fire/smoke damage to the inside so it did not have any mechanical effect on the vehicle which would require an inspection 

If he did write it off it would have required a VOSA inspection regardless just to verify it was the same vehicle that was the reason he did not write it off which i thought was great  

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

If the insured was not at fault then the cost of hiring an equivalent vehicle whilst your vehicle is being repaired is recoverable from the insurers of the driver at fault. It is recoverable along with any other out of pocket expenses. 

My car was written off last December, the other driver's insurance made a without prejudice payment equal to the market value of my car less its scrap value. At that point I could not claim for the cost of hiring an equivalent vehicle. The claims management company my insurer recommended then asked me to the return the vehicle they had provided me with. 

I've kept my written off car as I expect to be able to repair it for far less than the insurers vehicle engineer estimated the repair costs to be. Even if its not then I should be able to sell it for a bit more than their estimated value. 

The requirement for a VOSA inspection was dropped a while ago. It was intended to stop criminals disguising stolen vehicles identity but was found to be ineffective. Nevertheless any repaired vehicle still has to be roadworthy.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...