If it happened at a filling station, then I'd suspec there'd be CCTV. Can the OP not ask for evidence from there?

Some of this doesnt sound right. Possible scam? IDK.

1. How did the third party know who the vehicle was insured by? AskMid only shows a vehicle insured or not, and not who the insurer is, doesnt it?

2. Surely the InsCo would write first, and ask for his version of events and a diagram? Emails can be lost as spam, wrong email address etc.

3. With no details of where and when, so no evidence whatsoever, did it really happen? Independent inspection suggests not.

4. How can you accept a 50/50 without evidence from the insured? Seems absurd to me they'd accept it without any form of investigation.

So what are we left with? A chancer trying it on (again, how did he know the ins co); a car with a cloned plate; some kind of scam?

It's all very mysterious and to be frank, I dont know why the accused's insurer has not been far more vigorous in pursing the claimant for a possible fraudulent claim based on the alleged damage to the other vehicle.

If, as the OP indicates, the incident happened at a petrol station two months previously, why has it taken so long (March to May), and if I was the aggrieved party, I'd have made sure that my Ins Co had obtained the video evidence from the forecourt to support the claim.

Finally, can the OP's son or third party provide evidence of a transaction at the petrol station to prove they were there?

Simply do as Terry suggested in his post - dont bother with phone class

Just as an update.....

Admiral ( son's insurance ) havent been in touch to say they have received any evidence from Hastings the 3rd party's insurance firm. It is over 7 months now since the alleged incident and over 5 months of us asking Admiral to get this evidence ( which you would have thought was standard and obvious! ) .

My son's renewal is tomorrow. We received by letter his renewal quote. This included the doubtful claim of 21/3/24. This claim reduced his NCD to zero. He would have had 2yrs NCD. The claim cost Admiral £1522 according to the renewal letter.

I rang the renewal team and asked for a quote WITHOUT the claim and loss of NCD but the call operator couldn't do that on his system.

So! I went to 3 comparison sites and filled in details 'without claim' and 'with claim' and was able to see that the insurance would cost at least 75%-90% more with the claim and the loss of NCD. I therefore conclude that his new quote from Admiral would be similarly loaded. I signed up with Admiral again ( despite their uselessness and poor performance ) due to the fact that they were £400 cheaper than ANY comparison quote!

I have kept screenshots of these comparison site pages as proof of increased costs.

I think that I will check up with Admiral Claims today via a phone call to see if any evidence has been forthcoming and then follow Terry W's suggestion with the ultimate 'threat' of taking Admiral to Small Claims for all the money, time and effort that it has cost me so far.

Thank you all.

UPDATE...... I rang Admiral today. Admiral have sent yet another email to Hastings asking for evidence after Hastings did reply to Admirals last request ( 14 days ago ) for evidence by sending an email saying what allegedly occurred....no evidence... just that there was a collision and my son was to blame! I asked Admiral how long will this BS go on for and basically she said 'until Hastings stop responding to our emails' ( whatever is contained in those emails doesnt appear to matter! ). I realise that nothing will change now for the next 12 months. Admiral did say that I am obliged under Terms and Conditions to supply evidence to support our case that we were not involved. Considering they have only given me the DATE ( due to data protection FFS! ) and no time of the incident, we dont want to 'implicate by assumption' if my lad COULD have been there because we only have evidence where he was before or after the unknown time. My lads insurance costs have risen and been paid ( new policy 1st Nov ) so we have until the next policy is due in 12 months to get these allegations expunged off his record, and then we will attempt to get our over-paid monies back. Shocking isn't it?

Edited by Videoman1959 on 31/10/2024 at 18:07