UKH

Some of you may remember a recent thread I started (now archived) concerning the destruction of my car by ATM robbers being pursued by the police. I am thankfully able to report a happy conclusion (from my viewpoint) thanks to the advice from some contributors to the thread. About two days ago I wrote to my insurers (NFU Mutual) asking why they proposed to pay me out under my policy when the guilty vehicle was insured - co-incidentally by NFU. Thanks to advice from nniff of this parish I was able to quote the provision of the Road Traffic Act which makes it clear that the insurers of a stolen vehicle remain liable after the theft.  I was arranging insurance this morning (having heard nothing in reply to my letter) for a replacement vehicle and seemed to be facing the usual problem that you can pay to preserve your NCD but they can still bump up your premium after a no fault claim. They were asking for about £80 more than the last renewal of my old policy. I balked at this and decided to tell the rep about my letter. He left me on hold for 10 minutes while he talked to customer service, who had received my letter, and returned authorised to re-arrange my quote as if the incident had never happened. My new quote was the same as my renewal in December, pre-crash.

So, nniff, whoever you are, I owe you a pint! It may also be instructive concerning one's choice of insurer. NFU Mutual consistently tops the list for customer service and fair treatment of claimants. They aren't the cheapest, but I can't really fault their conduct of this claim, and they have retained my custom.

Result! Thanks for the update. I had wondered what the outcome was.

Thanks for returning to report the outcome. What is happening about the neighbour’s wall and what are your feelings about the police not having a pot of compensation cash to pay out to bystanders when their actions result in property damage, as this seemed to be a core issue in the other thread?

Apart from:

1) the fact that they didn't appear to be aware of how the law affects their obligations

2) they didn't respond to your letter advising them of their obligations under the law

Re neighbour's wall, I gave them all the details of the errant vehicle's insurance and details of nniff's advice, but haven't spoken since. It is a field wall and they live further up the road.

I agree with your implied view about a compensation fund for damage caused in such a circumstance.

I didn't expect someone in a call centre to know all this. I think I struck lucky on the phone this morning!

As for the letter, I only posted it on Tuesday evening so wasn't expecting a reply till Friday at the earliest. I think I might get a reply by post shortly.

There are other aspects of the NFU Mutual response to my claim which I haven't shared but which I believe are exemplary.

I agree. But the organisation should. And it should train call centre staff to identify outlier cases that they don't understand, and to pass those cases on to more expert handlers. Or they should be using expert systems to interpret claims.

My pleasure - pleased to have been of service!

FWIW I used to be with NFU (too expensive now sadly) and my (windscreen) claim was all done via the local branch, no national call centre involved. Was 4 years ago now so may have changed.