Insurance company stand-off

[Atavus]

The driver in this case is due half the cost of his repairs if they settle 50:50.

 

[markjay]

The driver in this case is due half the cost of his repairs if they settle 50:50.

Yes, but this is not my understanding of what happened in this case... I believe the term '50-50' was wrongly used, and as per my previous post what actually happened was that each party cover their own costs. Which is obviously different to what you are suggesting.

 

[pmcgsmurf]

Yes, but this is not my understanding of what happened in this case... I believe the term '50-50' was wrongly used, and as per my previous post what actually happened was that each party cover their own costs. Which is obviously different to what you are suggesting.

That may make more sense to me.

If it was 50% of your repair costs back this could be open to all sorts of abuse depending how the repair is handled.

 

[Atavus]

Most accidents on roundabouts get settled 50:50. There isn’t a form of settlement which each party pays for their own damage.

 

[Deleted member 149005]

Most accidents on roundabouts get settled 50:50. There isn’t a form of settlement which each party pays for their own damage.

So each insurer makes 2 payments. 1 to their client and one to the other party’s insurer?

Confused...

 

[Atavus]

They pay half the opposite party’s costs. They pay for their own client’s repairs in line with the policy the client has. Comp cover - they mend it, TP cover, they don’t.

 

[markjay]

Most accidents on roundabouts get settled 50:50. There isn’t a form of settlement which each party pays for their own damage.

I am pretty sure that when a work colleague was involved in a crash with another vehicle earlier this year, his insurer ruled that each party pay for their own damage.

Both parties had full-comp, so he claimed the repair cost for his car off his own insurer (and incurred the excess cost).

His insurer paid nothing to the other parry, not did they receive any payment from the other party's insurer.

Are you saying that this type of arrangement no longer exists?

 

[markjay]

See also:

Knock-for-knock agreement - Wikipedia

 

[Deleted member 149005]

May be “knock for knock” is an informal agreement between two insurers to each settle their own clients costs (to ease admin) and 50/50 is a more formal agreement, reflecting split liability

But, in the way these things do, they are used interchangeably, albeit with the inevitable confusion.

 

[Atavus]

Knock for knock died years ago and was a formal agreement between companies. It applied regardless of circumstances and the public (mostly) did not understand it. It had nothing to do with liability.

50:50 settlements are common for cases where there is no clear winner. Roundabouts and country lanes are classic examples. People, mistakenly, often call a 50:50 knock for knock.