Non-fault accident but still "at-fault"

Forum Sponsor
Found the link to your thread on the '401 got rear-ended'. Do you have any updates?

I would even escalate this to the media, CBC Marketplace, CTV W5, try and reach out to journalists. If word got out that if you're found 0% at-fault for a collision, you can later be found 20% for 'Bodily Injury' claim that's absolutely absurd.

The silver lining is that anyone who's involved in a collision where they're not at-fault, ALWAYS has to do the song-and-dance with the 'Letter of Experience'.

Even drivers who have the temporary ADLS license suspension have to explain that it shouldn't affect their rates. Your rates should be not be affected because its <25%.
 
We have a provincial election not too far away.

Go to the all candidates meetings and point out the absurdities.

The topic in the OP

The limits one can claim

The court restrictions

The fact that you have to use up benefits you paid for before the injuring party's insurer has to pay out.

No diminished value, a kick in the groin if you trade your car in while relatively new or have a market value clause in your lease.

Make a list and demand answers.

Unfortunately this isn't a one party screw-up

The big pill to swallow is that the insurance company's profit track records are based on the hosing the "No-fault" system brought about. A change in the system means a decline in profits and they will fight that tooth and nail.
 
iFly55 said:
Found the link to your thread on the '401 got rear-ended'. Do you have any updates?
Click to expand...

The Obuds for my insurance had the other insurance co. lower it to 10%. I know it doesn't mean much but I'm hoping the lower % means the insurance companies properly don't rate me on it.

I then asked them for a letter confirming this was as far as they would/could go in the matter incase I wanted to continue with the Obuds complaint.

iFly55 said:
I would even escalate this to the media, CBC Marketplace, CTV W5, try and reach out to journalists. If word got out that if you're found 0% at-fault for a collision, you can later be found 20% for 'Bodily Injury' claim that's absolutely absurd.
Click to expand...

I reached out to probably a half dozen. The CBC got back to me and we spoke at length over the phone. They called me back later the same day to say it wasn't a story for them. Didn't really interest them enough, though they were flabbergasted when they checked the website on how to make an insurance Obudsman complaint.
 
walhalla said:
I have had one accident and it is much the same story. The police report said it was not my fault the other person was even charged, but my insurance company's "investigation" said it was my fault

Sent from my LG-D852 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

AFAIK insurance companies are held to the Fault Determination Rules in the Insurance Act when it comes to assigning fault. They attempt to cover every situation and figure out fault for each, but of course that's not really possible, so sometimes you get funky situations. Ombudman might be the way to go.
 
drumstyx said:
AFAIK insurance companies are held to the Fault Determination Rules in the Insurance Act when it comes to assigning fault. They attempt to cover every situation and figure out fault for each, but of course that's not really possible, so sometimes you get funky situations. Ombudman might be the way to go.
Click to expand...
This is correct. The police are not able to assign fault and they should not be trusted for insurance advice. They've lied or been incorrect to me several times.

Having the police say one thing and insurance say another is a different situation than what this thread was about.
 
Yeah what walhalla is mentioning is incorrect and way off topic and not related to my situation at all. It's been mentioned already in this thread that insurance companies decide who is at fault not police.

However, my situation shows that the fault determination that insurance companies use is flawed and there is little to nothing the insured person can do about it.
 
slowbird said:
Yeah what walhalla is mentioning is incorrect and way off topic and not related to my situation at all. It's been mentioned already in this thread that insurance companies decide who is at fault not police.

However, my situation shows that the fault determination that insurance companies use is flawed and there is little to nothing the insured person can do about it.
Click to expand...

Do you know or can you confirm by having a 10% fault has any impact on increasing your premiums upon renewal or if you go elsewhere? That would be the concern I'd have.

If it doesn't, then I wouldn't spend much more time on it.
 
nakkers said:
Do you know or can you confirm by having a 10% fault has any impact on increasing your premiums upon renewal or if you go elsewhere? That would be the concern I'd have.

If it doesn't, then I wouldn't spend much more time on it.
Click to expand...

The impact this 10% at fault has had for me so far is:
When I was calling for insurance quotes the companies (TD for example) were counting it against me. I have an old car MVC that I'm at fault for and a minor speeding ticket. They would count the 10% as an at fault and that would push me over and I was deemed too "high risk" to insure.

Mitchell and Whale insurance was the only decent company that was quoting me without the 10% at fault but they wanted a letter of experience. However, my insurance company at first refused to provide me with one. It wasn't till I went to the Obuds that they sent me the Letter but not until after my policy had renewed.

So the answer to whether or not this 10% is going to effect my premiums is a soft "yes". Even though the % is lower than what they are allowed to use against me, the insurance companies don't seem to care and do it anyways.
With the letter of experience I should be ok (if I don't encounter any issues sending it to them) but I won't know for sure till renewal comes up.
 
Can't you get quotes and coverage and then cancel current policy/company? Or too risky if the quote is wrong?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom