Welcome to Netrider ... Connecting Riders!

Interested in talking motorbikes with a terrific community of riders?
Signup (it's quick and free) to join the discussions and access the full suite of tools and information that Netrider has to offer.

N/A | National QBE policy re claims

Discussion in 'Politics, Laws, Government & Insurance' started by VladTepes, Sep 17, 2012.

  1. I lodged a claim with QBE today.

    What happened? Dropped the bike on the LHS in the driveway (low speed).

    Lifted it up and she went slowly over to the other side (RHS) as well. D'oh ! ](*,)

    Anyway according to QBE that is 2 seperate incidents and therefore 2 excesses !

    The RHS damage is minor and will cost me less than the excess so I'm not claiming for that - just the other side.

  2. ferchrissakes..they're wankers aren't they.Surely it's all one incident.I mean ...I dropped my bike and it hit the tarmac(one incident)then it bounced and hit a rock (one incident)then it slid and hit a tree (one incident) I just don't get it.
  3. It is 2 separate incidents. Your intervention (picking it up) caused the second accident.

    In rangir's example it was a series of impacts from the one action.

    Sucks but that's the way it is.
  4. It's splitting hairs IMHO because the next insurer would see it as one incident. That QBE choose to say it's two would not suprise me. Person 1 and 2 are a married couple and both insured with Western. P1 was reversing out of garage and hit vehicle belonging to P2. P1 lodged a claim, and for the sole reason P1 and 2 were a couple, two claims and two excesses were payable. Upon ACA taking an interest in the story, Western despite their assertion that two claims were required, agreed to fix both vehicles under the one claim.

  5. Well that seals it for me i aint ever going to even get a quote from them,that attitude sucks
  6. Seen this before, not from QBE but other insurers. All will say two incidents when in fact it is two separate incidents that caused the damage.
    In the instance above, I've dealt with this before. If the damaged is caused on the property where the vehicles are registered, two excess will be applied. In one instance a client with 10k of policies threatene to leave and they reduced one of the excess.

    This is all standard fare for insurers, push the issue and you may get a favorable result.
  7. Come one Justus splitting hairs is what insurance companies do.

    In your example it was the one incident and should have only been treated as one claim. How did P2 contribute to the accident, were they parked illegally, i.e on the nature strip etc. If not, then it would be a simple case of lodging a complaint with the ombudsman and it would be sorted without ACA.

    The OP could lodge a complaint and see how it goes, but not sure how successful it will be. I would tell them I was doing that first and see if they reassess the claim.
  8. :LOL: True.


    P2 didn't contribute. Both cars were parked parallel in the 2-car garage. P1 was simple a woman who does not know how to reverse straight out of a garage :p

    In QBE Insurance Ltd v MGM Plumbing Pty Ltd, the same matter of whether one excess is payable was disputed and determined. I recall one claim where a claim was lodged for a motorcycle. QBE said it was a total loss but denied the claim. Instead of returning the bike, they SOLD it at auction ](*,)

    The claim was probably 10+ year ago now. If I find the resulting court case, I'll post it up in the [N/A | National] In the Courtroom (Motorcycles) thread :)

  9. not surprised to hear this.
    as soon as insurance companies realise they are going to have to pay up,
    they immediately start acting as if the bike/car belongs to them.

    you really have to be vocal as soon as you lodge the claim,
    and don't simply accept the first thing they say as being the only option.
  10. This is what you get for telling insurance company's the truth :)
    • Like Like x 1
  11. And it's also probably why QBE are consistently among the cheapest insurers out there.Go to another insurer.Its a bit of a bummer though when you do your application. "have you had any claims in the last five years?" yeah-2
  12. All insurers will try it on and most will just pay up.

    The hot tip here if you were to crash into your partners car, 'it happened out in the street'.
  13. They were making people pay twice for hitting spouses cars because people were doing it deliberately not because it was in their own driveway.
    • Like Like x 1
  14. In my personal experience, QBE go to great lengths to discourage you from re-insuring with them after claim.
  15. You're right, but I haven't seen two excess' applied when the vehicles aren't at the registered premises and I've also been advised (not QBE) that if it happenes in the street they wouldn't apply two excess'.
  16. Ok, still don't get why you would lie to the insurance company and risk getting denied, a police record and probably no insurance again over a $400 excess.
  17. Mate, you should see some of the crap people try to claim. It will never get denied, I've seen extreme cases and they still get paid out, maybe a reduced amount but they still got 90% of the repair cost.

    Basically, unless you are charged with something insurance will pay out.
  18. pretty standard, sorry i think you will just have to cop it or not claim the RHS damage.

    similar thing happened to a mate, a car smidsyd his car coming out of a servo, mate rear ended him and crashed into the gutter at the same time, NRMA demanded two separate claims for his damaged wheels and damaged front end.
  19. I guess I shouldn't have picked it up then eh? :confused:

    The RHS should cost less to fix than the excess so I won't claim for that side.

    I'm bloody furious about it though.... :furious:

    Next Q: who to reinsure with?
  20. Concerning read since I just renewed my qbe policy today.