Kritzie Posted November 20, 2013 Share I loathe OUTSURANCE..... they claimed the same - quick background.... driving down road... big security estate on left and side road on right with stop street. Ford KA comes towards stop street.... and stops. I see Ford KA.... keep driving as I have right of way. At last minute, Ford KA pulls away from stop street. I slam brakes (in a double cab) and try swerve but hit the KA. We pull over. Swop info.. have witnesses (the tow in guys are parked at the entrance to the estate.. I know the one guy. Get signed statement. After much to and fro-ing (OUTSURANCE service SUCKS ) I finally get a letter from them stating that I SHOULD HAVE BEEN AWARE THAT THE KA WAS GOING TO PULL OUT AND WAS NOT OBSERVING THE ROAD. I OWED THEM over 5k in damages. Car was written off. My insurance company was blown away by this response.... OUTSURANCE presumes that people are now psychic and are able to predict the future. Any excuse to not pay out. I cut my losses... but will NEVER EVER EVER use them as my insurance company. And Im still waiting for my R400 rant the fuc.... refuse to pay me, my current insurance kicks their asses!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nathrix Posted November 20, 2013 Share From @bicyclesafetysa on twitter https://twitter.com/bicyclesafetysa Michael van Staden @mikevanstaden to @GarethEdwardsSA @bicyclesafetysaOutsurance paid their client's damage, because cyclist was in the "wrong" they can claim amount from him generally, insurance companies will "sell" these claims to other companies..which in turn, will sue/claim from the person in the wrong.. Like the cyclist..s in the "wrong" they can claim amount from him Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
scotty Posted November 20, 2013 Share As mentioned, scare tactics. Outsurance tried similar with a friend, he was rear ended by a car following too close when he hit brakes to avoid a pedestrian. The guy that hit him was insured through outsurance and they agreed that my friend wont claim on his own insurance, but through outsurance. Long story short outsurance claimed their driver was not liable for damage as there was loose gravel on road among other excuses. He went back to his own insurance who lodged the claim on his behalf and without any further delay outsurance ended up paying out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super Sywurm Posted November 20, 2013 Share So a cyclist is cycling down a parking lot and a guy in his car reverses out infront of the cyclist, the cyclist had nowhere to go but to hit the car. Ok, back window broken and a small dent on the boot. Two months down the line the cyclist receives a letter from Outsurance to pay R16K + for the damages caused. Reasons: the cyclist was in the wrong as he should have avoided the reversing car. After calling the number on the letter it was said that the driver said he was stationary and the cyclist rode into the back of the vechile. I said but he was reversing out and the laywer said that I have to prove that the vechile was moving. My question is how is this possible to sue the cyclist? To prove that the vechile was moving is out of the question so what remains is for the cyclist to just fork out the money. When has the law changed in favour of the driver? Any advise? This is stupid, where would a cyclist just ride into a vehicle that is not moving??? As far as I know, I normal cyclist is usually aware of his or her surroundings and would ride around a parked vehicle Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pusher Posted November 20, 2013 Share Waiting to see where this goes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JGR Posted November 20, 2013 Share Had a claim done through outsurance as it was the driver, who was at faults insurer. You can only take you car to certain places where they generally charge lowe'outsurance' rate and this shows in the quality of the work. I had a huge fit when I found out they used grey parts and not original. They claim it was the 'same thing as the original'. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Azi Posted November 20, 2013 Share Outsurance is not going to litigate for a mere R16,000 when they have no solid evidence of who was doing what. At this point it's your word against their client's, and the burden of proof is on the claimant. Also, it would be easy to create doubt in a court. Can they prove it was you on the bike? Prove the car was stationery? Did the car really have R16,000 damage but the bicycle could be ridden away? So then did Outsurance pay more than a reasonable amount for the repairs? So the costing must be wrong. Or was there another unreported accident ont he same vehicle pre/post your accident? There are just too many variables to this, they won't take it further. I would not respond at all, as they won't do anything more than send threatening letters and demands. Besides, nothing pisses all over a lawyer's ego more than being totally ignored. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wyatt Earp Posted November 20, 2013 Share Sounds like a he said, she said scenario, ask them to prove you are to blame. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Helpmytrap Posted November 20, 2013 Share This is stupid, where would a cyclist just ride into a vehicle that is not moving??? As far as I know, I normal cyclist is usually aware of his or her surroundings and would ride around a parked vehicle Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
milky4130 Posted November 20, 2013 Share So a cyclist is cycling down a parking lot and a guy in his car reverses out infront of the cyclist, the cyclist had nowhere to go but to hit the car. Ok, back window broken and a small dent on the boot. Two months down the line the cyclist receives a letter from Outsurance to pay R16K + for the damages caused. Reasons: the cyclist was in the wrong as he should have avoided the reversing car. After calling the number on the letter it was said that the driver said he was stationary and the cyclist rode into the back of the vechile. I said but he was reversing out and the laywer said that I have to prove that the vechile was moving. My question is how is this possible to sue the cyclist? To prove that the vechile was moving is out of the question so what remains is for the cyclist to just fork out the money. When has the law changed in favour of the driver? Any advise?like you have to prove the vehicle was moving they have to prove the vehicle was stationery, init? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Reg Lizard Posted November 20, 2013 Share Ok so what did the police reports say? Surely you reported the accident and made a sworn affidavit? If you did, then I would refer then to that! Btw wonder what the other guys affidavit said? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
socialmedia@outsurance Posted November 20, 2013 Share So a cyclist is cycling down a parking lot and a guy in his car reverses out infront of the cyclist, the cyclist had nowhere to go but to hit the car. Ok, back window broken and a small dent on the boot. Two months down the line the cyclist receives a letter from Outsurance to pay R16K + for the damages caused. Reasons: the cyclist was in the wrong as he should have avoided the reversing car. After calling the number on the letter it was said that the driver said he was stationary and the cyclist rode into the back of the vechile. I said but he was reversing out and the laywer said that I have to prove that the vechile was moving. My question is how is this possible to sue the cyclist? To prove that the vechile was moving is out of the question so what remains is for the cyclist to just fork out the money. When has the law changed in favour of the driver? Any advise? ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Hi sharkbait, Can you please provide us with a claim number or details of the cyclist? We would like to provide feedback on the incident. You can mail me the details to foppena@out.co.za Thank you,Alet Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Newboy Posted November 20, 2013 Share This is going apeshit on Twitter. No wonder they are trying to fix it suddenly. I love how social media is taking the power away from corporates and giving it back to consumers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Super Sywurm Posted November 20, 2013 Share http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bzE-IMaegzQ Ok well, this shuts me up. But they did the crashes on purpose!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
the nerd Posted November 20, 2013 Share HAHHAHAHAHAHA or not.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PhilipV Posted November 20, 2013 Share Yis I hate Outsurance with the passion of a thousand suns.They tried a similar tactic with my friend. They can pay outbonusses because they try their best not to pay claims. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.