Admiral Insurance Drink and Drugs policy

ninhog

New member
I have to say that I couldn't help but laugh at this thread. It seems that some are angry that Admiral are attempting to recover costs from an insured driver who was stupid enough to drink drive.
It's worth noting that there are several requirements for car insurance to be valid. These are generally that the the driver is driving legally, has a valid MOT certificate for the vehicle (if required) and holds a suitable licence for the type of vehicle being driven. If these conditions aren't met and ANY insurance company finds this out in the event of a claim, costs won't be paid or if they have been already, they will be recovered from the insured driver.
The OP is complaining that his son is facing financial ruin, but would he be complaining about that so much if his son killed someone? Unfortunately, his son has brought all of this on himself. No one can blame Admiral or anyone else and to accuse them of being greedy or of trying to avoid responsibility is laughable.
Sadly, it's a sign of the times in that it's always someone else's fault.

Convicted Driver Insurance

Compare quotes from leading covicted driver insurance specialists in the UK

Get Quotes
 

Depressed Dad

Well-known member
Ah Troll alert. Usually a sad,lonely inadequate person revelling in someone else's misfortune.

I am so glad it amused you.

I don't condone drink driving. My son was an idiot and he has quite rightly been punished by the courts.

Terms and conditions vary from one company to the next and I recommend people read them carefully rather than just go on price. I also recommend people avoid Admiral and their group of companies. There are better policies and better, cheaper companies out there.

I have only read about Admiral companies recovering TP payouts through a drink and drug clause.

Pretty much every accident is caused by a driver's negligence. Driving too fast, not concentrating, lighting a cigarette, using a mobile, fiddling with the sat nav, falling asleep. Hang them all and make them pay!
 

rodmat

New member
Why the hell should I and other motor insurance policy holders pay through increased premiums for your son's crass stupidity. He is wrong, you are wrong. I support fully Admiral's policy of recouping their costs if it makes my insurance cheaper !
 

Depressed Dad

Well-known member
Why the hell should I and other motor insurance policy holders pay through increased premiums for your son's crass stupidity. He is wrong, you are wrong. I support fully Admiral's policy of recouping their costs if it makes my insurance cheaper !
It's a drop in the ocean.
If you want to save money on your premiums then go and fight against Personal Injury Claims, referral fees, solicitor fees, Credit Hire, Claims Management fees, etc.
You stick with Admiral if you want cheap insurance. You get what you pay for.

What are you going on this site anyway? Presumably not a looking for help for a drink driving offence?
 

lilly007

Well-known member
Why the hell should I and other motor insurance policy holders pay through increased premiums for your son's crass stupidity. He is wrong, you are wrong. I support fully Admiral's policy of recouping their costs if it makes my insurance cheaper !
Yes He made a mistake but if u have never made One in your Life then good for you. I AM sure the site is to give advice to others going through tough times of wrong decisions made on the day in question, We all feel worse than what you can Throw at us but as the site goes, We help and get help b the Best We can calculate alcohol and Know when its safe to Drive, people are already regreting the choices made on the day and are here to be better drivers to keep the roads safe, (so easy on with the Holly me,) It can happen to anyone b It Morning after or 2days later, depending on metabls ,.i have said my peace , u either here to help or maybe Find another Page, also sorry to say but judging b from the higher one. Xx
 

gutted

Well-known member
As far as I am aware, most motor insurance policies are invalid if the driver is drunk. Don't think its just Admiral. I know for certain that my current insurance policy would be invalid if I were over the limit. I'm pretty sure the same goes for previous policies I have held with Direct Line and Endsleigh. To my knowledge, the insurer generally wipes their hands of your policy, pays the 3rd party claims and then chases you for the money. A while ago there were a few threads on here by people with different insurers bemoaning this.

It makes me question why policies go up after you've been caught! Ok you might be perceived as being more likely to drink drive and therefore having an accident as a result of alcohol... but if they are not going to pay out anyway, where is the risk to the insurer??? Haha
 

Depressed Dad

Well-known member
As far as I am aware, most motor insurance policies are invalid if the driver is drunk. Don't think its just Admiral. I know for certain that my current insurance policy would be invalid if I were over the limit. I'm pretty sure the same goes for previous policies I have held with Direct Line and Endsleigh. To my knowledge, the insurer generally wipes their hands of your policy, pays the 3rd party claims and then chases you for the money. A while ago there were a few threads on here by people with different insurers bemoaning this.

It makes me question why policies go up after you've been caught! Ok you might be perceived as being more likely to drink drive and therefore having an accident as a result of alcohol... but if they are not going to pay out anyway, where is the risk to the insurer??? Haha
The Admiral group of companies have a very specific Drink and Drugs exclusion clause. I have looked at most of the big insurers policies and no one else has it other than Zurich perhaps.
When I have trawled t'Internet for similar cases I only come across Admiral, Bell, Diamond, Elephant.

Under the Road Traffic Act and with EU court advice such as the Bernaldez case I suspect that other companies could try to enforce it. However I think the most likely outcome is they pay the 3rd party costs and leave it at that.

I would suggest that very few people read the policy T&C's and virtually no one reads the RTA which underpins and dictates the compulsory need for third party insurance.
 

randomer

Member
Just to throw my 2 cents in, I had a similar experience a few years ago. Basically I lent a friend of mine my car, he was driving under the third party extension of his own policy as his car was broken and I was out of town for a bit....we had checked with our insurance companies this was acceptable and it was.

Then he managed to get incredibly drunk and crashed at high speed into a bus stop, a pub wall and somebodies front garden. Unfortunately the roof had to come off to extricate the 2 rear passengers and of course the car was a total write off, needless to say I was less than impressed.

The difficulty came with the insurance, my insurance had to pay out as it is technically the car that is insured and not the driver but because he as drunk they were only liable upto their obligation under the road traffic act. I dont know what the final bill was but it was many thousands and being 3rd party only they didnt want to pay for the car (it wasnt worth much anyway)

Of course they then decided to come after me to recoup the payout. They sent me an indemnity form etc and letters every day! Needless to say I did not sign anything to say I had any intention of paying them, after badgering me for a few months and realising I would not sign anything to make myself liable, they dropped it. The rear passengers claimed compo of course and were paid, but I had no intention of being ruined by all this and told them to see me in court. They left me alone after a while and needless to say I havent paid a penny. This was years ago but I assume even now that signing anything is a bad move. I believe there is a fund floating somewhere that pays insurance companies back for unrecoverable costs that they all pay into to insure themselves if you like so there is the money available to them, but they like to harrass the customer first of course.
 

ayz10

New member
u ok mate is there any chance i can speak to you privatly mate im 23 the same thing has happened as what happened to your son my dad is the first driver and i am the second driver will my dad be effective by the payment if i cant afford to pay for the damages myself as its my dads policy
 

Depressed Dad

Well-known member
u ok mate is there any chance i can speak to you privatly mate im 23 the same thing has happened as what happened to your son my dad is the first driver and i am the second driver will my dad be effective by the payment if i cant afford to pay for the damages myself as its my dads policy
I cannot send you a Private Message because you have not posted enough on the forum.

I cannot say if Admiral will end up pursuing your Dad. There is presumably a risk given the wording in the terms and conditions. It would be grossly unfair but I wouldn't trust Admiral. They do everything they can to increase their profit.

If they pursue me rather than my son you will see me on TV or read about it in the national press.

I really do recommend that you seek some expert advice. Try the Citizens Advice Bureau or you should be able to get a free initial chat with a solicitor. Find one that specialises in Contract and/or insurance law. It is very tricky for the man in the street to take on a big company like Admiral. A fight in the courts could vastly add to the costs if you lose.

Unfortunately we don't get much sympathy due to the Drink Driving element but no doubt you will be living with fall out the criminal conviction for several years. Admiral have no qualms about twisting the knife.

Post a bit more about the circumstances of your incident - as much as you feel comfortable with.
 

Gameto

New member
I cannot send you a Private Message because you have not posted enough on the forum.

I cannot say if Admiral will end up pursuing your Dad. There is presumably a risk given the wording in the terms and conditions. It would be grossly unfair but I wouldn't trust Admiral. They do everything they can to increase their profit.

If they pursue me rather than my son you will see me on TV or read about it in the national press.

I really do recommend that you seek some expert advice. Try the Citizens Advice Bureau or you should be able to get a free initial chat with a solicitor. Find one that specialises in Contract and/or insurance law. It is very tricky for the man in the street to take on a big company like Admiral. A fight in the courts could vastly add to the costs if you lose.

Unfortunately we don't get much sympathy due to the Drink Driving element but no doubt you will be living with fall out the criminal conviction for several years. Admiral have no qualms about twisting the knife.

Post a bit more about the circumstances of your incident - as much as you feel comfortable with.

Hi Depressed Dad I am going through the same as you

I am very keen to talk to you about this

Please let me know

 

Depressed Dad

Well-known member
Hi Depressed Dad I am going through the same as you

I am very keen to talk to you about this

Please let me know

I cannot PM you because you are a new member.
See my previous advice. You really should seek some expert advice. A solicitor should give you an initial free consultation.

Post a bit more about your incident.

The insurer has to make sure you are aware of the Drink/Drugs clause. They will claim that it was pointed out to you in the sales call and it is clearly spelt out in the policy document.
If you don't think it was clear then send in an official complaint. They will most likely turn it down in which case you can then raise it with the Financial Ombudsman Service (FOS)
If you call them they will raise the complaint with the insurer on your behalf. A FOS adjudicator will review the case and if either party is not happy with the outcome then it is referred to the Ombudsman. There is a long, long wait for the Ombudsman to review at the moment because they are inundated with PPI disputes.

Also, if you think the terms and conditions are unfair (which I do) then raise a case with the Financial Services Authority (FSA). The key issue in my opinion is that the consumer signs up to a non-negotiated contract (the policy) which exposes you to unlimited liability and completely undermines the point of the insurance policy. By all means don't cover the damage to your own car and property but they should (in my opinion) pay up for the 3rd party damages and not recoup them.

My biggest issue with Admiral at the moment is that they have not appropriately challenged the 3rd party claim and accept the opinion of people being paid by the claims management company - no independent medical examinations, statements taken, engineer reports, etc. They claim they will save yo money if you sign the indemnity form but in reality they follow there usual lazy default route to settle a claim and just pass the costs on to the consumer.
 

mesteph

New member
Hi, would like to share my experience with admiral and I am looking for some info and advice form anyone who has been through a similar thing.

I was banned for a year and given a £1000 fine at court, it was my first motoring offence. My licence has since been returned and I have just received a letter from Admiral saying the will be recovering the money from me that they have paid to third party claimants. The money they have paid is substantial and I simply cannot afford it. They have also said in the letter "they are under no obligation to negotiate the claims form third parties. However they consider the claims to be deemed reasonable and consistent with the accident". The problem I have with this is that one of the claims in particular (a passenger in the car) is, in my opinion, a claim that should have been more thoroughly scrutinised on their part. I would at least like to know how much they paid out to the claimants and what for. Has anyone had any luck getting this information?

They end the letter by saying if I don't pay the total by the start of next month they they will instruct a solicitor to commence legal proceedings against me. What is my next step in this? I am willing to go to a lawyer but is it worth it? Would be interested to hear what other people have had to go through in similar cases.

Thanks.
 

Depressed Dad

Well-known member
Hi, would like to share my experience with admiral and I am looking for some info and advice form anyone who has been through a similar thing.

I was banned for a year and given a £1000 fine at court, it was my first motoring offence. My licence has since been returned and I have just received a letter from Admiral saying the will be recovering the money from me that they have paid to third party claimants. The money they have paid is substantial and I simply cannot afford it. They have also said in the letter "they are under no obligation to negotiate the claims form third parties. However they consider the claims to be deemed reasonable and consistent with the accident". The problem I have with this is that one of the claims in particular (a passenger in the car) is, in my opinion, a claim that should have been more thoroughly scrutinised on their part. I would at least like to know how much they paid out to the claimants and what for. Has anyone had any luck getting this information?

They end the letter by saying if I don't pay the total by the start of next month they they will instruct a solicitor to commence legal proceedings against me. What is my next step in this? I am willing to go to a lawyer but is it worth it? Would be interested to hear what other people have had to go through in similar cases.

Thanks.
Get some professional advice. Either a solicitor or Citizens Advice Bureau.

If there are third party claims for personal injury it will add a lot to the claim. People genuinely injured are entitled to compensation. Unfortunately soft tissue damage is impossible to prove or disprove so false whiplash claims are easy to get away with.

Your case may be completely different to my son's and you may not have a legal leg to stand on if the accident is clearly your fault and you have caused loads of damage and definitely injured people.


If it is like my son's case then I doubt Admiral have commissioned their own medical examination, engineers report, police reports, etc. on the basis that it adds to the cost. No signed statements from the victims or you, no assessment of damage to your own car perhaps.

They will let people paid by the third party insurer or more likely a claims management company to write the reports. If you pay someone to write a report about personal injury guess what they are likely to write?

Admiral make little effort to challenge the costs and just leave it to incompetent administrators to deal with the case.

If they get in early enough they will make a pre-medical offer for personal injury to keep costs down, i.e. payout based on no evidence at all.

as far as i cam make out the process is no different to the one used for normal claims.

Challenge all the costs being claimed for and get Admiral to explain it. Just ask them for the breakdown and you will see how
You are expected to pay but they will not share the claimants details because of the Data Protection Act.

So they will pursue you for costs they haven't challenged properly for people who remain anonymous.

If you cannot afford to pay they will try to get you to agree a repayment plan. CAB can help with this.
Depending on your financial situation you have a number of options to deal with the debt.

You also have the option to fight them in court but seek legal advice as you may be liable for their legal costs if you lose. I have yet to find someone who went to court but watch this space.

If you think Admiral have not made the drink and drugs clause clear when you took the policy out, or you have other cause for complaint then raise an official complaint through Financial Ombudsman Service (FOS). It takes months for the FOS to process it.
 

Depressed Dad

Well-known member
Got an interesting decision from the Financial Ombudsman today.

Unfortunately they have no sympathy for my son and it leaves it open for Admiral to pursue him for the money - I wish them luck in trying and hope it costs them lots of money.

For me as the policyholder the Ombudsman says that any reference to a claim by me (as the policyholder) should be erased from all databases and NCD restored. Any financial impact of having to pay increased premiums or admin fees since the incident should be refunded by Admiral. The FOS say that there was no claim against the policy. A minor but enjoyable victory as I know Admiral did not like this when the adjudicator had the same findings. The way I read the decision it does not allow Admiral to pursue me, mainly I think because my son signed the indemnity.
 

chris125

Well-known member
Folks

I have been reading this thread with great interest.

When we take out insurance policies we confirm somewhere along the line that we have read, understood and accepted the terms and conditions of the contract. We cannot go back and dispute the contract at a later date when one of the terms and conditions doesn't suit us. As a soon-to-be convicted drink driver myself I understand the heartache of all that it entails and I can also understand that the financial implications can be very severe, particularly in the cases described here. The insurance company in question is perfectly entitled to chase a person for third party costs if that is what it says in their contract. If they didn't have that wording in their contract but still tried to claim from you then you'd be shouting from the rooftops that it wasn't mentioned in their terms and conditions. In this case it clearly was mentioned so all they are doing is exercising their rights under the terms of a deal you agreed to. The Financial Services Ombudsman has clearly backed them up on this one.

Drink driving is a choice we make at a particular moment in time. A silly choice, but still a choice nonetheless. Silly choices in life often come with severe consequences (as I am about to find out on Monday!). Had the offender not committed the offence then this discussion wouldn't be happening. Does it sound harsh the way Admiral are dealing with this? Yes it does, but it is in the terms and conditions of their policy which you were made aware of at the outset. You agreed with it at the time, and think of it this way...........if your own car or home was damaged by a drunk driver and their insurance company refused to pay out to you on the basis that they had no recourse to claim the costs from the offender, what would your reaction be? Would you shrug your shoulders and say "Hey ho, there you go" or would you be feeling a bit annoyed?

The reason the likes of Admiral are competitive with their premiums in the first place is because they don't include all of the features offered by other companies which in turn reduces their potential liability. That's the reality of getting a bargain or a "good deal"...it often has some of the glitz removed but if you stay on the right side of the law then it won't affect you. How do I know this?? I know it because I crashed my car when I was silly and thought it was ok to drink and drive. My car was a Mercedes Benz E350 with a value of £30,000. My insurance company told me to sling my hook and my solicitor, after examining my policy details and every associated law in the land, agreed with them. He told me that this is the kind of thing that can happen when you get the cheapest insurance you can get. He was a thoroughly nice chap and even charged me £250 for the pleasure of telling me too!

If the alternative to your dilemma was no reclaim of costs but you had killed someone through your irresponsible actions......which would you choose?
 

chris125

Well-known member
Depressed Dad....

Why are you jumping to your son's defence on this one. You said earlier you thought he was an idiot (or something similar) so let him take responsibility for his actions. Let him feel the pain. Let him experience the cost of being an idiot. Everyone else has to do it and to blame the insurance company for being unfair is like telling your son that he was a naughty boy.......but the insurance company is naughtier. That is falling just short of condoning his behaviour. And you hope it costs them lots of money to take him to court? Who do you think will ultimately pay for that? It'll be the people who have never made this silly mistake (and yes, those same innocent people will end up paying for my silliness too!).

Make him read this story below and then tell him he should be grateful that money can sort out his own problem....even if it means it will take him years to fix.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2313348/Teenage-drink-driver-Joseph-Salah-Eldin-killed-friend-Norfolk-crash-played-stereo.html
 

Depressed Dad

Well-known member
Chris125 -

I know this topic polarises opinion and I understand that. The Admiral Group are particularly aggressive about this clause and they are the only insurer that I have come across on the internet that pursue people for repayment. I understand that one or two others such as Zurich may also have this clause and other have tried it and dumped it.

When you "sign up" to your insurance contract the main thing that people go on is price. I have learned this lesson the hard way but hopefully won't make the same mistake again.

Couple of points relating to the "you signed up to it so live with it" opinions

1. You sign up to unlimited liability - the claim could amount to millions. You could go out for a few drinks, leave your car at the pub, pick it up the next day (thinking you are OK), have a crash on the way home, get nicked for DD and Admiral take your house off you. Ethically wrong and I suspect that is why most insurers don't exercise their right to pursue for the TP costs.

2. Every accident is caused by someone's negligence. Using your mobile, driving whilst ill or tired, speeding, fiddling with the radio, shouting at the wife and kids, lighting/dropping a cigarette, doing you make up, failing to see a red light, etc, etc. If Admiral want to be "fair" then why not pursue anyone convicted of a driving offence. Using the "you could have killed someone" argument is emotional blackmail and whilst I would be aggrieved if someone close to me was killed by a drunk there is more chance they will be killed due to some other negligence by the other driver. So let's stigmatise smokers and phone users in the same way we stigmatise Drink Drivers. They are all responsible for their actions.

3. My son signed an indemnity that sounded like Admiral would help reduce the cost of the claim. What they did is no different to how they manage any other claim. Cheapest approach, managed by numpties, all left up to TP Claims Management company. They took the others parties engineers report and medical reports and failed to conduct their own independent investigations to confirm the whiplash claims, no police report, no written statements from anybody. Admiral make pre-medical offers to PI claimaints, to keep costs down. Therefore the 10 year old, £1400 minicab that got written off (for the third time as I discovered myself) turned into a £25k claim, all happily paid up by Admiral. If if wasn't a DD case then who cares how much it costs and how incompetent Admiral are? Bit different when you are asked to the £25 yourself.

4. If you are worried about the increase in insurance costs it has little to do with Drunk Drivers. It is due to whiplash claims (UK is the whiplash capital of Europe) and associated solicitor and medical costs, referral fees (which generate Admiral a significant income), Claims management co's. Credit hire agreements, preferred repairer lists, etc

5. If I commit a criminal offence I serve my punishment and after a set period of time my slate is wiped clean under the Rehabilitation of Offenders act. Some of the people pursued by Admiral will be financially ruined for the rest of their life.

I think the fairest way is to have the TP costs paid by the insurer and they don't pay up for damage to your own car. That is how most insurers deal with it.

I recommend everyone reads their policy thoroughly and you also let you named drivers know exactly what is in there.
People using this site should steer well away from Admiral Group, including, Admiral , Bell, Diamond and Elephant.
 

adam21

New member
Hi there, I was wondering if you could update me on what the outcome (if any) has been to your situation with Admiral. I am in exactly the same position and would greatly appreciate any advice you might have.

many thanks

adam








Surprised by this time that they haven't sent you a letter with the amount they want off you!

However they might still be embroiled in a long winded dispute over the final figure.

I can't yet see how they can enforce these terms and conditions which basically means you accept unlimited liability.

Have you signed the indemnity form?

My advice is don't contact them and string it out.

They have given my son a figure and asked how is plans to pay.
I have asked for ALL the details relating to the case and the stuff they have sent me is unacceptable. They cite the Data Protection Act for not supplying the names, addresses and medical reports of the claimants.
So they want my son to pay out to some anonymous people?

They have knocked 10% as a special offer and asked him to send his payslips in and explain his outgoings. Nice try but no chance!

My son has no assets so if they want to pursue him it will be a pointless.
I will see how far they take it. All the way to Court if necessary.

Convicted Driver Insurance

Compare quotes from leading covicted driver insurance specialists in the UK

Get Quotes
 
Top