It's academic now, as it's all done and dusted. But need a disagreement about insurance (accident declaration) settling. One day, I borrowed my son's Mk2 and managed to drive into the back of a Passat with it (we were turning left into a main road, I glanced right to ensure no traffic was coming and the Passat suddenly stopped.). The damage to son's car was a new numberplate required and the Passat got a scratched on his bumper about the size of a ten pence piece. He made a fuss about it, said he didn't see why he should suffer, and claimed a bumper respray and a hire car for three days! I am a named driver on my son's insurance and he is a named driver on mine. The claim was made on his insurance and he paid the excess then suffered having to declare it for years, resulting in higher insurance for him. However, when I reinsured my own car, it asked if I had been involved in any accidents and I had to declare it and thus paid more insurance. Is it right and fair that we should both have to suffer insurance penalties? Should it not just have affected son's insurance and not mine? It seems we both had to pay out more in insurance. Friend argues that I shouldn't have declared it on mine and that I was too honest (stupid)! Who is right? Should I have declared it to my insurers too?
I would say you have done things as the insurance company would like you to. You have technically had a crash so should declare it and your son has a claim on his policy so will suffer. Its a crappy situation but at least you can sleep at night knowing everything is declared and above board
