Back

 So Apparently Horses Think The M1 Is A Paddock - Sorry for people with shit internet, large files.  

Page 3 of 3
Jump to page
Post Topic
Innuendo
Post #71

QUOTE (timmy_o @ Mar 1 2011, 12:42 PM) *
So apparently because the paddock the horse is meant to be in doesn't attach to the M1, I am at fault and have to pay excess? This doesn't seem right to me. The horse is owned by a person whom they are aware of the owner. Therefore it is the owners responsibilty to keep the horse within their own property not roaming around the M1? It's not my fault their fence is damaged. Off to the solicitor I go.


That's absolute bullshit. I have owned horses for a while now, and all my horses have 3rd party insurence for this exact reason. As ol'mate Tony says "shit happens" especially with such an unpredictable animal.
QUOTE (timmy_o @ Mar 1 2011, 03:18 PM) *
The owner has admitted that the two horses are hers. And the fence was broken that's why the horse got out. Just had the council send me 57 pages of stuff, it says that the owner is responsible to have it refrained on her property. That she has failed to do so. Therefore it is her issue.


Definately the case. You are lucky she admited ownership though, just like dogs microchips often trace back to a "old owner" and mysteriously they never have any record of selling or can tell you where the animal went after being sold :jerkit:.




You are one very lucky person to have survived that, it's a shame the horse didn't because the owner seemingly couldn't maintain her fence.

slo_32
Post #72

holy crap man.

i was just looking at this car the other day, its in a yard across the road from my work. last thing i expected was that it hit a horse!!

good to hear your ok. hopefully you recover quickly and fully. :jerkit:

176OES
Post #73

QUOTE (timmy_o @ Mar 2 2011, 07:15 AM) *
To above two. I'll go through the PDS today see what I can scrub up. I've gone through the Council legislation which it clearly states in there she has committed an offence. Sent this through to the insurance company they said that it doesn't matter as I need to prove the horse owner was negligent? I still fail to understand this also, how being negligent or not overrides the law? And yes, I've escalated it to the supervisor who has so far been helpful. She said to give her a couple of days. As I said before I don't want to be an asshole, I just want to claim my insurance for my car and my health so I am not out of pocket and I will be satisified. But if I have to go through the drawn out process of the courts, I'll be claiming full, everything which I am entitled to now, but I don't see the need. I just want to continue as per normal.


Ok,

a few points that will assist you:

One - Your PDS will outline the timeframes your insurer is meant to respond in once a complaint is escalated, DO NOT go chasing them up. If they fall outside of the timeframes they have supplied within their contract to you, you have them over a barrel, they must meet your (reasonable) demands.

Two - You WILL NOT need to take your insurer to court if they are an Australian based company which is bound by the Financial Services Reform Act (FSRA), basically, once you have exhausted the internal dispute resolution (IDR) process with the insurer, you are entitled to raise your complaint with the Financial Ombudsman Service. The FOS is a free consumer advocate service and their decisions are binding when they make a ruling on an outcome with yourself and your insurer.

timmy_o
Post #74

A new xxxxgold. Mate thanks for your help :bowrofl:

  • Member Login

    If you have a BoostCruising account enter your user name and password into the yellow box.

    Alternatively, you can quickly login with Facebook.

    If you don't have an account create one below.

    Create Account
  • Forgotten your password?
  • Login with Facebook

    Login using your Facebook account!

Page 3 of 3
Jump to page
THIS TOPIC HAS BEEN ARCHIVED
2 User(s) are reading this topic (2 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members:
Loading...
x