The way you have gone about this, they would have every right to refuse your claim completely.

Cheers,
Peter

Have i read this wrong i take it Bas has damage to a bull bar he has not had it repaired as cil want him to pay for repairs then send the invoice in with a claim and hope they see fit to cover it. If that is the case i would not insure with them either the last claim we had to make was when a guy ran into the side of my wife's car our insurance told us to take to a panel shop she filled out a claim form at the panel shop and paid zero as she was not at fault. If cil want people to pay for repairs up front then how would you get on if it was a really big claim.

Why do I get the feeling we have not been told the "full" story. I am with CIL, have not had to make a claim yet, but have heard nothing but praise for CIL which is why I have gone with them.
regards
Ian

Bas + Eve wrote:

---

We have held insurance with CIL for 5 years without a claim. A wizzbanger hit a car head on and ricocheted into our bull bar. I suggested that on our way home we would call into the BB (bullbar?) manufacturer and have it replaced. CIL want us to pay for the repair  and THEN send the invoice and photos in for assessment!! $3500 and wait however long. NEVER EVER use these ppl. I am straight to KTI next renewal

---

Gday...

I am with CIL and have had two claims in the past five years ... each was absolutely painless and went quickly, smoothly and very much to my satisfaction. I presented the van to a repairer, they took photos, emailed photos to CIL and approval, and claim number, within 24 hours and work commenced without fuss. I only had to pay the excess to CIL by way of online transfer.

May I take the liberty to suggest a possible scenario while we wait for any further clarification from Bas?

A vehicle, "whizzbanger", hit another vehicle and then bounced (ricocheted) into the bull bar. No statement of extent of damage, but most bullbars are of sufficiently strong construction to perhaps be a bit bent from such a minor (?) incident. One would be a bit surprised that the bar was so damaged it warranted complete replacement and also somewhat surprised that the replacement and any labour involved would amount to $3,500. Dare I suggest that if the bull bar was so damaged it required replacement, there would have also been some damage to the panelwork of the vehicle.

Therefore, one might safely assume, that the insurer, when presented with a potential bill of $3,500 for a 'repair' to a bull bar was a little cautious.

One might also assume that Bas was keen to get the bar 'repaired' by the manufacturer 'on the way home' and therefore may have sought permission from the insurer to progress the 'repair' immediately so they could be on their way with minimum of fuss and delay. 

Insurer has therefore quite probably stated the 'repair' can be done but without admission of liability. The statement, we assume from CIL, that Bas would have to "wait however long" after photos and invoice were presented to CIL for them to consider reimbursing him for the payment to 'repair' the bullbar sounds reasonable. 

I stress the above is simply my assessment of reading the limited information from the original post, but I feel it might be close to the circumstances - and therefore I think any insurer would similarly be cautious.

Jest sayin' 

Cheers - John

Bas + Eve - I take it after bagging CIL (incorrectly), you will take the same time to apologise to CIL for your incorrect & disparaging comments on this forum. It appears CIl was good enough to apologise to you.

I was pleased to read all the positive comments re CIL because I cancelled my NRMA today & took out a Comprehensive policy with CIL.

I'd read good reports about CIL through GN - but was over the moon to discover that my premium has been slashed by almost 2/3!! My vehicle is insured for the same amount now, and has the same cover as it had with NRMA, but as of today I'll be paying just 1/3 of the amount NRMA was charging me. Guess who's happy ....