Is there a legal requirement to report an accident to the insurer?

Scenario

- 2 vehicle accident

- each vehicle has less than $1000 damage

- each vehicle has damage roughly equal to insurance deductible

- a police Accident Report was completed

In this scenario the drivers decided to repair their own damages. But are they legally bound to report the accident and damages to the insurer? ...and out of curiosity... does the accident impact the insurance coverage even if no claim was made?

According to the Insurance Act, if you're planning on filing a claim, you have seven days from the time of the incident to report it. If not, no report is required UNLESS the insurance policy says "you must report all damage or collisions." That's rare, though. Check your policy.

6rob51 wrote:

does the accident impact the insurance coverage even if no claim was made?

Unless a driver was charged with an offence, no.

Another example: My car got banged up in a parking lot in two separate hit-and-run incidents (Note to Toronto drivers: STOP HITTING MY CAR!! ) one of which gouged and wrecked the right rear quarter-panel and the other buckled and dislocated the front bumper. No surveillance cameras, no chance of identifying the driver or the suspect vehicle, so I'm paying out of pocket rather than dealing with insurance and having my rates go up for the next six years (did the math, cheaper to pay out of pocket). So, I didn't bother reporting it to my insurance company, as far as putting in a claim goes.

If there is a collision report completed, it will eventually get to the MTO and added onto the drivers licence.

When insurance checks the licence, they will see the collision.

Would not want to say no collisions if asked, as that might be a reason to cancel your insurance for a false statement.

hwybear wrote:

If there is a collision report completed, it will eventually get to the MTO and added onto the drivers licence.

When insurance checks the licence, they will see the collision.

Good point. Forgot about that.

Radar Identified wrote:

According to the Insurance Act, if you're planning on filing a claim, you have seven days from the time of the incident to report it. If not, no report is required UNLESS the insurance policy says "you must report all damage or collisions." That's rare, though. Check your policy.

6rob51 wrote:

does the accident impact the insurance coverage even if no claim was made?

Unless a driver was charged with an offence, no.

Another example: My car got banged up in a parking lot in two separate hit-and-run incidents (Note to Toronto drivers: STOP HITTING MY CAR!! ) one of which gouged and wrecked the right rear quarter-panel and the other buckled and dislocated the front bumper. No surveillance cameras, no chance of identifying the driver or the suspect vehicle, so I'm paying out of pocket rather than dealing with insurance and having my rates go up for the next six years (did the math, cheaper to pay out of pocket). So, I didn't bother reporting it to my insurance company.

R I not sure about that.

If your car is parked and damaged by another driver there is no impact on your insurance record.

My car was scraped from front to back, by a 5 ton, while parked, about $3000 damage.

$100 deductible applied so they paid me $2900.

No claim added to record.(still 7 star)

The only time that there is no effect on your insurance (rates) is when you are out of the car or when something hits you from the air.

Cheers

Viper1

6rob51 wrote:

Is there a legal requirement to report an accident to the insurer?

Scenario

- 2 vehicle accident

- each vehicle has less than $1000 damage

- each vehicle has damage roughly equal to insurance deductible

- a police Accident Report was completed

In this scenario the drivers decided to repair their own damages. But are they legally bound to report the accident and damages to the insurer? ...and out of curiosity... does the accident impact the insurance coverage even if no claim was made?

"a police Accident Report was completed"

Pics etc. are sent to your insurance company same day you report it.

Under $1000 no need to report it.

Cheers

Viper1

viper1 wrote:

The only time that there is no effect on your insurance (rates) is when you are out of the car or when something hits you from the air.

Interesting... they told me "it's a claim so it will affect your rates." Wonder if I got the right info from them.

EDIT: Should clarify - I mentioned the damage to them, so I guess that could count as a report, but never filed a claim.

viper1 wrote:

[The only time that there is no effect on your insurance (rates) is when you are out of the car or when something hits you from the air.

Viper1

just blame RI for that

hwybear wrote:

just blame RI for that

Imagining trying to explain myself to Transport Canada...

Rates will not be affected if you are hit from behind as well, which is 0% responsibility according to insurance accident rules.

I'm just completing a FSCO course right now, and some of the fault rules are infuriating, including this one, because even if idiot driver #1 pulls in front of you in some road rage battle and slams on his breaks and you hit him, he was the one who drove carelessly (dangerously, even) but YOU according to insurance rules as they stand are 100% at fault. I am still so perplexed over this and have asked if a police charge of careless on the other driver could be shown, would the fault determination change. I was told "no".

If there were a way to attach powerpoint files to posts I would post the rules here as I have them on study sheets to memorize as they, imo, make NO SENSE whatsoever that I have to resort to full-on memorization to remember them.

Marquisse wrote:

Rates will not be affected if you are hit from behind as well, which is 0% responsibility according to insurance accident rules.

I'm just completing a FSCO course right now, and some of the fault rules are infuriating, including this one, because even if idiot driver #1 pulls in front of you in some road rage battle and slams on his breaks and you hit him, he was the one who drove carelessly (dangerously, even) but YOU according to insurance rules as they stand are 100% at fault. I am still so perplexed over this and have asked if a police charge of careless on the other driver could be shown, would the fault determination change. I was told "no".

If there were a way to attach powerpoint files to posts I would post the rules here as I have them on study sheets to memorize as they, imo, make NO SENSE whatsoever that I have to resort to full-on memorization to remember them.

your course agrees then.

My wife has been doing that for 20 years.

You could ask and I might tell you a lot of answers.

Cheers

Viper1

Marquisse wrote:

I'm just completing a FSCO course right now, and some of the fault rules are infuriating, including this one, because even if idiot driver #1 pulls in front of you in some road rage battle and slams on his breaks and you hit him, he was the one who drove carelessly (dangerously, even) but YOU according to insurance rules as they stand are 100% at fault.

Yeah, reading the Fault Determination Rules, it has a tendency to make me do this:

Driver "A" could be charged with careless driving and be 0% at fault, whereas driver "B" could be an innocent victim but 100% at fault.

Marquisse, there are a lot of sites out there that allow you to upload files for free. All you have to do is google, find one, and post the link here

I cannot access those storage sites from this computer....

I have used fileqube in the past, they do not require registration for small files.

http://fileqube.com/

If you are still having trouble, PM me to arrange an email so that I can upload the file for you.