Bike Shop Charging Service Charge for Insurrance Claims

[denis]

Yo Bros,

 

Need some comments on this issue.

 

Anybody ever done insurrance claim through bike shop?

 

Is it a common pratice for bike shop to charge "service charge" for administration work for insurrance claim?

 

[kennethy]

i only had one experience on the matter. and in that case, the bike shop did charge me a small amount.

 

however, having said so, i believe it is still worth it cos they bear the repair cost for me first and i only have to pay back the amount after the other side pay out.

[drfunk]

i had an experience with a bike shop that did my insurance claim for me, pretty simple actually and saved me alot of trouble. they did my bike up for me, hired a lawyer for me and help me fight the case. if i lose the case i do not need to pay any lawyer fee, but if i win, they will just take 15% of the compensation i receive. pretty worth it imo.

[denis]

well...

 

i'm curious because i just done my accident claim through FUTURE SCOOTERING.

 

My encounter wasn't exactily pleasant in the sense that, after the claim was settled, i was required to sign an acknowledgement letter ( by FUTURE SCOOTERING, of the repairs that are done to the bike)

 

Attached behind the acknowlegement letter, are list of coresspondances between the FUTURE SCOOTERING & the other party's insurrance company. In it, are also copies of the claim amount. On the list of the claims, includes claims for LOSS OF USE (of motorcycle), amounting to $90 (from initial claim of $150)

 

wat disgust me was, they feign ignorance about this claim amount of $90. (since loss of use is by me, not the bikeshop)

 

Upon further enquiry on this issue, they say this amount is suppose to be for them, to offset the aministration service charge (since they are doing claim).

 

Since its a small amount, i simply sign the acknowlegement letter.

 

But wat disgust me was this is not ethical at all of them to claim the "LOSS OF USE by rider", for themselves, as administration charges, epecially since the repair works (are done by them) and the claim amount (are fully towards their account) already justified their "efforts".

 

Not only is this not ethical, they are also not upfront about their administration charges, as they had NOT indicated this HIDDEN COST, PRIOR to commencing the claims.

 

NOW i'm tempt whether to lodge a complaint to CASE to highlight on their less than ethical and dishonest conduct.

[BlackBandit]

Is there any other charges aside from the loss of use?? If not, I find it reasonable since they are already claiming on your behalf and that is tantamount to their commission.

 

I have done 2 claims before and both times, the bike shop will advance the repairs. In return, they will take 10-15% of my personal injury claim, which usually amounts to about $200+. No worries for me since the bikes are done up nicely & I get some "pocket" money for personal injury.

 

But do note that bike shops will only do repairs for you in advance if you're less liable in the accident. If you're the culprit, most likely you have to foot the bill in part or full before they proceed with the repairs. This is to safeguard themselves in case you lose the case and the compensation amount/quantum is not sufficient to cover the advance repairs.

[kennethy]

i guess the threadstarter is not so into the 'service charge' but the shop not being transparent and upfront with they chargers...

[denis]

Is there any other charges aside from the loss of use?? If not, I find it reasonable since they are already claiming on your behalf and that is tantamount to their commission.

 

dun quite get what u meant by "any other charges" aside from the loss of use. They did claim for "labour charge" thou, if that's wat u meant.

[denis]

i guess the threadstarter is not so into the 'service charge' but the shop not being transparent and upfront with they chargers...

 

indeed, he who understand me best, kennethy

[eyz]

labour charge is a whole different item. it is the charges the charged by the mechanic for repairing ya bike. surely ya are not expecting them to overstate the labour charge so as to include the admin fees, do ya? if ya're expecting them to do so, wudn't them be not transparent either? actually, imho, 90$ for admin fees is rather reasonable. but i also do understand ya point tat they shudn't have used the claim for loss of use of motorbikes for their admin fees. or mayb in order to save ya the hassle of forking out the money for the admin fees, they jus covered the admin fees under 1 of the item in the claim?

[denis]

labour charge is a whole different item. it is the charges the charged by the mechanic for repairing ya bike. surely ya are not expecting them to overstate the labour charge so as to include the admin fees, do ya? if ya're expecting them to do so, wudn't them be not transparent either? actually, imho, 90$ for admin fees is rather reasonable. but i also do understand ya point tat they shudn't have used the claim for loss of use of motorbikes for their admin fees. or mayb in order to save ya the hassle of forking out the money for the admin fees, they jus covered the admin fees under 1 of the item in the claim?

 

 

well...dat's y i said, by doing so, its not being ethical and transparent. Its about highlighting before proceeding the claim that there will be a cost involved, and not to act as if nothing has happened, and pray that the customer dun see this "loss of use" claim.

 

By acting blur makes them less than ethical.

 

The whole idea of this thread is to discuss about whether is this act ethical, rather then about their workmanship, services, prices etc. Workmanship, services, prices are rather debatetable, given the benefit of doubts. But the act of claiming "loss of use" as administration charge, WITHOUT, telling the customer, and by ACTING BLUR about it when enquired, left no room for doubts.