Not at Fault Accidents Being Reported As at Fault Accidents

[BlockO]

I had a discussion with another agent today, and I mentioned that I've noticed a lot more drivers with not at fault accidents that are showing up as at faults after reports are run. He told me he's noticed the same thing too.

What causes these inaccuracies?

I ruled out clerical errors, because I've never once seen an at fault accident incorrectly reported as a not at fault.

So I'm wondering is the discrepancy caused by the MVR or CLUE (or both)?

My agent friend also brought up that some companies are requiring drivers to prove they're not at fault on any accident, regardless of what the report says....

Curious to hear other agents chime in on this......

 

[indienoise]

I'm assuming it's the old "determination of fault occurs between the parties and their carriers" line that you hear adjusters use...only adapted by underwriters. Carriers all handle this differently. Some default to at fault but let you change fault with no proof. Some carriers take move at their word. Others rate as at fault unless you prove otherwise. I have one carrier that uses accidents as a litmus test for truthfulness/disclosure. As long as the accident is declared before reports are run, they take the insured at their word, unless mvr and clue CLEARLY show otherwise. Any accident that is not declared, however, requires a copy of accident report if the policy is issued.
My take is this is one way carriers are addressing the current environment of material misrepresentation and high loss ratios.