If you'd had the car for a long time it would be easier for the insurers to argue the value (depreciation etc), but as it's a recent purchase I would think/hope you're in a more favourable position. Fingers crossed that the assessor is sympathetic.Ah. That's a shame.
Thank you for the information though.
The car went to the bodyshop this morning. Should have an estimate tomorrow and then wait to hear whether the insurers will accept the costs or dispute them.
Sad but true. No fault claim decision is entirely in the hands of the third party insurer. But a fault claim does not imply a different outcome. They just tot up the cost based on only new parts prices and labour and if it exceeds around 60% of the market valuation, they write it off and elect not to repair it. If there is structural damage it is very likely to be a write-off from the outset given the cost of straightening it. Amazingly if the air bag has gone off, on older vehicles, that can be an immediate total loss due to high cost of buying and setting up the airbag(s).You would think as a no fault the third party insurance company would have to tow the line, apparently not.
It's a disgrace when they offer less than what is available retail same age/condition when you are the innocent third party.
This approach is unlikely to work today. I rejected the first offer arguing retail value of similar cars. They batted them down arguing flaws in my wife's car (normal for a 12 year runaround car) but with full annual servicing and good MOT history and low mileage at 60k miles. They upped their offer around £100, gave me 48 hours to accept or reject the offer - through my wife's insurer, who advised I could reject and make a fault claim and no guarantee that their inspection will lead to a repair decision and I'd have to pay the excess.Demand a like for like replacement car and threaten to use a claims Co re your broken neck etc... they will soon adjust anu offer to limit thier liability.
Ouch.
Realy don't want mine written off.
I don't know how long ago this was. But threatening legal action (in my view) is unlikely to get you to a comfortable place. These insurance companies have teams of in-house lawyers that will cost you plenty in a legal challenge. You would need to argue (a) they have been 'unreasonable' in their offer and decision and (b) the valuation on your car deserves to be higher. Both very difficult and costly to pursue with high risk that you won't win. Threatening legal action is pointless unless you are going to carry it out. 1st rule 9f negotiating is never ever make a threat that you wont carry out and see through. I used to be a professional negotiator in high value deals so I have seen this from the other party too often. I always called their bluff knowing I had some of the finest in-house lawyers at my disposal.dont take any cr4p from the assessor and third party insurers, advise them that if the car is not repaired to your satisfaction you will start a small claims court action against their client, i speak from experience and it worked for me on a car that initially the third party insurer wanted to write off a few years ago
I don't know how long ago this was. But threatening legal action (in my view) is unlikely to get you to a comfortable place. These insurance companies have teams of in-house lawyers that will cost you plenty in a legal challenge. You would need to argue (a) they have been 'unreasonable' in their offer and decision and (b) the valuation on your car deserves to be higher. Both very difficult and costly to pursue with high risk that you won't win. Threatening legal action is pointless unless you are going to carry it out. 1st rule 9f negotiating is never ever make a threat that you wont carry out and see through. I used to be a professional negotiator in high value deals so I have seen this from the other party too often. I always called their bluff knowing I had some of the finest in-house lawyers at my disposal.
Weigh it up carefully is all I can say. They may just call your bluff and then you realise how exoensive it could be and your chance of winning.
Very sorry to hear this, especially so soon into your ownership
My AC was written off with this damage - bootlid, bumper, creased rear wing, exhaust, light fittings. No chassis damage and the wheel & brakes were all fine
View attachment 73628
there are no risks with a small claims court action other than you will lose the court application fee of some £30 to £300 max if you lose the case (depends on value of claim) , in reality most companies will want to avoid such action as it will cost them dearly to defend it, therefore, would want to avoid such action at all costs, the claimant has no legal costs as lawyers/solicitor are not required
This clarification is helpful. But my points about what the claimant needs to show and prove still stand and those ain't easy to prove - even in a small claims court. The insurer will simplify state book values which is the accepted norm in the motor trade to show they have been fair and reasonable in their decision and offer.there are no risks with a small claims court action other than you will lose the court application fee of some £30 to £300 max if you lose the case (depends on value of claim) , in reality most companies will want to avoid such action as it will cost them dearly to defend it, therefore, would want to avoid such action at all costs, the claimant has no legal costs as lawyers/solicitor are not required
Ah. That's a shame.
Thank you for the information though.
The car went to the bodyshop this morning. Should have an estimate tomorrow and then wait to hear whether the insurers will accept the costs or dispute them.
Anorak spot, is that a 155 rear quarter in the background?
This clarification is helpful. But my points about what the claimant needs to show and prove still stand and those ain't easy to prove - even in a small claims court. The insurer will simplify state book values which is the accepted norm in the motor trade to show they have been fair and reasonable in their decision and offer.
The option to reject a write off decision is always present. It can be turned into a fault claim or a repair funded out of pocket after claiming the wreck at a reduced value. No comment on subjective reasons such as cannot be 4rsed. Purely subjective and not factual. They simply state the facts of uneconomical repairs quoting repair costs versus book value. Or they condemn it for "structural damage'.
Arguing with them for a change of outcome is unlikely to work and your personal involvement will be a fault claim or take a reduced scrap value, keep the wreck (now with Cat X status) and pay out of pocket for repairs.
I too speak from experience and am not spouting out.
This clarification is helpful. But my points about what the claimant needs to show and prove still stand and those ain't easy to prove - even in a small claims court. The insurer will simplify state book values which is the accepted norm in the motor trade to show they have been fair and reasonable in their decision and offer.