2 car insurance claims - car written off 2nd time before 1st repairsdone


P

paulfoel

Had an accident in car which resulted in some damage to the side of
the car. The liability for this is currently disputed.

Had some hassle with the insurance company where they tried to force
me to use their recommended repairer. Ended up they made a cash
settlement (minus excess and minus VAT which they said they'd pay upon
production of an invoice) to pay for the repairs.

They offered me £1250 for repairs, my quote was £1300, excess was £500
(yeh, I know!!), so they gave me £563 with the promise of £186 when I
produced a VAT invoice.

Car was booked into the garage to be done (I was going to be about £50
out of pocket with the cash settllement being less than the quote),
when my wife was unfortunate enough to have an accident.

Subsequently, the car has been deemed a total loss with the insurance
company making a cash settlement.

So now I've still got this £563. I will have to pay the garage I had
the car booked in with some out of pocket expenses because they have
to return the parts they'd already ordered but its bot going to be
that much.

Of course, I wont be able to get a VAT receipt for the repairs now
because they'll never happen, but theoretically if the disputed claim
comes out my way, I could get my excess of £500 back !!!

The insurance companys engineer who inspected the car would have seen
the side damage hadnt been repaired yet (Damage to car causing write
off was rear shunt so all the damage was to front end not side).

What normally happens in this case? Where do I stand legally? As far
as the insurance company is concerned is the first claim closed since
they settled by cash? Wont they find it strange that I never claimed
the VAT?

Not really in my interest to pay the money back voluntarily in an
attempt to save my no claims from the 1st claim because the 3rd party
will have claimed for damage to their vehicle anyway. So regardless of
whether I add to this claim its all going to depend on how liability
is decided.
 
Ad

Advertisements

T

The Real Doctor

Had an accident in car which resulted in some damage to the side of
the car. The liability for this is currently disputed.
Subsequently, the car has been deemed a total loss with the insurance
company making a cash settlement.
What normally happens in this case? Where do I stand legally? As far
as the insurance company is concerned is the first claim closed since
they settled by cash? Wont they find it strange that I never claimed
the VAT?
Have you had the cash settlement for the write-off? I'd have expected
the chap who inspected it to report ots damaged condition and for the
write-off value to be reduced to reflect that.

Ian
 
P

paulfoel

Have you had the cash settlement for the write-off? I'd have expected
the chap who inspected it to report ots damaged condition and for the
write-off value to be reduced to reflect that.

Ian
Not yet, but they've made the offer. No reduction was made....
 
P

paulfoel

How do you know? Have you seen a copy of the engineer's report?
I'm assuming it hasnt otherwise I've had a mega bargain when I bought
the car 3 months ago....
 
P

peterwn

....

The over arching consideration is that you should not be paid out more
than the car was worth at the time of the second accident assuming the
first accident had never happened. Since you made two claims, it is
similarly not unreasonable to have to meet the 500 pound excess for
each accident. Therefore the correct payout would be the value of the
car (assuming it was undamaged) at the time of the second accident
less what was paid after the first accident to cover the undone
repairs less 1000 pounds excesses.

I am pretty well certain a court would uphold his approach under the
principles of equity.
 
Ad

Advertisements

N

Norman Wells

peterwn said:
...

The over arching consideration is that you should not be paid out more
than the car was worth at the time of the second accident assuming the
first accident had never happened. Since you made two claims, it is
similarly not unreasonable to have to meet the 500 pound excess for
each accident. Therefore the correct payout would be the value of the
car (assuming it was undamaged) at the time of the second accident
less what was paid after the first accident to cover the undone
repairs less 1000 pounds excesses.

I am pretty well certain a court would uphold his approach under the
principles of equity.
The insurance company are the experts, though. If they say a car is worth
so much, it is. Provided the OP hasn't made any false statements, why
should he volunteer to have his payment reduced?
 
P

paulfoel

The insurance company are the experts, though.  If they say a car is worth
so much, it is.  Provided the OP hasn't made any false statements, why
should he volunteer to have his payment reduced?
And I did remind the insurance company that the damage to the side of
the vehicle was caused by the previous claim not the current one. I
wanted to ensure the garage only quoted for the new damage since I was
hoping the car would not be a total loss.
 
Ad

Advertisements

F

Fergus O'Rourke

[snip]
The insurance company are the experts, though. If they say a car is worth
so much, it is.
Context is all, but this is a very dangerous idea to express !
 

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments. After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.

Ask a Question

Top