OH involved in a collision... Not a parody thread!

When we had a car written off we haggled based on autotrader prices, they were happy to match them for same age/mileage/model. Admittedly that was 2007 but as above you should push for what it will cost you to replace.
 
I'm with Fox... :eek:

they ram it down your throat enough when you take out insurance "MARKET VALUE"
You are not trade, and private sales don't count.

they need to provide you enough money to go out and replace the car they are writing off from a business seller.

yeah 100% do not accept that, who's paying out btw your insurance or the 3rd parties?
 
[TW]Fox;29598971 said:
Private sales do count - if thats how you usually purchase cars.
Click to expand...

For valuations I'm sure it was posted on here somewhere that the insurance company use values that must be from a business seller not a private individual?
 
Last edited:
Regardless of whether or not your missus was speeding, the guy misjudged the time needed to get out of her way, its 100% his fault. I believe the highway code sides with her too.

I cant see how she'll lose assuming he sticks to his stupid speeding story.
 
"Oh you were speeding" is such a ballbag excuse, oh so you had time to see me and decide I was speeding but thought **** it I'll pull out anyway :rolleyes:
 
[TW]Fox;29551319 said:
It doesn't sound likely at all and there is no need for dash cam footage, pulling out of a junction into oncoming traffic is fairly clear cut.
Click to expand...

Whilst you are correct that "pulling out of a junction into oncoming traffic is fairly clear cut", proving that this is what actually happened may not be so easy. How would the collision damage differ between:

  • Someone pulling out of a junction in front of you and you going into the back of them (their fault).
  • Someone slowing down in front of you and you going into the back of them because you were driving too close (your fault).
In the absence of witnesses/video evidence then it's basically their word vs yours.

The__Malteser said:
Apparently if you hit the back of a car (rear door pr back bumper) it's the fault of the person behind even if he/she had the right of way. The reasoning behind it is that you had enough time to brake (hypothetically you start braking as soon as you see the front bumper) and the fact that you hit the rear part of the car means you were either distracted (and braked late) or you were going too fast.

Not sure if it is a rule in the UK, but I'm quite sure it is a rule in my country. I don't agree with the rule but I can see the idea behind it.
Click to expand...

I doubt that's a strict rule; there are situations where it's entirely possible to go into the back of someone and it be their fault (e.g. on a motorway/dual-carriageway where they move into your lane just ahead of you and slam on the brakes).

The problem is proving that's what happened.

NoNameNoNumber said:
Well they've written the car off, offered £1095. 07 plate focus estate 140k. Seems a replacement will be much nearer £2k though, is that enough evidence to haggle a better price?? They're saying based on Glasses guide that is all it is worth but to me, she needs more than that to buy a replacement going off what is available on Autotrader.

Other side still haven't admitted liability.

Any advice?
Click to expand...

Never accept the first offer. When my Focus was written off a few years ago they initially offered me ~£600 for it; after a lot of back and forth, providing evidence of prices for local cars, I eventually ended up with double that!

Also, depending on who you are insured with and how you pay, you may find that:

- If you pay monthly then any outstanding monthly payments will be taken off the settlement figure
- They will cancel your policy (they may let you move it to a new car, but there is a time limit with this; in my case Admiral gave me 28 days IIRC)
 
Last edited:
I thought the law had changed, so us general public dont get screwed, i thought they had to base it a avg market value now, IE take 3 car adverts of similar age/condition/miles, and divide it by 3, to get an avg value for your car?
 
Haggisman said:
Whilst you are correct that "pulling out of a junction into oncoming traffic is fairly clear cut", proving that this is what actually happened may not be so easy. How would the collision damage differ between:

  • Someone pulling out of a junction in front of you and you going into the back of them (their fault).
  • Someone slowing down in front of you and you going into the back of them because you were driving too close (your fault).
In the absence of witnesses/video evidence then it's basically their word vs yours.


I doubt that's a strict rule; there are situations where it's entirely possible to go into the back of someone and it be their fault (e.g. on a motorway/dual-carriageway where they move into your lane just ahead of you and slam on the brakes).

The problem is proving that's what happened.



Never accept the first offer. When my Focus was written off a few years ago they initially offered me ~£600 for it; after a lot of back and forth, providing evidence of prices for local cars, I eventually ended up with double that!

Also, depending on who you are insured with and how you pay, you may find that:

- If you pay monthly then any outstanding monthly payments will be taken off the settlement figure
- They will cancel your policy (they may let you move it to a new car, but there is a time limit with this; in my case Admiral gave me 28 days IIRC)
Click to expand...

the guy pulled out from the right, she has damage to her front right and he has damage to his rear left.


She has been offered £1800 now... Should she push for more? Is that still below glass's guide for retail or are they likely to knock her back?

Thanks for all your help chaps :)
 
Since they started with the "Glasses guide values at" line, I don't see why you can't try to insist on the actual Glasses guide value that you can buy at (i.e. retail). They demonstrably recognise Glasses Guide as a legitimate source for values - they just made a mistake with which figure to use last time.
 
cheesyboy said:
Since they started with the "Glasses guide values at" line, I don't see why you can't try to insist on the actual Glasses guide value that you can buy at (i.e. retail). They demonstrably recognise Glasses Guide as a legitimate source for values - they just made a mistake with which figure to use last time.
Click to expand...

I need a definite Glass's retail figure though before I dare tell her to insist too much more.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom