Soldato
do they have to offer you a figure you're happy with?Muncher said:
what's stopping them from saying "this is what it's worth, take it or leave it"?
VX Rearended - Maybe written off
- Thread starter Muncher
- Start date
what's stopping them from saying "this is what it's worth, take it or leave it"?
The_Dark_Side said:
Nothing, but then my lawyers will go to trial to get what I want. The costs involved then are way in excess of what the difference my valuation and theirs is that it would be unwise for them not to settle. I've also got a well respected firm of engineers doing the assessment and valuation which insurers generally tend to trust.
Soldato
i suppose the question is, is your idea of a reasonable settlement in the same ball park as the typical payout values?Muncher said:
Soldato
which is far more clear cut IMHO.Will Gill said:thats why I have an agreed value on my policies
if Muncher is being over optimistic with his valuation, and doesn't have an agreed value policy, then he may be disappointed.
it's a buyers market at the moment and even cars like the VX have trouble holding their value.
The_Dark_Side said:
That's not the question, the question is "with the money they are paying me, could I put myself in the same position as I was pre-accident?" They have to indemnify me, anything less than the market value of buying an equivalent and no lesser car is not enough.
Soldato
what figure would you be happy with, and what's the value according to Glass'?Muncher said:
Muncher said:
once they make you a final offer normally the market value, and you are not happy with it. you will have to supply evidence in writing (ie receipts other adverts etc) justifying your figure.
if you cant reach a happy medium then it will go to court. if this means that the hire costs are excessive you may be liable for all or part of them. hope you paid for a seperate insurance to cover them.
when our car was rear ended the accident management company arranged for a similar vehicle and due to the length of time the repairs took they would not pay for the hire vehicle siting excessive charges.
it went to court and ......we paid nearly £1000 of our own money towards the hire costs. (got to love courts......)
as far as salvage you may be able to buy it back but highly unlikely as nearly all insurance companies now have contracts with salvage agents. they may put you in touch with the agent but it wont be for 20% of the value more like 60%.
in all of the cases i know of its a clause that final payment is when they recieve the documents and then it is fetched.
one of our customers owns a bodyshop and when his e39 m5 was damaged he told the insurance it would cost 5k to repair. they still paid him 17k and dragged the car away.
looking at that damage start downloading cars for sale.
Last edited:
The_Dark_Side said:
It looks like £11k would probably buy me another standard VX then you add to that:
Cost of plate transfer and new plates
Geo Cost
Cost of ITG kit
Cost of remap
Cost of full exhaust
Cost of dual xenons
Cost of Nitron racing shocks
Cost of MP3 headunit
Cost of fire extinguisher
Cost of harness bar
Cost of harnesses
Cost of front grille
Cost of SBS brake pads
Cost of uprated hub carriers, new engine mounts and freshly serviced
That is assuming they keep the salvage. So to put me back in my original position it's either cost of standard car + those or enough cash to go out and buy an equivalent car with that done.
Glasses guide is in no way representative of true VX prices, they seemed to go from a starting price and depreciate it like an Astra.... Their figure for dealer prices for example would buy you nothing more than the shabbiest CatC car the last time I looked.
The accident management company won't give me any cars which they can't recover the costs of from the third party insurers.
From my experience and those of plenty of people I know who restore the Elise and VX, 20% is the figure they have been stating, no way would it be 60%.
The third party insurers have already stated salvage will be offered. I'm quite familiar with the process, I used to work for AXA and my dad still does in a claims roll and I'm also a trainee solicitor so familiar with the legal standpoint.
From my experience and those of plenty of people I know who restore the Elise and VX, 20% is the figure they have been stating, no way would it be 60%.
The third party insurers have already stated salvage will be offered. I'm quite familiar with the process, I used to work for AXA and my dad still does in a claims roll and I'm also a trainee solicitor so familiar with the legal standpoint.
Muncher said:
Muncher, if it's a write off the other insurer only has to offer market value on the day regardless. and will only offer more than book price if they consider your car dam near impossible to replace.
if you dont accept book price and go to court the other insurer will drag things out, then you have to accept the ruling(which will be the market price unless you want to take on glasses)and any cost incured from your refusal will be down to you, ive seen it hapen so many time's and it not fair.
if the car is repairable, offer to buy it back as a barganing tool but remember they are not obligated to sell and if the car is written off again you will only be paid upto 80% of the market value and have to inform any new owner of this.
Its a shame it looked a very nice vx in the pics, i hope you get fixed up soon.
regards.
jigger
Last edited:
Associate
From your comments, and especially the one above, its good to see you know what your entitled to, and you seem to be dead set on getting it. Its was by no means your fault, and you should not have to suffer any loss or further inconvenience. Their insurance company should be grovelling and very apologetic that their customer inconvenienced you in the slightest.Muncher said:
I have a very low opinion of insurance companies, they're like vultures, and people shouldn't think that they wont try to squeeze of of what they're there, and obliged to do.
I hope everything gets sorted to your full satisfaction Muncher.
Soldato
had you declared all your mods?Muncher said:
Soldato
Shouldn't matter surely as he's not making a claim on his insurance?The_Dark_Side said:
![[TW]Fox](/data/man-of-honor/2009.png){kind=avatar}
[TW]Fox said:
Like you would complain if you were offered those kind of cars if your car was damaged. Would you really turn around and say, actually no I don't want a Cayman/Exige as my car wasn't in the same class as those 2? Thought not!
Muncher: All well and good listing those mods, but isn't it normally the case that insurers don't pay out for mods, only to put the car back to original spec? If so, you would just be looking at the cost of a similar car and spec, right?
jigger said:
Insurance is not about paying market values, it is about adequately compensating for any loss suffered. In fact as I'm claiming from a third party, it is purely a matter of tort as it doesn't relate to any insurance contract at all.
Adam said:
Of course not, I'd be jumping around the room, and as far as Muncher is concerned, go for it. I just don't understand how the accident management company are expecting the third party insurer to simply pay up without a fight - none of this is Munchers problem if he has paid to cover himself against it but it's still a reasonabe point for discussion and it's also one of the other reasons why our insurance is so high these days - even a minor bump (Not munchers) costs thousands becuase of £500 a day hire car fees
This is only the case when you claim from your own insurer following a fault accident. Your insurance status is irrelevent to the third party insurer - they must, where reasonable, put you in the same position as you were before the accident.
Adam said:
Yes, the value of a similar car and spec, however I'm not aware of any others with the same spec as mine, in fact I am pretty certain there isn't one with the same spec anywhere, let alone available for purchase.
Again, this is not an insurance matter but a legal one. If the third party insurers don't offer a suitable settlement I will sue their driver, the insurers will then be obliged to indemnify their policy holder for the consequences of this as per their contract of insurance with their policy holder.
Regarding mods, they are all declared but this is totally irrelevant as my insurers will only be told of the claim "for information purposes only". It makes no difference if I had a third party only cover and an undeclared saturn five rocket strapped to the back, the third party has to put me back in the position I was pre-accident.
Too many people get put over a barrel with insurers, simply because they let them.
Fox - certainly an Exige is comparable in terms of being the closest available car in terms of driving experience, power and handling. It's part of the risk that insurers take on when they decide to insure someone.
Muncher said:
The Exige-S is not comparable in terms of being the closest driving experience to your car - be honest, it's on another level, isn't it? Leaving aside the insurance issues, for a second, the closest to your car is some sort of Elise. It might well be that the closest Elise to your car is not a car Europa Consultants offer - but this isn't the problem of the third party insurer.
Imagine, for example, you used Bob's Accident Management, but he had only two cars - a Ford Ka 1.3 and a Bugatti Veyron. You reckon you'd get away with the hire costs for a Veyron becuase 'it's the most comparable car they could offer'?
In a court of law, it would come down to whats reasonable and I can't see any court which would disagree that an Elise S was a reasonable hire car for you.
It is, correct. And we all pay for it. My musings are against the system, of course, not you. If I was in your position I'd be arguing the toss to get an M5 or something
