Urgent Insurance advice - Carpark smash
Discussion
red_slr said:
Personally I would say 90% of that could be sorted out by a good detailer, wet sanding, 3 full days for a skilled detailer would probably cost a heck of a lot less than a full respray also.
The pin holes and debris under the paint not really possible but minor enough IMHO.
The rest of it, should be possible to fix without any more paint.
The lip on the bonnet might also be a pain to sort. If the detailer knows a skilled smart repair guy you might be able to sort a few more of the issues at the same time.
Also, if it makes you feel any better there are almost always signs of a respray no matter how good the body shop is. There are shops who will do the perfect job but you are looking at £10k+.
I think a detailer will get the majority looking nice, I really do. If i'm honest though, i'm not comfortable for a car which is less than a year old to have paint which has been sanded and polished to an inch of it's life. In a years time any scratch, swirl or mark needing a polish is going to be very hard to remove without burning through. It feels like a cover up to me. The pin holes and debris under the paint not really possible but minor enough IMHO.
The rest of it, should be possible to fix without any more paint.
The lip on the bonnet might also be a pain to sort. If the detailer knows a skilled smart repair guy you might be able to sort a few more of the issues at the same time.
Also, if it makes you feel any better there are almost always signs of a respray no matter how good the body shop is. There are shops who will do the perfect job but you are looking at £10k+.
Bit of an update.
I've still not had a response, per se. They needed to have an internal discussion with the original repairers around who will be paying for the new work, in essence the insurance company does not want to pay out to for two repairers. Not sure how this is my issue, but there you go. But it sounds like higher level conversations are starting to happen.
I've pretty much tagged one chap in the department i'm dealing with - He's the only one who calls back when he says he will and actually makes things happen, although he has very little authority. Speaking with anyone higher up has been impossible.
I gave them a week to decide with whats gong on, otherwise I would forward an invoice for my costs. Just trying to push a fast resolution, if anything. Deadline has been and gone so I'll be submitting my costs this weekend, I don't feel like I have any other choice and I don't expect them to pay up; but it's certainly something for them to digest. It's pushing £1k so far. 40 hours, 330 mile and about 500 minutes talk time. Stupid.
The news today is that the insurance company internal engineers and original repairers are disputing the work required as highlighted by the bodyshop and independent engineer they organised. They don't believe the car needs a full respray and want to come view the car for inspection. I'm uncomfortable with this as I can't help but feel they want to come and nit pick to reduce costs. 1) We have a professional independent report, of their instruction. 2) The engineer works for the insurance company, conflict of interest and bias. 3) this is going to delay things once again. 4) Putting restrictions in place on work allowed to be done will not only make it even harder to find a willing bodyshop, but will only increase the risk of further issues; which may I add will be my responsibility being my bodyshop of choice.
I'm feeling telling them no and they should honour the independent report, at a push i'll get my own report. It all feels too little, too late and they should now be considering how this is affecting me. Being blunt, f
k their costs; I've been amicable and they've had their chances. Just fix my bloody car to how it was before, give me the funds to do so myself or write it off.
I can see this going to court.
I've still not had a response, per se. They needed to have an internal discussion with the original repairers around who will be paying for the new work, in essence the insurance company does not want to pay out to for two repairers. Not sure how this is my issue, but there you go. But it sounds like higher level conversations are starting to happen.
I've pretty much tagged one chap in the department i'm dealing with - He's the only one who calls back when he says he will and actually makes things happen, although he has very little authority. Speaking with anyone higher up has been impossible.
I gave them a week to decide with whats gong on, otherwise I would forward an invoice for my costs. Just trying to push a fast resolution, if anything. Deadline has been and gone so I'll be submitting my costs this weekend, I don't feel like I have any other choice and I don't expect them to pay up; but it's certainly something for them to digest. It's pushing £1k so far. 40 hours, 330 mile and about 500 minutes talk time. Stupid.
The news today is that the insurance company internal engineers and original repairers are disputing the work required as highlighted by the bodyshop and independent engineer they organised. They don't believe the car needs a full respray and want to come view the car for inspection. I'm uncomfortable with this as I can't help but feel they want to come and nit pick to reduce costs. 1) We have a professional independent report, of their instruction. 2) The engineer works for the insurance company, conflict of interest and bias. 3) this is going to delay things once again. 4) Putting restrictions in place on work allowed to be done will not only make it even harder to find a willing bodyshop, but will only increase the risk of further issues; which may I add will be my responsibility being my bodyshop of choice.
I'm feeling telling them no and they should honour the independent report, at a push i'll get my own report. It all feels too little, too late and they should now be considering how this is affecting me. Being blunt, f
k their costs; I've been amicable and they've had their chances. Just fix my bloody car to how it was before, give me the funds to do so myself or write it off.I can see this going to court.
EnthusiastOwned said:
I think a detailer will get the majority looking nice, I really do. If i'm honest though, i'm not comfortable for a car which is less than a year old to have paint which has been sanded and polished to an inch of it's life. In a years time any scratch, swirl or mark needing a polish is going to be very hard to remove without burning through. It feels like a cover up to me.
In all honesty, burning through the paint is a lot harder than you may expect. I did a detailing training day and it took AGES with the polisher to burn through, and we were trying!But agree, the job should be done to a good standard, and then finished with a light polish by a detailer if you want it perfect.
Blue Oval84 said:
In all honesty, burning through the paint is a lot harder than you may expect. I did a detailing training day and it took AGES with the polisher to burn through, and we were trying!
But agree, the job should be done to a good standard, and then finished with a light polish by a detailer if you want it perfect.
Yeah it is, I've done a course too. Modern paint is very thin compared to an old banger though. With the amount of correction required I have my reservations. I'm with you the job should be done to a good standard. But agree, the job should be done to a good standard, and then finished with a light polish by a detailer if you want it perfect.
Ok, now i'm pissed.
After being told countless times over the past few weeks by the claim department there is nothing they can do, with no further information; they are awaiting their internal engineers to make a decision. I've been led to believe this engineer and the original repairer are disputing the independent report and bodyshop quote and want to view the car to verify the work required themselves. I've been told they want to reduce the amount of work (I believe costs).
I've been waiting for a phone call from the internal engineers for over a week so I can discuss, with the belief this engineer holds the power to make a decision and I could put forward my case.
I finally got that phone call this morning and the internal engineer knows very little, he works from home, he hasn't really seen the report and has only been told by the claims department to come view the car to verify, where he'll then pass on his report to the original repairers who may then want to come view themselves. He works direct for the insurers and I explained there is a huge conflict of interest here and they should go by the independent report, that's what it's for. If required I'll get a second independent report. He said no problem and that he'll report back to the claims department.
What. The. fk. I can't tell if they are purposefully wasting my time or their processes are just long winded without the customer in mind.
At the same time my claim handler is out of office this week and only back on Friday. I can't speak with anyone else. Are they taking the piss?
I'm ready to put in a a Section 152 (Road Traffic Act 1988) notice and go small claims court. Any advice is welcome.
After being told countless times over the past few weeks by the claim department there is nothing they can do, with no further information; they are awaiting their internal engineers to make a decision. I've been led to believe this engineer and the original repairer are disputing the independent report and bodyshop quote and want to view the car to verify the work required themselves. I've been told they want to reduce the amount of work (I believe costs).
I've been waiting for a phone call from the internal engineers for over a week so I can discuss, with the belief this engineer holds the power to make a decision and I could put forward my case.
I finally got that phone call this morning and the internal engineer knows very little, he works from home, he hasn't really seen the report and has only been told by the claims department to come view the car to verify, where he'll then pass on his report to the original repairers who may then want to come view themselves. He works direct for the insurers and I explained there is a huge conflict of interest here and they should go by the independent report, that's what it's for. If required I'll get a second independent report. He said no problem and that he'll report back to the claims department.
What. The. f
k. I can't tell if they are purposefully wasting my time or their processes are just long winded without the customer in mind.At the same time my claim handler is out of office this week and only back on Friday. I can't speak with anyone else. Are they taking the piss?
I'm ready to put in a a Section 152 (Road Traffic Act 1988) notice and go small claims court. Any advice is welcome.
EnthusiastOwned said:
I'm ready to put in a a Section 152 (Road Traffic Act 1988) notice and go small claims court. Any advice is welcome.
Have your raised a formal complaint to the insurer?If so, and you are unsatisfied, then try:
A short, polite, factual email to the CEO outlining the points and crucially, the rectification that you seek
Then ombudsman.
Then court.
TazLondon said:
They are trying to minimise their costs. Insurers don't give a st about their customers.
Exactly this. When I once needed an 'engineer' to view my car after it had been repaired, to a pretty st about their customers.tty standard the guy flounced off after I challenged him on the paint colour. He claimed the car was at least three different shades of white, strangely as it was all original. I ended up getting a detailer to bring it up to scratch. Sad to say unless you deal with a small and specialist broker insurance companies are just scumbags.
EnthusiastOwned said:
Ok, now i'm pissed.
After being told countless times over the past few weeks by the claim department there is nothing they can do, with no further information; they are awaiting their internal engineers to make a decision. I've been led to believe this engineer and the original repairer are disputing the independent report and bodyshop quote and want to view the car to verify the work required themselves. I've been told they want to reduce the amount of work (I believe costs).
I've been waiting for a phone call from the internal engineers for over a week so I can discuss, with the belief this engineer holds the power to make a decision and I could put forward my case.
I finally got that phone call this morning and the internal engineer knows very little, he works from home, he hasn't really seen the report and has only been told by the claims department to come view the car to verify, where he'll then pass on his report to the original repairers who may then want to come view themselves. He works direct for the insurers and I explained there is a huge conflict of interest here and they should go by the independent report, that's what it's for. If required I'll get a second independent report. He said no problem and that he'll report back to the claims department.
What. The. fk. I can't tell if they are purposefully wasting my time or their processes are just long winded without the customer in mind.
At the same time my claim handler is out of office this week and only back on Friday. I can't speak with anyone else. Are they taking the piss?
I'm ready to put in a a Section 152 (Road Traffic Act 1988) notice and go small claims court. Any advice is welcome.
Hi Rich, this is about par for the course I'm afraid. You've done the right thing in insisting it's an independent engineer that provides a "ruling" not surprised the insurers want to use one of their own employees. After being told countless times over the past few weeks by the claim department there is nothing they can do, with no further information; they are awaiting their internal engineers to make a decision. I've been led to believe this engineer and the original repairer are disputing the independent report and bodyshop quote and want to view the car to verify the work required themselves. I've been told they want to reduce the amount of work (I believe costs).
I've been waiting for a phone call from the internal engineers for over a week so I can discuss, with the belief this engineer holds the power to make a decision and I could put forward my case.
I finally got that phone call this morning and the internal engineer knows very little, he works from home, he hasn't really seen the report and has only been told by the claims department to come view the car to verify, where he'll then pass on his report to the original repairers who may then want to come view themselves. He works direct for the insurers and I explained there is a huge conflict of interest here and they should go by the independent report, that's what it's for. If required I'll get a second independent report. He said no problem and that he'll report back to the claims department.
What. The. f
k. I can't tell if they are purposefully wasting my time or their processes are just long winded without the customer in mind.At the same time my claim handler is out of office this week and only back on Friday. I can't speak with anyone else. Are they taking the piss?
I'm ready to put in a a Section 152 (Road Traffic Act 1988) notice and go small claims court. Any advice is welcome.
They'll always try and penny pinch especially where the customer isn't one of their own. Usual complaints rules don't apply.
If I were you I would contact the third party who actually caused the damage and threaten them personally with court proceedings (for the rectification work) explaining why you are contacting them and that you are not prepared to deal with their insurer any more as they are leading you a merry dance. They will be outraged (hopefully) and will be straight on to their insurer. Who will in turn get on to you. Try it, we use it often as a tactic to get resolution. If you don't get anywhere issue a money claim against the third party who will bring their insurers in to it. I think it's important that the courts get to grips with shoddy insurance practice and punish accordingly. What you are claiming for is not unreasonable just "a decent repair please". Often insurers are raised as the shining light and the resolution to all our problems when the reality is somewhat different. We see this a lot. They are purely commercial enterprises interested in their own bottom line.
I always advise against passing the responsibility over to a third party insurer for the reasons you've experienced, not least the lack of support in case things go awry, and not necessarily because I may have a vested interest in doing the opposite of what the insurers might like you, me and everybody else to do.
ging84 said:
You can call yours, but if there is no liability dispute then it is often quicker and easier to deal with the 3rd parties insurer as they will be keen to get it settled quickly to avoid inflated costs of an accident management company.
You should call yours at some point to let them know, even if the 3rd party have agreed to handle the claim themselves.
Just quoting this for old times sake. You should call yours at some point to let them know, even if the 3rd party have agreed to handle the claim themselves.
Sorry...
Edited by anniesdad on Wednesday 5th October 13:42
By the way Rich I'm right in saying that the car was repaired by Fix Auto's a non-Seat approved repairer? Correct?...
You'll be suing for a full respray (whatever the estimate of repair cost is that you have obtained), your time, replacement hire whilst the car is being resprayed and any other direct expenses you can think of. I'd get together an estimate of that cost by getting an online quote off a local reputable hire company (make sure you get a quote to fully protect yourself with all the addons to reduce your excess liability to £zero).
I really don't think the insurers will want this going to court but without the threat or receipt of an actual court summons I'm afraid they will lead you a merry dance.
You'll be suing for a full respray (whatever the estimate of repair cost is that you have obtained), your time, replacement hire whilst the car is being resprayed and any other direct expenses you can think of. I'd get together an estimate of that cost by getting an online quote off a local reputable hire company (make sure you get a quote to fully protect yourself with all the addons to reduce your excess liability to £zero).
I really don't think the insurers will want this going to court but without the threat or receipt of an actual court summons I'm afraid they will lead you a merry dance.
Edited by anniesdad on Wednesday 5th October 14:11
^ listen to this man.
You need to get stty with them now. Decline their offer to send yet another (biased) assessor. Tell them they have 24 hours to confirm they will be paying you the total (as above) to get it sorted or you will be starting legal proceedings. Remind them this accident was their clients accident, not yours.
You need to get s
tty with them now. Decline their offer to send yet another (biased) assessor. Tell them they have 24 hours to confirm they will be paying you the total (as above) to get it sorted or you will be starting legal proceedings. Remind them this accident was their clients accident, not yours.As an aside a little story if I may of a client who was labelled as non-genuine by the third party insurance company, them suggesting that the damage to the rear of his car was not consistent with the accident circumstances. Effectively saying he wanted to claim for damage that their client hadn't done. I spoke personally to the third party who in her own words "did not believe she had caused that damage", I believe it was this throw away comment/assertion that set off a chain off events that led to the insurers stance. The at-fault insurers instructed an "independent" forensic engineer to assess both vehicles and he came to the "conclusion" that the accident had not happened in the manner it was described and the damage was therefore inconsistent. I never once thought our client was being anything other than genuine.
Our client could not understand why his losses were not being paid by the other side? This is an elderly professional man, a Doctor and a man who is in a position of standing in his local area and he was adamant that his well maintained car was undamaged before the accident. His own insurers paid for the repairs to be done to his vehicle but decided that they did not want to pursue the recovery of their vehicle repair losses (c.£4k) and instructed legal advisers to recover these on their behalf. These legal advisers decided not to take the case on, preferring instead to go with the forensic experts evidence. So the insurers put it down as a "non-recovery" case aka fault claim. However to attempt to appease the client they offered to give him back the policy excess that he had paid upon repair completion as a gesture of goodwill for the trouble that he had had in dealing with his insurers and their appointed representatives.
At this point the client could have left it, however he was respectful of our involvement and time spent on his case, we still had a financial interest in the case (we had provided him with a car similar to his own whilst his own car was off the road) and frankly he wanted to clear his name. As such we helped facilitate suitable lawyers for him and they were given instructions to issue proceedings immediately against the other party in relation to the recovery of his hire charges but also the £4k vehicle damage losses incurred by his insurers. All he had was his word against the forensic evidence. This was just under 8 weeks ago. Our client had a call earlier today to confirm that the solicitors representing the other side have agreed with their insurer principal to pay all damages back in full. Vindicating him and getting his insurers paid back the money that they had otherwise written off. To say I was delighted for the client was an understatement as this accident happened quite some time ago and you can imagine the upset this has caused him.
I guess the point of me writing this is that the moral of the story...sometimes you've just got to pull the gloves off.
Our client could not understand why his losses were not being paid by the other side? This is an elderly professional man, a Doctor and a man who is in a position of standing in his local area and he was adamant that his well maintained car was undamaged before the accident. His own insurers paid for the repairs to be done to his vehicle but decided that they did not want to pursue the recovery of their vehicle repair losses (c.£4k) and instructed legal advisers to recover these on their behalf. These legal advisers decided not to take the case on, preferring instead to go with the forensic experts evidence. So the insurers put it down as a "non-recovery" case aka fault claim. However to attempt to appease the client they offered to give him back the policy excess that he had paid upon repair completion as a gesture of goodwill for the trouble that he had had in dealing with his insurers and their appointed representatives.
At this point the client could have left it, however he was respectful of our involvement and time spent on his case, we still had a financial interest in the case (we had provided him with a car similar to his own whilst his own car was off the road) and frankly he wanted to clear his name. As such we helped facilitate suitable lawyers for him and they were given instructions to issue proceedings immediately against the other party in relation to the recovery of his hire charges but also the £4k vehicle damage losses incurred by his insurers. All he had was his word against the forensic evidence. This was just under 8 weeks ago. Our client had a call earlier today to confirm that the solicitors representing the other side have agreed with their insurer principal to pay all damages back in full. Vindicating him and getting his insurers paid back the money that they had otherwise written off. To say I was delighted for the client was an understatement as this accident happened quite some time ago and you can imagine the upset this has caused him.
I guess the point of me writing this is that the moral of the story...sometimes you've just got to pull the gloves off.
anniesdad said:
As an aside a little story if I may of a client who was labelled as non-genuine by the third party insurance company, them suggesting that the damage to the rear of his car was not consistent with the accident circumstances. Effectively saying he wanted to claim for damage that their client hadn't done. I spoke personally to the third party who in her own words "did not believe she had caused that damage", I believe it was this throw away comment/assertion that set off a chain off events that led to the insurers stance. The at-fault insurers instructed an "independent" forensic engineer to assess both vehicles and he came to the "conclusion" that the accident had not happened in the manner it was described and the damage was therefore inconsistent. I never once thought our client was being anything other than genuine.
Our client could not understand why his losses were not being paid by the other side? This is an elderly professional man, a Doctor and a man who is in a position of standing in his local area and he was adamant that his well maintained car was undamaged before the accident. His own insurers paid for the repairs to be done to his vehicle but decided that they did not want to pursue the recovery of their vehicle repair losses (c.£4k) and instructed legal advisers to recover these on their behalf. These legal advisers decided not to take the case on, preferring instead to go with the forensic experts evidence. So the insurers put it down as a "non-recovery" case aka fault claim. However to attempt to appease the client they offered to give him back the policy excess that he had paid upon repair completion as a gesture of goodwill for the trouble that he had had in dealing with his insurers and their appointed representatives.
At this point the client could have left it, however he was respectful of our involvement and time spent on his case, we still had a financial interest in the case (we had provided him with a car similar to his own whilst his own car was off the road) and frankly he wanted to clear his name. As such we helped facilitate suitable lawyers for him and they were given instructions to issue proceedings immediately against the other party in relation to the recovery of his hire charges but also the £4k vehicle damage losses incurred by his insurers. All he had was his word against the forensic evidence. This was just under 8 weeks ago. Our client had a call earlier today to confirm that the solicitors representing the other side have agreed with their insurer principal to pay all damages back in full. Vindicating him and getting his insurers paid back the money that they had otherwise written off. To say I was delighted for the client was an understatement as this accident happened quite some time ago and you can imagine the upset this has caused him.
I guess the point of me writing this is that the moral of the story...sometimes you've just got to pull the gloves off.
Nice outcome. You may not remember but you helped my wife after a dozy bint scraped round the back of her SLK at a junction. She denied it, but funny how her insurers changed their minds after you got involved and we could show her Polo paint on our bumper and I could see silver of the SLK on hers after going round to her house!Our client could not understand why his losses were not being paid by the other side? This is an elderly professional man, a Doctor and a man who is in a position of standing in his local area and he was adamant that his well maintained car was undamaged before the accident. His own insurers paid for the repairs to be done to his vehicle but decided that they did not want to pursue the recovery of their vehicle repair losses (c.£4k) and instructed legal advisers to recover these on their behalf. These legal advisers decided not to take the case on, preferring instead to go with the forensic experts evidence. So the insurers put it down as a "non-recovery" case aka fault claim. However to attempt to appease the client they offered to give him back the policy excess that he had paid upon repair completion as a gesture of goodwill for the trouble that he had had in dealing with his insurers and their appointed representatives.
At this point the client could have left it, however he was respectful of our involvement and time spent on his case, we still had a financial interest in the case (we had provided him with a car similar to his own whilst his own car was off the road) and frankly he wanted to clear his name. As such we helped facilitate suitable lawyers for him and they were given instructions to issue proceedings immediately against the other party in relation to the recovery of his hire charges but also the £4k vehicle damage losses incurred by his insurers. All he had was his word against the forensic evidence. This was just under 8 weeks ago. Our client had a call earlier today to confirm that the solicitors representing the other side have agreed with their insurer principal to pay all damages back in full. Vindicating him and getting his insurers paid back the money that they had otherwise written off. To say I was delighted for the client was an understatement as this accident happened quite some time ago and you can imagine the upset this has caused him.
I guess the point of me writing this is that the moral of the story...sometimes you've just got to pull the gloves off.
Vaud said:
Have your raised a formal complaint to the insurer?
If so, and you are unsatisfied, then try:
A short, polite, factual email to the CEO outlining the points and crucially, the rectification that you seek
Then ombudsman.
Then court.
Formal complaint was raised on my behalf around the 12th July (after the 2nd failed repair). It's been a complaint ever since. If so, and you are unsatisfied, then try:
A short, polite, factual email to the CEO outlining the points and crucially, the rectification that you seek
Then ombudsman.
Then court.
Good idea with the CEO e-mail. At the least the courts will see I've tried every avenue. I've found a CEO e-mail online, not sure it's correct; but I can try.
Ombudsman isn't worth the time and hassle. Usually a minimum of 3 months and in my experience, useless resolve.
anniesdad said:
Hi Rich, this is about par for the course I'm afraid. You've done the right thing in insisting it's an independent engineer that provides a "ruling" not surprised the insurers want to use one of their own employees.
They'll always try and penny pinch especially where the customer isn't one of their own. Usual complaints rules don't apply.
If I were you I would contact the third party who actually caused the damage and threaten them personally with court proceedings (for the rectification work) explaining why you are contacting them and that you are not prepared to deal with their insurer any more as they are leading you a merry dance. They will be outraged (hopefully) and will be straight on to their insurer. Who will in turn get on to you. Try it, we use it often as a tactic to get resolution. If you don't get anywhere issue a money claim against the third party who will bring their insurers in to it. I think it's important that the courts get to grips with shoddy insurance practice and punish accordingly. What you are claiming for is not unreasonable just "a decent repair please". Often insurers are raised as the shining light and the resolution to all our problems when the reality is somewhat different. We see this a lot. They are purely commercial enterprises interested in their own bottom line.
I always advise against passing the responsibility over to a third party insurer for the reasons you've experienced, not least the lack of support in case things go awry, and not necessarily because I may have a vested interest in doing the opposite of what the insurers might like you, me and everybody else to do.
Thanks for this, makes me feel a little better. I have the other drivers details so I could have a frank conversation with him. Feel pretty bad about having to drag him into it though. Can I not claim direct against the 3rd party insurers rather than the driver? Who do I put the Section 152 notice to?They'll always try and penny pinch especially where the customer isn't one of their own. Usual complaints rules don't apply.
If I were you I would contact the third party who actually caused the damage and threaten them personally with court proceedings (for the rectification work) explaining why you are contacting them and that you are not prepared to deal with their insurer any more as they are leading you a merry dance. They will be outraged (hopefully) and will be straight on to their insurer. Who will in turn get on to you. Try it, we use it often as a tactic to get resolution. If you don't get anywhere issue a money claim against the third party who will bring their insurers in to it. I think it's important that the courts get to grips with shoddy insurance practice and punish accordingly. What you are claiming for is not unreasonable just "a decent repair please". Often insurers are raised as the shining light and the resolution to all our problems when the reality is somewhat different. We see this a lot. They are purely commercial enterprises interested in their own bottom line.
I always advise against passing the responsibility over to a third party insurer for the reasons you've experienced, not least the lack of support in case things go awry, and not necessarily because I may have a vested interest in doing the opposite of what the insurers might like you, me and everybody else to do.
anniesdad said:
By the way Rich I'm right in saying that the car was repaired by Fix Auto's a non-Seat approved repairer? Correct?...
You'll be suing for a full respray (whatever the estimate of repair cost is that you have obtained), your time, replacement hire whilst the car is being resprayed and any other direct expenses you can think of. I'd get together an estimate of that cost by getting an online quote off a local reputable hire company (make sure you get a quote to fully protect yourself with all the addons to reduce your excess liability to £zero).
I really don't think the insurers will want this going to court but without the threat or receipt of an actual court summons I'm afraid they will lead you a merry dance.
The car firstly went to Fix Auto Sutton is Ashfield which was not SEAT approved - I caught this quickly enough and the car was transferred to Fix Auto Loughborough who are SEAT approved. Fix Auto Loughborough competed all repairs to date. The insurers have confirmed it is their appointed bodyshop and responsibility.You'll be suing for a full respray (whatever the estimate of repair cost is that you have obtained), your time, replacement hire whilst the car is being resprayed and any other direct expenses you can think of. I'd get together an estimate of that cost by getting an online quote off a local reputable hire company (make sure you get a quote to fully protect yourself with all the addons to reduce your excess liability to £zero).
I really don't think the insurers will want this going to court but without the threat or receipt of an actual court summons I'm afraid they will lead you a merry dance.
Edited by anniesdad on Wednesday 5th October 14:11
I have already submitted costs to date. 60+ hours, nearly 500 minutes talk time and 350 miles in travel so far. Calculated at £19 per hour (I believe this is the flat litigant costs as I can't calculate my hourly rate), £0.35 per minute and £0.45 per mile.
I have the bodyshop quote in writing. But I need to get hire car costs. I'll have to figure out how long I'll need the car for. Or could I get the hire car costs via the bodyshop?
edo said:
^ listen to this man.
You need to get stty with them now. Decline their offer to send yet another (biased) assessor. Tell them they have 24 hours to confirm they will be paying you the total (as above) to get it sorted or you will be starting legal proceedings. Remind them this accident was their clients accident, not yours.
I have declined the offer, on more than one occasion. The last independent engineer was truly independent (as far as I could tell). The bodyshop quote I have received is derived from a conversation between this independent engineer and the bodyshop, my main involvement was supplying the car for viewing. Without a doubt the independent engineer thinks the car needs a lot of work - during this visit he even said the bodyshop who takes the work on will likely want to full respray. You need to get s
tty with them now. Decline their offer to send yet another (biased) assessor. Tell them they have 24 hours to confirm they will be paying you the total (as above) to get it sorted or you will be starting legal proceedings. Remind them this accident was their clients accident, not yours.I think my next steps are, e-mail to CEO and Claims Director. Speak with the driver of the other car. Advise of impending proceedings. Then court.
Find their twitter account and message them. They dont like the publicity. something along the lines of their poor customer service x months messed about, 3 botched repairs etc etc.
You need to be on the phone asking to speak to the head of customer service. You're being too nice and they are hoping you'll get bored and give up.
You need to be on the phone asking to speak to the head of customer service. You're being too nice and they are hoping you'll get bored and give up.
edo said:
Find their twitter account and message them. They dont like the publicity. something along the lines of their poor customer service x months messed about, 3 botched repairs etc etc.
You need to be on the phone asking to speak to the head of customer service. You're being too nice and they are hoping you'll get bored and give up.
Great idea. But I rarely use twitter so it's not really effective in my case. Would have been great as I know they just tweeted that Fix Auto have won some award. You need to be on the phone asking to speak to the head of customer service. You're being too nice and they are hoping you'll get bored and give up.
I've tried and tried, the only opportunity I've been given was a name of someone with authority, I called them for days and was ignored every time. It was clear the person in question was refusing to speak with me (transfer times were suspiciously longer than normal and when the original call handler came back to me they were always flustered).
It's the reason why I'm thinking court is the only way.
EnthusiastOwned said:
Ok, now i'm pissed.
After being told countless times over the past few weeks by the claim department there is nothing they can do, with no further information; they are awaiting their internal engineers to make a decision. I've been led to believe this engineer and the original repairer are disputing the independent report and bodyshop quote and want to view the car to verify the work required themselves.
Remind me again if this quote is from SEAT approved or somewhere else?After being told countless times over the past few weeks by the claim department there is nothing they can do, with no further information; they are awaiting their internal engineers to make a decision. I've been led to believe this engineer and the original repairer are disputing the independent report and bodyshop quote and want to view the car to verify the work required themselves.
Do SEAT have engineers (sic) that come out and inspect?
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff