First crash...advice please

[Ki3r]

Ah bugger .

Oh well, guess time will tell! Time to get searching! Any other sites worth looking at? PH, AutoTrader, local paper. Not going to bother with eBay unless its worth it?

[saaby93]

mrmr96 said:

The only potential spanner in the works is what you TOLD them it was worth, either at the point you took the policy out, or when you claim. That may well set a ceiling.

The old problem with going through your own insurer for a TP claim if cars appreciate during the term

He should tell his own insurer he's going to claim direct from the third parties insurer, get a claim form from them. Then if it's going to be written off he should be able to claim for a replacement car and demonstrate current ones for sale. They reduce a bit for haggling or make an offer to save argument.

[Ki3r]

saaby93 said:

he old problem with going through your own insurer for a TP claim if cars appreciate during the term

He should tell his own insurer he's going to claim direct from the third parties insurer, get a claim form from them. Then if it's going to be written off he should be able to claim for a replacement car and demonstrate current ones for sale. They reduce a bit for haggling or make an offer to save argument.

We have the same insurance company. Thought this was good to start with, maybe not anymore.

[martynr]

I feel sorry for you. It looks like a write off. I had a claim with elephant in 2010. I have never claimed before, but their service and communication was st. They had an old MS Office and could not read my emails with vehicles of similar price. They offered me peanuts for my car so needed to fight them for over 2 months. My excess is still not recovered. They cancelled the insurance straight away, even though it had 15 days remaining. Good luck.

[BMWBen]

mrmr96 said:

Ki3r said:

I have informed my insurance company, did it when I heard a few people say it might be a write off. Haven't admitted liability, said it was their fault. I'll be amazed if its anything but!

One thing I was thinking about, I said that my car was worth around £1,250 when I got my insurance. There is a bit of damage on the bonnet from when I got it, and not the best condition, you can see the rust on the passenger door! When I phoned up, I said it was worth around £1,000 (I know nothing about the value of cars, was purely a guess!). I've had a quick look on AutoTrader, local to me. The only one that is close to the same spec and mileage is nearly £2,000!

If I could only find ones that are around that price, would they still pay out that much? Despite I only paid £1,700 for it?

The valuation they pay out hasn't got a great deal to do with what you paid for the car. Most cars will be worth less when smashed than they were when they were bought, as they are then older with more miles. The payout tends to be based on what you would have been able to sell the car for privately, rather than what it would cost to replace. (Neither is anything to do with what you bought it for.) Rare cars may even go up in value, and the payout would reflect that.

The only potential spanner in the works is what you TOLD them it was worth, either at the point you took the policy out, or when you claim. That may well set a ceiling.

Not true when my 545 was stolen I got 2.5k higher than I paid for it and than I said it was worth on the insurance. The prices had gone up. I had a range of adverts, the glasses valuation (which was lower), and copy of an invoice from a kind chap on here who had just sold one of similar spec for higher than the glasses valuation.

In my case, the prices had gone up and there was not much arguing that could be done on their side. Only accept a fair valuation regardless of anything, that is my advice.

If they claim that it is only worth x, challenge them to find you a similar spec/condition car for x.

Edit: also, your own policy details should not matter here, you're not claiming off your own policy (the fact it's actually the same company should be immaterial.

Edited by BMWBen on Tuesday 17th January 09:22

[SanguiniusZ]

OP - have had experience of raising a claim through Elephant, who were my insurance provider at the time when a bus did a "show-and-go", in the process sideswiping my Mondeo which was in the land adjacent.

Put it this way - utterly 100% the bus driver's fault, however took Elephant 18 months to get around to extracting an offer - of 50% liability - from the bus company's insurers.

Don't hold your breath, Elephant are PISH.

[Scelto]

SanguiniusZ said:

OP - have had experience of raising a claim through Elephant, who were my insurance provider at the time when a bus did a "show-and-go", in the process sideswiping my Mondeo which was in the land adjacent.

Ok, I give up - what's a "show-and-go"?

[Ki3r]

Scelto said:

Ok, I give up - what's a "show-and-go"?

I think its hit and run.

When would be best to phone up and ask for any information on whats happening?

[Ki3r]

Just had a phone call from them. The other party are saying that I already had damage on the car...which isn't true, I had a bit of rust on the near side front passenger door, but nothing else. Time to start writing EVERY thing down I think!

[jazzyjeff]

Ki3r said:

Just had a phone call from them. The other party are saying that I already had damage on the car...which isn't true,

And so the steamroller of lies and manipulation has commenced...

How would the third party know your car was damaged before they hit it?

[aka_kerrly]

Ki3r said:

Just had a phone call from them. The other party are saying that I already had damage on the car...which isn't true, I had a bit of rust on the near side front passenger door, but nothing else. Time to start writing EVERY thing down I think!

NIGHTMARE

This is exactly why you need to take multiple pictures at the scene, take as many notes perhaps draw diagrams of road layouts so that in the days/weeks/months after a claim details are still fresh in your mind.

Do you have any pictures of the car prior to the accident? A good assessor ought to be able to tell existing damage from new damage. As you say the car had rust on it previously this can easily be ignored as a car wouldn't have rusted in the hours/days post impact.

I dealt with someone similar earlier this year after they crashed into my brother and then tried to claim that it was a shared fault. You have to stick to your guns, you were already on the main road and they hit halfway along your car so you had clearly already passed them before they began moving forward so the blame is purely with them.

What I suspect is because it is a company car the driver is being a weasel and seeing if he can get 50/50 or a reduced claim so that he/she can reduce the grief they get from their boss!

[mrmr96]

jazzyjeff said:

Ki3r said:

Just had a phone call from them. The other party are saying that I already had damage on the car...which isn't true,

And so the steamroller of lies and manipulation has commenced...

How would the third party know your car was damaged before they hit it?

+1

How the hell would the other guy know what damage was/wasn't present before the crash. He clearly didn't even SEE your car before the crash (else he wouldn't have pulled out!)

There needs to be a bigger penalty (and a way to catch) people who lie during insurance claims processes.

[BMWBen]

mrmr96 said:

jazzyjeff said:

Ki3r said:

Just had a phone call from them. The other party are saying that I already had damage on the car...which isn't true,

And so the steamroller of lies and manipulation has commenced...

How would the third party know your car was damaged before they hit it?

+1

How the hell would the other guy know what damage was/wasn't present before the crash. He clearly didn't even SEE your car before the crash (else he wouldn't have pulled out!)

There needs to be a bigger penalty (and a way to catch) people who lie during insurance claims processes.

+10 why does the claim handler not ask - "if you didn't see the car before pulling out, how do you know it was damaged?"

[Ki3r]

aka_kerrly said:

NIGHTMARE

This is exactly why you need to take multiple pictures at the scene, take as many notes perhaps draw diagrams of road layouts so that in the days/weeks/months after a claim details are still fresh in your mind.

Do you have any pictures of the car prior to the accident? A good assessor ought to be able to tell existing damage from new damage. As you say the car had rust on it previously this can easily be ignored as a car wouldn't have rusted in the hours/days post impact.

I dealt with someone similar earlier this year after they crashed into my brother and then tried to claim that it was a shared fault. You have to stick to your guns, you were already on the main road and they hit halfway along your car so you had clearly already passed them before they began moving forward so the blame is purely with them.

What I suspect is because it is a company car the driver is being a weasel and seeing if he can get 50/50 or a reduced claim so that he/she can reduce the grief they get from their boss!

I dont have any photos of it before hand sadly, although I did get it MOT at the start of December, would they have notes on it? The mechanic that I use was also on the look out for a new door as it was rusty, would this help? I'm guessing not though.

I've been on Google Maps to get some screen shots of the road. Its a open junction, so you can see whats coming.



Few more photos, little bit better than the first one.









They've said I can either get it repaired now and pay my excess and claim it back, or wait. I've chosen to wait, can't afford whatever my excess is at the moment.

I think I'm going to get myself a dashcam on pay day though!

Thanks for all the help and advice .

[saaby93]

keep calm
Youre entitled to your car back in its pre accident condition, the argument about rust is a red herring unless you think theyre going to add rust when they paint it.
The insurer is only asking you about what the third party has said to see what you say.
If youre getting out of your depth maybe see what these say
http://www.europaconsultants.co.uk/

[daz3210]

So have they said it is a repair not a write off?

If so get it repaired and give them the bill. There are accident management companies out there who will get the work done and sort all the paperwork and excess for you. You lay nothing out.

Don't let it lie unrepaired, it will rust and then if the bits need to be produced the other persons story may look more plausible.

As for the rust on the door, ok, there may be 'betterment' but if so, you said you were looking for another door anyway, basically come to an agreement with the other party or his insurer as to what you think that 'betterment' is worth (and it won't be much )

[hornetrider]

That door is badly rusted and was clearly there beforehand. Regardless - you would need a new door. Not sure how things work out in that case, may be as daz says, an element of betterment. Be honest, say there was a bit of rust, but now it's fked.

[collateral]

When I binned my 306 the money Elephant offered me at first was a joke - "well that's what the book says". Even after I printed out a bunch of ads from the Trader I still ended up with less money than another Pug would've set me back. At least they weren't tts about the loan car I had, dreadful as it was.

Good luck OP...

[Ki3r]

collateral said:

When I binned my 306 the money Elephant offered me at first was a joke - "well that's what the book says". Even after I printed out a bunch of ads from the Trader I still ended up with less money than another Pug would've set me back. At least they weren't tts about the loan car I had, dreadful as it was.

Good luck OP...

Thanks! Think I might need it!

I dont have hire car as an extra on my insurance, mainly as I was working during the day and could get by with lifts to work, however my hours have now changed (flexie), and the next couple of weeks I'm doing early starts (5:45) and a few late nights (23:15). So unable to get lifts. Would I be able to get a hire car and get it back from the third party?

[SanguiniusZ]

"show-and-go" = simultaneous signal-and-manouevre, without reference to anything that might be approaching from behind, or might actually even already by in lane(s) adjacent (not "land" as I typo'd before)