Blown turbo - engine damage? and insurance conundrum
Discussion
Oooooo shouty, that sets off all sorts of triggers on the fraud scale for us.
If your turbo failed randomly then why are you trying to link it to one of the accidents (as stated earlier). If it just failed then with the cosmetic damage to the car already which seems major why not just get it written off by your insurer? The sums involved suggest that would have happened anyway.
If your turbo failed randomly then why are you trying to link it to one of the accidents (as stated earlier). If it just failed then with the cosmetic damage to the car already which seems major why not just get it written off by your insurer? The sums involved suggest that would have happened anyway.
Shouty? Not at all, I am merely offering my defence in response to your accusations that I am trying to commit fraud. I'm bemused at this point, firstly at your accusation of fraud, second that a man with your experience thinks my reply was in any way shouty. Surely you experience much more robust defences on a daily basis.
Rewind and show me where I am linking the turbo failure to the accident? I am not, and have not ever claimed that the turbo failure has anything to do with the accident.
The only question we had after the first accident was that we felt the steering of the car was a bit off, we asked BMW to investigate and they came up empty.
We since had the car tracked on a hunter system and it was way out, since been fixed and car drives much better. I guess it's possible the knock shunted the alignment out.
I told my insurer exactly what I told you. I had engine failure and there was potential unknown costs in repairing it. So I was wondering what options we had as the total cost of repair with bodywork/engine could exceed the cost of the car.
They then offered cash in lieu. At no point did they suggest that the car would be written off, it wasn't even mentioned or considered. I did ask if it would be CAT D'd, they said no, just a straight up cash in lieu payment.
I am also on the record of explaining my plan, to take the cash, do a reasonable cosmetic patch up and use the rest to repair the engine.
I'd be the worst fraudster ever if that's the case as I've told them from the start.
Rewind and show me where I am linking the turbo failure to the accident? I am not, and have not ever claimed that the turbo failure has anything to do with the accident.
The only question we had after the first accident was that we felt the steering of the car was a bit off, we asked BMW to investigate and they came up empty.
We since had the car tracked on a hunter system and it was way out, since been fixed and car drives much better. I guess it's possible the knock shunted the alignment out.
I told my insurer exactly what I told you. I had engine failure and there was potential unknown costs in repairing it. So I was wondering what options we had as the total cost of repair with bodywork/engine could exceed the cost of the car.
They then offered cash in lieu. At no point did they suggest that the car would be written off, it wasn't even mentioned or considered. I did ask if it would be CAT D'd, they said no, just a straight up cash in lieu payment.
I am also on the record of explaining my plan, to take the cash, do a reasonable cosmetic patch up and use the rest to repair the engine.
I'd be the worst fraudster ever if that's the case as I've told them from the start.
Edited by dogzilla on Wednesday 25th March 11:19
dogzilla said:
That is ridiculous.
I had no way of predicting turbo failure. The car was functioning absolutely fine and it just had cosmetic damage. Bits weren't falling off, it was just scraped up. People drive scraped up cars all the time.
I was going to see my Family on the south coast of France over Christmas. In my boot I had a 12kg turkey, 3kg ham, huge bag of brussel sprouts and parsnips. In the car was my wife and my dog. Does it seem likely I'd drive knowing I had engine problems?
Then on my return leg, just past Lyon, my turbo fails. I'm then stuck waiting for 6 hours for a pickup, then another 2 hours getting driven to my hotel. Then another 2 days getting back to Calais (Christmas/New Year is not a good time to get stuck in France). Then I had to pay £200 out my own pocket for a taxi to take us from Calais to Dover with our dog in the boot.
(fortunately Green flag covered hotels and other costs)
Then I waited 6 weeks to get the car repatriated to the UK.
Yes I totally would have predicted and planned the whole event just to get money out of the insurance company with all the uncertaintny of getting there or not and all the stress and hassle it involved.
So when you went to France you said you had green Flag breakdown insurance.They would have you and your car returned to the UK in less than a couple of days at most.6 weeks to get your car home.taxis etc.I had no way of predicting turbo failure. The car was functioning absolutely fine and it just had cosmetic damage. Bits weren't falling off, it was just scraped up. People drive scraped up cars all the time.
I was going to see my Family on the south coast of France over Christmas. In my boot I had a 12kg turkey, 3kg ham, huge bag of brussel sprouts and parsnips. In the car was my wife and my dog. Does it seem likely I'd drive knowing I had engine problems?
Then on my return leg, just past Lyon, my turbo fails. I'm then stuck waiting for 6 hours for a pickup, then another 2 hours getting driven to my hotel. Then another 2 days getting back to Calais (Christmas/New Year is not a good time to get stuck in France). Then I had to pay £200 out my own pocket for a taxi to take us from Calais to Dover with our dog in the boot.
(fortunately Green flag covered hotels and other costs)
Then I waited 6 weeks to get the car repatriated to the UK.
Yes I totally would have predicted and planned the whole event just to get money out of the insurance company with all the uncertaintny of getting there or not and all the stress and hassle it involved.
Edited by dogzilla on Wednesday 25th March 11:07
In your first post you said that we were close to the alps where thousands of people were stranded but have now said you broke down just past Lyon.is that near the Alps im not sure.
I would estimate from the date of your body work claim with your insurance its about 4 months now and feel sure they would have settled by now.Is this a wind up.
Edited by btcc123 on Wednesday 25th March 11:34
btcc123 said:
So when you went to France you said you had green Flag breakdown insurance.They would have you and your car returned to the UK in less than a couple of days at most.6 weeks to get your car home.taxis etc.
In your first post you said that we were close to the alps where thousands of people were stranded but have now said you broke down just past Lyon.is that near the Alps im not sure.
The morning after the initial break down Green Flag organised a taxi to the nearest open car hire place which was Lyon-Saint Exupery airport. It was about 2-3 hours drive. It is reasonably close to the alps, lots of skiiers travel from that airport.In your first post you said that we were close to the alps where thousands of people were stranded but have now said you broke down just past Lyon.is that near the Alps im not sure.
Edited by btcc123 on Wednesday 25th March 11:34
This was on the same day that thousands of people were stranded in the alps and Green Flag were swamped. Car hire place was mental, was lucky to get a car though had to wait about 3 hours.
Greenflag outsource the repatriation to another company. They ballsed up obviously and took much longer to return my car. After the initial 14 day quote I kicked up a fuss and they gave us a hire car until my car was returned. All of this is easily proven as I have documentation from Greenflag.
Edited by dogzilla on Wednesday 25th March 12:05
LoonR1 said:
Oooooo shouty, that sets off all sorts of triggers on the fraud scale for us.
What kind of percentage of claims do you think are fraudulent?I only ask because, and please don't take this personally, pretty much every thread on here seems to end up with you telling the OP that things didn't happen the way they say they did.
Now OK there are always three sides to a story, but I'm curious if the fraud stats are so high as to almost make that your default assumption?
Foliage said:
Op seems extremely muddle up to me, needs to take a step back and have a rethink or he may end up extremely out of pocket in the end.
It's easy to poke holes into my story as I'm not here writing a forensic report of what happened. It is just me writing updates informally on a forum hoping for some advice.I do find it rather odd though to poke holes in my france story, as if I'm motivated some how to write a factually untrue account of what happened to somehow gain internet points.
I have nothing to gain by misleading anyone here as nothing anyone says has any bearing on the eventual outcome.
Edited by dogzilla on Wednesday 25th March 12:06
LoonR1 said:
I've skim read this, but to summarise the massive essays that are being written it seems to me
1. Your car was hit by two lorries in two separate incidents
2. You didn't have it repaired straight away
3. The engine failed on your car
4. The damage all in is now more than your car is worth, or at the very least close to it
5. You tried to get cash for the repairs to cover the cost of the engine too
6. You've been rumbled
The Coles ruling is not your friend here. That relates to insurers and others suffering a loss not having to pass on any negotiated discounts. It doesn't cover you getting a substandard repair amd pretending that it was a top notch job. That's fraud.
The opOmbuudsman is highly unlikely to find in your favour when all this comes out. Too many on here seem to think that the FOS is some sort of avenging customer white knight. They aren't, they take account of everything and excluding PPI claims uphold customer complaints1 in 3 times and rule against them 2 in 3.
I concur.1. Your car was hit by two lorries in two separate incidents
2. You didn't have it repaired straight away
3. The engine failed on your car
4. The damage all in is now more than your car is worth, or at the very least close to it
5. You tried to get cash for the repairs to cover the cost of the engine too
6. You've been rumbled
The Coles ruling is not your friend here. That relates to insurers and others suffering a loss not having to pass on any negotiated discounts. It doesn't cover you getting a substandard repair amd pretending that it was a top notch job. That's fraud.
The opOmbuudsman is highly unlikely to find in your favour when all this comes out. Too many on here seem to think that the FOS is some sort of avenging customer white knight. They aren't, they take account of everything and excluding PPI claims uphold customer complaints1 in 3 times and rule against them 2 in 3.
You tried it on and got rumbled.
FOS won't help you.
Soov535 said:
I concur.
You tried it on and got rumbled.
FOS won't help you.
You mean I approached the insurance company and explained I had engine problems and then they offered me cash in lieu before back tracking?You tried it on and got rumbled.
FOS won't help you.
How is that trying it on? They offered the solution not me. I didn't ask for or demand it.
If they had said, repair or write off then I would have taken one of those options. But they offered cash in lieu.
dogzilla said:
nothing anyone says has any bearing on the eventual outcome
A strange thread to start then.They confirmed their offer 3 times over the phone - over what period was that and what was then the hurry to start the work before confirmation in writing and perhaps even having the cheque in your hand?
dogzilla said:
You mean I approached the insurance company and explained I had engine problems and then they offered me cash in lieu before back tracking?
How is that trying it on? They offered the solution not me. I didn't ask for or demand it.
If they had said, repair or write off then I would have taken one of those options. But they offered cash in lieu.
Mate I'd Ignore it.... Here's how this will go. Loon will refuse to actually take a position on the issue without all the facts!!! But then call you a fraudster. He does it all the time. No way he can explain how to get a problem resolved unless he had polygraph tests - but no problem accusing people of whatever he can think off. You will also get a few other idiots chirping up - they will feel clever saying that there are inconsistencies but not actually say what they are...How is that trying it on? They offered the solution not me. I didn't ask for or demand it.
If they had said, repair or write off then I would have taken one of those options. But they offered cash in lieu.
Based on what you said ask for a deadlock letter. Write to the CEO. Loon called me a fraudster and I ended up getting my problems resolved with the insurance company and was also paid compensation... The bloke just gets off on trying to put others down. He keeps alluding to the fact that he is a big name in insurance - but I've never seen him say who he is or who he works for.... Which makes me think that either he is talking crap or he knows his constant abuse would not be appreciated by his employers.
Anyway - ask for a deadlock letter and email/write to the CEO. Don't let low level monkeys mess you about!!! And stop feeling the need to defend yourself to these Internet retards. I had one a few months ago claim I lived in a fantasy world - when I asked him to stake money he ran away sharpish. Rise about it mate.
OP what is the latest situation with your insurance company and who are they as you are allowed to tell.Why has it taken 4 months and not been sorted yet.
You asked for advice from the forum,the only advice I can give you is to ring your insurance company,tell them it has taken 4 months and you want it all sorted in the next week.
You asked for advice from the forum,the only advice I can give you is to ring your insurance company,tell them it has taken 4 months and you want it all sorted in the next week.
b
hstewie said:
hstewie said: What kind of percentage of claims do you think are fraudulent?
I only ask because, and please don't take this personally, pretty much every thread on here seems to end up with you telling the OP that things didn't happen the way they say they did.
Now OK there are always three sides to a story, but I'm curious if the fraud stats are so high as to almost make that your default assumption?
Lots of different definitions of fraud so no way I'm tying myself to a percentage. I only ask because, and please don't take this personally, pretty much every thread on here seems to end up with you telling the OP that things didn't happen the way they say they did.
Now OK there are always three sides to a story, but I'm curious if the fraud stats are so high as to almost make that your default assumption?
photosnob said:
Mate I'd Ignore it....
And stop feeling the need to defend yourself to these Internet retards.
Cheers feller. Good to know it's not just me. Fortunately been around on the internet long enough to know when I'm dealing with keyboard warriors.And stop feeling the need to defend yourself to these Internet retards.
It's really easy to poke holes and sling mud with an air of authority and then ignore the points raised in response, even more so if you just skim read the story and make your mind up without fully understanding the course of events.
Loon might be an expert in this field but I'd wager my house that he doesn't win every argument, given his attitude I wouldn't be surprised if it were closer to 50/50. No more reliable than a coin toss. I assume the only reason he sticks around is the inflated ego and sense of self worth he gets with hanging around uneducated plebs like us.
dogzilla said:
It's easy to poke holes into my story as I'm not here writing a forensic report of what happened. It is just me writing updates informally on a forum hoping for some advice.
I do find it rather odd though to poke holes in my france story, as if I'm motivated some how to write a factually untrue account of what happened to somehow gain internet points.
I have nothing to gain by misleading anyone here as nothing anyone says has any bearing on the eventual outcome.
yep muddled.I do find it rather odd though to poke holes in my france story, as if I'm motivated some how to write a factually untrue account of what happened to somehow gain internet points.
I have nothing to gain by misleading anyone here as nothing anyone says has any bearing on the eventual outcome.
Edited by dogzilla on Wednesday 25th March 12:06
dogzilla said:
Cheers feller. Good to know it's not just me. Fortunately been around on the internet long enough to know when I'm dealing with keyboard warriors.
It's really easy to poke holes and sling mud with an air of authority and then ignore the points raised in response, even more so if you just skim read the story and make your mind up without fully understanding the course of events.
Loon might be an expert in this field but I'd wager my house that he doesn't win every argument, given his attitude I wouldn't be surprised if it were closer to 50/50. No more reliable than a coin toss. I assume the only reason he sticks around is the inflated ego and sense of self worth he gets with hanging around uneducated plebs like us.
Ok, I'll sit back and watch you claim to have won then in a few weeks. It's really easy to poke holes and sling mud with an air of authority and then ignore the points raised in response, even more so if you just skim read the story and make your mind up without fully understanding the course of events.
Loon might be an expert in this field but I'd wager my house that he doesn't win every argument, given his attitude I wouldn't be surprised if it were closer to 50/50. No more reliable than a coin toss. I assume the only reason he sticks around is the inflated ego and sense of self worth he gets with hanging around uneducated plebs like us.
LoonR1 said:
Lots of different definitions of fraud so no way I'm tying myself to a percentage.
But in your role, you will see this, surely - at least indicative types of fraud and the countermeasures and process to mitigate risk to the business. If you tell me that a big insurer doesn't understand the types and % of (known) frauds on a historical basis... or just that you didn't have access to that info?Vaud said:
But in your role, you will see this, surely - at least indicative types of fraud and the countermeasures and process to mitigate risk to the business. If you tell me that a big insurer doesn't understand the types and % of (known) frauds on a historical basis... or just that you didn't have access to that info?
I know it and the FOS even handily provides case studies http://www.financial-ombudsman.org.uk/results.html...
I'm more involved in the TP fraud side of things, but policyholder fraud is fairly easy to identify and to repudiate the claim as a result.
To give you an idea if all types of fraud are rolled up into one overarching definition, then we worked out that 90% of household claims would be fraudulent. That does include exaggeration, or innocent overstarement through to fake burglaries
Just got a call from Quality team and I am absolutely over the moon with the result.
I was gearing up for a long battle but fairness has prevailed.
I was informed that a cheque for £7500 is in the post today. This includes money for a geometry check on the car which came as reccomendation from the engineer.
The figure is slightly reduced as the labour on the two incidents was combined and reduced accordingly.
This does not include compensation for the saga which I have gone through, they are currently working on a figure and will get back to me in a few days.
P.S - I will scan in the final resolution letter when it arrives just to cover any smug tttery from our resident in-house know it alls.
I was gearing up for a long battle but fairness has prevailed.
I was informed that a cheque for £7500 is in the post today. This includes money for a geometry check on the car which came as reccomendation from the engineer.
The figure is slightly reduced as the labour on the two incidents was combined and reduced accordingly.
This does not include compensation for the saga which I have gone through, they are currently working on a figure and will get back to me in a few days.
P.S - I will scan in the final resolution letter when it arrives just to cover any smug t
ttery from our resident in-house know it alls.dogzilla said:
Just got a call from Quality team and I am absolutely over the moon with the result.
I was gearing up for a long battle but fairness has prevailed.
I was informed that a cheque for £7500 is in the post today. This includes money for a geometry check on the car which came as reccomendation from the engineer.
The figure is slightly reduced as the labour on the two incidents was combined and reduced accordingly.
This does not include compensation for the saga which I have gone through, they are currently working on a figure and will get back to me in a few days.
P.S - I will scan in the final resolution letter when it arrives just to cover any smug tttery from our resident in-house know it alls.
Good news for you.The letter will be with your cheque so will be interested in seeing it within the next few days.I was gearing up for a long battle but fairness has prevailed.
I was informed that a cheque for £7500 is in the post today. This includes money for a geometry check on the car which came as reccomendation from the engineer.
The figure is slightly reduced as the labour on the two incidents was combined and reduced accordingly.
This does not include compensation for the saga which I have gone through, they are currently working on a figure and will get back to me in a few days.
P.S - I will scan in the final resolution letter when it arrives just to cover any smug t
ttery from our resident in-house know it alls.Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff