GT-R non fault claim, like for like hire car?
Discussion
Tuvra said:
nipsips said:
Intimidated by lorries. And how do you prove that? Also 4k for a reversing incident. Id be interested to hear how hard the at fault insurers laughed at you.
Also refusing cars nowadays is likely to end up in court with you trying to explain to a judge exactly why a Focus 1.6 wont do for a week when your car is a Focus ST.
It's what I was told by various parties phoning me following the accident, I didn't entertain them. I doubt the at fault insurers laughed, not after the £4.5k repair bill.... Also refusing cars nowadays is likely to end up in court with you trying to explain to a judge exactly why a Focus 1.6 wont do for a week when your car is a Focus ST.
Refusing a 1.6 Focus got me a GT86, but thanks for your concern and obvious in depth knowledge
Not having a go at all, just trying to help share my knowledge.
nipsips said:
Quite clearly my in depth knowleknowledge is non existent working with claims like this all day. However seems like you got the result you wanted, hope in a couple of years time you don't get a letter from the at fault insurer asking you to prove your claim.
Not having a go at all, just trying to help share my knowledge.
Lets be honest here, that is not going to happen and you know it (not having a go either). Not having a go at all, just trying to help share my knowledge.
Everyone here has their opinion and arguing one way or the other isn't going to change that. For me, I don't expect to be driving a lesser car for any length of time through no fault of my own. I did not take the piss, I didn't claim compensation, I just wanted a car equally as nice to drive around in whilst mine was repaired, I do pay "like for like" insurance after all.
What really drives up Insurance claims are the companies doing the repairs and supplying the courtesy cars in the first place, just look at this for example:
http://www.helphire.co.uk/carlist_v5.pdf
£490 a week for a Fiesta, Joe Public can lease one fully maintained for what? £40/week?
Tuvra said:
What really drives up Insurance claims are the companies doing the repairs and supplying the courtesy cars in the first place, just look at this for example:
What really drives up the cost of insurance claims are all the payouts for sore necks, not people expecting to be provided with a car equivalent to their own when it's been damaged by someone else's negligence.If you choose to buy an expensive car, and are prepared to pay for it because that's what you want, why on earth should you have to put up with a budget car when your own is off the road through no fault of your own? Especially when it can be off the road for many weeks, during which time you will probably be paying expensive lease/hp charges for a car you don't get to use.
RYH64E said:
What really drives up the cost of insurance claims are all the payouts for sore necks, not people expecting to be provided with a car equivalent to their own when it's been damaged by someone else's negligence.
If you choose to buy an expensive car, and are prepared to pay for it because that's what you want, why on earth should you have to put up with a budget car when your own is off the road through no fault of your own? Especially when it can be off the road for many weeks, during which time you will probably be paying expensive lease/hp charges for a car you don't get to use.
If you choose to buy an expensive car, and are prepared to pay for it because that's what you want, why on earth should you have to put up with a budget car when your own is off the road through no fault of your own? Especially when it can be off the road for many weeks, during which time you will probably be paying expensive lease/hp charges for a car you don't get to use.
RYH64E said:
What really drives up the cost of insurance claims are all the payouts for sore necks, not people expecting to be provided with a car equivalent to their own when it's been damaged by someone else's negligence.
If you choose to buy an expensive car, and are prepared to pay for it because that's what you want, why on earth should you have to put up with a budget car when your own is off the road through no fault of your own? Especially when it can be off the road for many weeks, during which time you will probably be paying expensive lease/hp charges for a car you don't get to use.
Two cheeks of the same arse IMO, excessively entitled people screwing the system (although not in this case as he paid extra for a like for like replacement)If you choose to buy an expensive car, and are prepared to pay for it because that's what you want, why on earth should you have to put up with a budget car when your own is off the road through no fault of your own? Especially when it can be off the road for many weeks, during which time you will probably be paying expensive lease/hp charges for a car you don't get to use.
Ian Griffiths said:
If you're intelligent enough to own four cars then you're intelligent enough to see that the argument of entitlement doesn't really stand up to scrutiny. Don't care what you've paid in. That's why its called insurance and not your personal savings fund.
Yet again, there is a difference between 'Credit Hire' cars provided by accident management companies, and 'Like for Like' courtesy cars provided by the insurer as part of an upgrade package paid for by the policy holder.Wind your neck in./
mph1977 said:
Thank you for contributing to raised premiums for all.
I'm sure someone will be along shortly from one of many of the accident management/taxi/ kebab/ visa agent / letting agencies to fleece us all with your like for like innit hire car.
'Like for like' with courtesy cars is to stop people being fobbed off with a up!/ ka/ adam/107 to 'replace' their towbar equipped large estate car, not so people can have extended test drives of premium cars.
The law of tort says otherwise. If a crash is entirely the other person's fault, then that person is liable to compensate you for your reasonably proximate and foreseeable loss. You, for your part, have a duty to mitigate your loss. Your loss is the loss of use of your expensive car that you paid for and that you enjoy driving. It is not the loss of use of a generic car, but of the specific car. If you fuss about the repair, pay more than is reasonable for the repair or delay the repair, thus lengthening the time for which you need a hire car, you are not mitigating your loss and the damages to which you are entitled will be reduced commensurately. I'm sure someone will be along shortly from one of many of the accident management/taxi/ kebab/ visa agent / letting agencies to fleece us all with your like for like innit hire car.
'Like for like' with courtesy cars is to stop people being fobbed off with a up!/ ka/ adam/107 to 'replace' their towbar equipped large estate car, not so people can have extended test drives of premium cars.
Edited by mph1977 on Friday 14th November 11:23
In short, you have the right to damages for loss of use of your expensive car and for its repair as a result of the other driver's breach of his duty of care to you. That should mean that you have the right to have your car repaired at his insurer's expense and to have a car of similar value hired for you and paid for by his insurer.
Where this gets more difficult is in the excessive charges of the credit hire companies that hire out prestige cars to accident management companies. If you use one of those, then there is a risk that you will not be seen as having mitigated your loss. That they get away with this is the fault of the insurance companies alone.
Edited by Zod on Thursday 27th November 12:21
tty budget eurobox.Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff