New car in a smash within 12 hours - write off?

New car in a smash within 12 hours - write off?

Author
Discussion

Krikkit

26,500 posts

180 months

Sunday 1st March 2015
quotequote all
Jonno02 said:
Krupp Stahl said:
At least that stopped him driving off from the scene.
That's exactly what I thought. To be fair to the guy, he was extremely upset as he could tell the car was new and when I told him it was 12 hours old he looked like he was going to break down in tears. Nearly as upset as I was!

Just bumped into his dad and he couldn't apologise enough. He also said I wouldn't be left out of pocket and there were a few options such as (him) getting his lawyer involved or basically paying the difference of the cost to get a new like-for-like car. Seemed like a nice guy, but obviously, it's no consolation until it actually comes to that and he's still as sure about those options.
That's bloody good to be fair - a lot of people would just leave it to the insurance co!

Jonno02

Original Poster:

2,246 posts

108 months

Sunday 1st March 2015
quotequote all
Northernchimp said:
Fair dos. Here's one if it helps... http://www.autotrader.co.uk/classified/advert/2015...

Not being anti-Seat (got 2), but not sure I'd put £15k in one of those. If they do write it off, at least buy the new shape. You'll lose a load of money on a mk2.

Edited by Northernchimp on Sunday 1st March 20:03


Edited by Northernchimp on Sunday 1st March 20:04
Cheers. There's only about 2 FR+'s within 150 miles of me, which is a downer. I actually could have had the new shape for about the same price, minus parking sensors, bluetooth and a few bits but opted for the older shape purely because I wasn't keen at all on the new shape.

If it's a write off, doubtful I'll hold out for an old shape FR+ and just opt for something else!

Krikkit said:
That's bloody good to be fair - a lot of people would just leave it to the insurance co!
Oh I totally agree mate, they don't seem like the kind of people to just say "well tough luck". His dad is an older gent and seemed quite of the mindset that "You're a young guy and can't be losing thousands for owning a car for 40 miles so I'll do what I can" - obviously you don't want to take advantage of peoples good nature, but at the end of the day, it's 100% non fault and I'm sure he's given his son a bking for hitting it, hence why I've been so accepting and calm with them. Probably helped them empathise a lot haha!

Edited by Jonno02 on Sunday 1st March 20:10

Mopar440

410 posts

111 months

Sunday 1st March 2015
quotequote all

Jonno02 said:
ripped off the back drivers door,
Jonno02 said:
The mangled door actually opened and closed fine, but obviously being bent upwards, you could put your hand into the car whilst it was closed.
So the door wasn't ripped off after all?

Jonno02

Original Poster:

2,246 posts

108 months

Sunday 1st March 2015
quotequote all
Mopar440 said:
So the door wasn't ripped off after all?
You had to support it up as the hinge was on it's last legs, but when you got it to the right height, it would still close fine. If you opened it and let it hang on it's own weight, it would have fully come away. But for all intents and purposes, the door is done.

Edited by Jonno02 on Sunday 1st March 20:46

pork911

7,086 posts

182 months

Sunday 1st March 2015
quotequote all
dacouch said:
The Ombudsman disagrees with you, if you purchased the car "recently" then the price you paid is regarded by the Ombudsman as being the car's value
Incomplete so still bks

dacouch

1,172 posts

128 months

Sunday 1st March 2015
quotequote all
pork911 said:
Incomplete so still bks
This is what the Ombudsman says...

"9. vehicles recently purchased second-hand

If the consumer only recently bought their car second-hand, we generally assume that they paid the market value price – although we will consider any evidence the insurer can provide that this was not the case."

http://www.financial-ombudsman.org.uk/publications...

If the goes to the Ombudsman it would be upto the Insurer to prove he over paid for the car otherwise he'll get what he paid.

Here's the other part from the Ombudsman that confirms the poster was correct in some fairly rare circumstances

"We are likely to award the consumer the full retail value – even if they inadvertently underestimated the value of the vehicle when filling in the proposal form or luckily bought the vehicle for less than it was worth. And we have seen exceptional cases where a vehicle’s value genuinely rose between the date it was bought and the date of the damage or theft"

So your call of "bks" on McSam's post is itself bks as he was broadly correct

pork911 said:
McSam said:
Don't worry about their "estimated market value" - you only just bought the car, its market value is quite clearly what you paid for it, or else you wouldn't have paid it. This means that it should be repaired.

If it is written off, you could argue that the amount you paid is actually below market value, because you mentioned you got a personal discount which is unavailable to the general public and not applicable to any replacement.
Absolute bks

22Rgt

3,575 posts

126 months

Sunday 1st March 2015
quotequote all
So some posts are bks some arent bks? Which load of old bks is the correct bks?

pork911

7,086 posts

182 months

Sunday 1st March 2015
quotequote all
dacouch said:
pork911 said:
Incomplete so still bks
This is what the Ombudsman says...

"9. vehicles recently purchased second-hand

If the consumer only recently bought their car second-hand, we generally assume that they paid the market value price – although we will consider any evidence the insurer can provide that this was not the case."

http://www.financial-ombudsman.org.uk/publications...

If the goes to the Ombudsman it would be upto the Insurer to prove he over paid for the car otherwise he'll get what he paid.

Here's the other part from the Ombudsman that confirms the poster was correct in some fairly rare circumstances

"We are likely to award the consumer the full retail value – even if they inadvertently underestimated the value of the vehicle when filling in the proposal form or luckily bought the vehicle for less than it was worth. And we have seen exceptional cases where a vehicle’s value genuinely rose between the date it was bought and the date of the damage or theft"

So your call of "bks" on McSam's post is itself bks as he was broadly correct

pork911 said:
McSam said:
Don't worry about their "estimated market value" - you only just bought the car, its market value is quite clearly what you paid for it, or else you wouldn't have paid it. This means that it should be repaired.

If it is written off, you could argue that the amount you paid is actually below market value, because you mentioned you got a personal discount which is unavailable to the general public and not applicable to any replacement.
Absolute bks
Thank you for confirming bks was the correct call for him and you.

Mopar440

410 posts

111 months

Sunday 1st March 2015
quotequote all
22Rgt said:
So some posts are bks some arent bks? Which load of old bks is the correct bks?
The irony is strong here...

dacouch

1,172 posts

128 months

Sunday 1st March 2015
quotequote all
pork911 said:
Thank you for confirming bks was the correct call for him and you.
Interesting, you do not understand the topic you're talking about, call someone else out and are proved wrong but rather than accept you made a mistake you remain hostile.

If the OP wants to follow bad advice on Insurance they just need to follow the advice you give which could have potentially cost him thousands of pounds if the Insurers ignored the Ombudsman's rules on valuing a recently purchased car.


OldGermanHeaps

3,801 posts

177 months

Sunday 1st March 2015
quotequote all
Would you have paid 14k for the car if it had extensive accodent repairs done previously? Remember most "insurance approved" bodyshops are just that because they minimise repair costs, not because they do top quality work. Also a lot of the original metalwork was galvanised after welding in the factory the repairs wont be.if it was me i'd push for a write off and fight over the value.

tumble dryer

1,996 posts

126 months

Sunday 1st March 2015
quotequote all
Mopar440 said:
22Rgt said:
So some posts are bks some arent bks? Which load of old bks is the correct bks?
The irony is strong here...
Nah. He’s ex SAS (car rental division), he’s bound to know what’s bks and what isn’t.


Mr Whippy

28,944 posts

240 months

Sunday 1st March 2015
quotequote all
OldGermanHeaps said:
Would you have paid 14k for the car if it had extensive accodent repairs done previously? Remember most "insurance approved" bodyshops are just that because they minimise repair costs, not because they do top quality work. Also a lot of the original metalwork was galvanised after welding in the factory the repairs wont be.if it was me i'd push for a write off and fight over the value.
Any sensible enthusiast buyer, buying a fairly rare car, may spot less tha factory new repairs and as soon as a seed is planted they'll either walk or want a full frank explanation and adjust their offer accordingly.

I'd push for the manufacturer body shop to repair or have it written off.

The amount of new cars you see driving around that have had cleat crap repairs done these days is quite stunning.

Based on what I've seen I'd want it written off purely to avoid the hassle of dealing with cretins when the job they do is sub par and you go round in circles for months more trying to get it sorted!


Good luck with it smile

Dave

Jonno02

Original Poster:

2,246 posts

108 months

Sunday 1st March 2015
quotequote all
Mr Whippy said:
Any sensible enthusiast buyer, buying a fairly rare car, may spot less tha factory new repairs and as soon as a seed is planted they'll either walk or want a full frank explanation and adjust their offer accordingly.

I'd push for the manufacturer body shop to repair or have it written off.

The amount of new cars you see driving around that have had cleat crap repairs done these days is quite stunning.

Based on what I've seen I'd want it written off purely to avoid the hassle of dealing with cretins when the job they do is sub par and you go round in circles for months more trying to get it sorted!


Good luck with it smile

Dave
The work comes with a 3 year guarantee, which won't be worth the paper its written on! Leaning towards hoping they write it off now.

McSam

6,753 posts

174 months

Monday 2nd March 2015
quotequote all
dacouch said:
pork911 said:
McSam said:
Don't worry about their "estimated market value" - you only just bought the car, its market value is quite clearly what you paid for it, or else you wouldn't have paid it. This means that it should be repaired.

If it is written off, you could argue that the amount you paid is actually below market value, because you mentioned you got a personal discount which is unavailable to the general public and not applicable to any replacement.
Absolute bks
His first paragraph is spot on, the second paragraph not so accurate but could be correct in fairly rare circumstances.

Just to clarify for you, the OP has just purchased the car recently so the write off value is deemed to be what he paid for it.
Thank you. I didn't mention the hopefully obvious qualifier that, in cases where you significantly over- or underpaid, the insurer is able to adjust the original price to better reflect market value but they'd need a good case to demonstrate that your price was well off.

To clarify further, in the second paragraph I said you could argue that about the discount, as that would be my standpoint. I didn't say it would necessarily be successful, and I did go on to say it'd be far nicer to avoid the hassle.

Pork, rather than just throwing denouncements around without any substance whatsoever, would you like to give us the reasoning/precedent/guidelines behind your thoughts, as we have above?

Jonno02

Original Poster:

2,246 posts

108 months

Monday 2nd March 2015
quotequote all
Small update: The insurance company are sending an assessor to go and view the car in the body shop to make a decision.

sandman77

2,366 posts

137 months

Monday 2nd March 2015
quotequote all
Jonno02 said:
Small update: The insurance company are sending an assessor to go and view the car in the body shop to make a decision.
bks

smile

GC8

19,910 posts

189 months

Monday 2nd March 2015
quotequote all
The FOS's view on value is that the vehicle's value is what the owner paid for it, so the insurer cannot value at £10,500 when the owner bought it for £14,000 yesterday.

TwigtheWonderkid

43,248 posts

149 months

Monday 2nd March 2015
quotequote all
dacouch said:
TwigtheWonderkid said:
It is. The insurer does not have to pay you what you paid for it the day before, because you may well have overpaid. Not saying this is the case with the OP, but to say they HAVE to match what you paid very recently is nonsense.

If you use that logic, if he'd underpaid for it, the insurer would be allowed to give him what he paid and not what it's worth, which is also tripe.

They pay the market value. That can be less than, more than or the same as what you paid for it the day before.
The Ombudsman disagrees with you, if you purchased the car "recently" then the price you paid is regarded by the Ombudsman as being the car's value
So if I sell a car to my son for half the market value, because I wish to help him out, he'll only get what he paid if he writes it off?

Or if I buy a car for twice the market value off my son because I want to help him out, if I write it off I'll get back what I paid.

Really???

GC8

19,910 posts

189 months

Monday 2nd March 2015
quotequote all
You will see that I have posted in a similar vein to the fellow that you are replying to. No, the settlement is not limited by the purchase price, rather obviously. If you give someone a car then they will receive its market value.

If you buy a smart car for a price which is over what the insurers claims to be the market value, then the ombudsman will side with you and agree that the price that you just paid dictates market value.

Its a silly argument, but if you aren't convinced then look on the FOS's website and read the motoring and insurance related decisions published in the newsletter.