None fault crash - Uninsured loss claim

[Calza]

Hi,

Hoping someone can help me with a couple of questions.

I was involved in a hit and run at the end of last year, but found the tosser a few months later. They admitted, car got repaired etc. I'm now claiming for uninsured losses.

Two items they're disputing are time spent dealing with it, and repatriation as I was stranded.

1. Time claimed - I've claimed half a morning to sort out emergency repairs (I came out to find the car with wheels in different direction and suspension components snapped). I've also claimed for some of the time I've spent on the phone to the third party, insurers etc. I've been told I can only claim time back if I can prove loss of earnings and have a letter from HR stating I was off work for this time, along with 3 months pay slips. I've been told this is the law and that's that. Is it?

2. Repatriation - The accident happened at my 'part time' house in London, I had to get back home that week though. So after the garage collected the car, I've claimed the distance from Home to London and back again, then again a few days later when fixed. I've asked for 45p per mile as that seems the standard rate. They're now asking for a fuel receipt from 5 months ago and the make / model of the vehicle that collected me to calculate the average MPG. I don't see how that proves anything, or even makes sense. Again I've bee told this is law.

Any help appreciated?

[TooMany2cvs]

Calza said:

I've been told I can only claim time back if I can prove loss of earnings and have a letter from HR stating I was off work for this time

Yes, it seems entirely fair that you can only claim for earnings you've actually lost.

Calza said:

2. Repatriation - The accident happened at my 'part time' house in London, I had to get back home that week though. So after the garage collected the car, I've claimed the distance from Home to London and back again, then again a few days later when fixed. I've asked for 45p per mile as that seems the standard rate. They're now asking for a fuel receipt from 5 months ago and the make / model of the vehicle that collected me to calculate the average MPG. I don't see how that proves anything, or even makes sense.

So you'd like to claim your "losses" based on an entirely random figure? You made no attempt to mitigate your losses - by, say, using your normal recovery service - and you failed to keep any records of the costs you apparently incurred?

[Calza]

TooMany2cvs said:

Calza said:

I've been told I can only claim time back if I can prove loss of earnings and have a letter from HR stating I was off work for this time

Yes, it seems entirely fair that you can only claim for earnings you've actually lost.

Calza said:

2. Repatriation - The accident happened at my 'part time' house in London, I had to get back home that week though. So after the garage collected the car, I've claimed the distance from Home to London and back again, then again a few days later when fixed. I've asked for 45p per mile as that seems the standard rate. They're now asking for a fuel receipt from 5 months ago and the make / model of the vehicle that collected me to calculate the average MPG. I don't see how that proves anything, or even makes sense.

So you'd like to claim your "losses" based on an entirely random figure? You made no attempt to mitigate your losses - by, say, using your normal recovery service - and you failed to keep any records of the costs you apparently incurred?

Steady on there, maybe my wording was poor. The 'emergency' repairs were carried out by a local garage in London about 2 miles from the car. I thought this was mitigating losses, cheaper than getting trains / public transport everywhere. I don't know what my normal recovery service is though, I don't have a personal flat bed and The AA wouldn't have any interest in moving it.

The repatriation was for me personally. I can't prove it now, but the alternative was to book same day train tickets the week before Christmas - which was altogether more costly. It was a hit & run, I had no reason to think that several months later I would find the person and be able to submit a claim. I don't see what a random fuel receipt before the crash would really prove anyway? Cars don't just consume fuel when being driven, nor does an official MPG figure accurately reflect real life MPG ?

The figure isn't entirely random, I looked towards the governments suggested mileage allowance payments of 45p per mile: https://www.gov.uk/expenses-and-benefits-business-... .

Edited by Calza on Thursday 16th April 12:32

Edited by Calza on Thursday 16th April 12:32

[TooMany2cvs]

Calza said:

The 'emergency' repairs were carried out by a local garage in London about 2 miles from the car.

And they didn't provide you with a loan car?

Calza said:

I don't know what my normal recovery service is though, I don't have a personal flat bed and The AA wouldn't have any interest in moving it.

If you're an AA member, then the AA is your normal recovery service.

[quote]The repatriation was for me personally. I can't prove it now, but the alternative was to book same day train tickets the week before Christmas - which was altogether more costly. It was a hit & run, I had no reason to think that several months later I would find the person and be able to submit a claim. I don't see what a random fuel receipt before the crash would really prove anyway? Cars don't just consume fuel when being driven, nor does an official MPG figure accurately reflect real life MPG ?

I'm a little confused here. This was a trip that you would have been making anyway, but for which you couldn't use your own car as it was in dock with no courtesy car available? So fuel is irrelevant, but car hire might be.

If not, how does you trekking backwards-and-forwards across the country because your car is being fixed two miles from your home address relate to the damage?

[s2kjock]

The AA don't recover you after an RTC.

[TooMany2cvs]

s2kjock said:

The AA don't recover you after an RTC.

They do.

They'll charge you - like all the other recovery services - but that's a bill that can be passed on to the insurers with little risk of quibbling, if the car's undrivable.

[Calza]

The car was picked up by a company the local garage arranged, and that was included in the bill. Everyone's 'happy' with that claim.

It's just a small local garage so I don't think they have any courtesy cars, no?

The crash was in London, where I've got a part term room let in a house - but I live in Lincolnshire. So I needed to get back to Lincolnshire that day (and ideally for Christmas), but couldn't because the car was broke. So I had to get collected and brought home. Then a few days later brought back down to collect the car and drive it north.

[The Surveyor]

Calza said:

Hi,
1. Time claimed - I've claimed half a morning to sort out emergency repairs (I came out to find the car with wheels in different direction and suspension components snapped). I've also claimed for some of the time I've spent on the phone to the third party, insurers etc. I've been told I can only claim time back if I can prove loss of earnings and have a letter from HR stating I was off work for this time, along with 3 months pay slips. I've been told this is the law and that's that. Is it?

They are asking for this to demonstrate that you have actually incurred a loss as a result of having to spend time sorting out the repair. If you are paid a salary and your employer didn't deduct the time spent sorting out the damage from your salary or took it off your holiday entitlement, you haven't incurred any actual loss. Lets be realistic, most employers would allow you some time off to sort out these normal little drama's in the same way you don't incur a loss when you go to the dentist, doctors, or any other similar event during work time.

Alternatively, if you are self employed or paid by the hour, then you shouldn't have any problem providing the details needed to demonstrate that a reasonable amount of your earning-potential has been lost sorting out the damage.

These are uninsured losses remember, not opportunities to make a profit.

[ging84]

you going to add the time spent starting this thread and replying on it to the claim?

[ralphrj]

Calza said:

The crash was in London, where I've got a part term room let in a house - but I live in Lincolnshire. So I needed to get back to Lincolnshire that day (and ideally for Christmas), but couldn't because the car was broke. So I had to get collected and brought home. Then a few days later brought back down to collect the car and drive it north.

As others have said, you can only claim for actual losses.

1. Time off - you can only claim this if you actually suffered loss of salary or used some of your holiday entitlement. That is why the insurer is asking for some evidence from your employer. If you were paid as normal and your employer didn't make you take a half day holiday then you haven't suffered a loss.

2. Repatriation/travel - you need to provide some evidence that you actually incurred some additional costs. You say you want 45p per mile but then say that someone collected you and gave you a lift back to Lincolnshire then drove you back to London to collect the car (you would have had to make the final trip from London to Lincolnshire anyway so that would not be claimable). Did you pay that person 45p per mile for giving you a lift? If so, get a receipt from them for the mileage multiplied by 45p. If not, what additional cost did you actually incur? If they gave you a lift for free then it cost you nothing.

[TooMany2cvs]

Calza said:

The car was picked up by a company the local garage arranged, and that was included in the bill. Everyone's 'happy' with that claim.

Ah, OK. By "repatriation", I thought you meant the car being taken to the other end of the country.

Calza said:

It's just a small local garage so I don't think they have any courtesy cars, no?

Yes, they will. They might not be great, but they will.

Calza said:

The crash was in London, where I've got a part term room let in a house - but I live in Lincolnshire. So I needed to get back to Lincolnshire that day (and ideally for Christmas), but couldn't because the car was broke. So I had to get collected and brought home. Then a few days later brought back down to collect the car and drive it north.

So you'd have been going back to Lincs for Xmas anyway (about this loss of earnings...). I really can't believe the most sensible way to sort the transport from London to Lincs was to get somebody to drive from Lincs to pick you up, then drive you back south when the car was ready, so that you could then drive it straight back to Lincs...? Could the car not have waited for collection until you returned to London?

[anonymous-user]

Sounds like a perfectly reasonable claim to me.

Insurance company being arses, particularly as their client didn't stop. They should pay with good grace and claim back from their knobhead client.

[hornetrider]

TooMany2cvs said:

Calza said:

It's just a small local garage so I don't think they have any courtesy cars, no?

Yes, they will. They might not be great, but they will.

How the fk do you know? There's gazillions of garages without courtesy cars - it's how they keep costs down.

[Calza]

In all honesty I thought I was entitled to claim back for some of my time wasted too. Several hours arranging collection etc, more hours of phone calls than I can actually recall. If that's not the case fair enough - just seems stty I'm inconvenienced and it's tough luck!

I couldn't have stayed in London, I needed to get back up to Lincs even though it meant repeat journey a few days apart. If the argument is that it would have been conducted once as my normal routine - the extra trip was generated as a result of the crash surely? I wasn't returning to London till the new year and really needed a car for getting around at Christmas / New year.

Appreciate the time taken to reply from every one so far, and apologies if some of my wording has been poorly chosen / unclear.

[The Surveyor]

desolate said:

Sounds like a perfectly reasonable claim to me.

Insurance company being arses, particularly as their client didn't stop. They should pay with good grace and claim back from their knobhead client.

Claim what though, £10/hour, £50/hour, £1,000/hour, a million quid as he 'could' have bought a lottery ticket during the time lost on the phone sorting out the claim! It is right that you can only claim for actual losses otherwise it's open to mega fraud and then all our policy premiums would rocket. Possibly!

[anonymous-user]

The Surveyor said:

desolate said:

Sounds like a perfectly reasonable claim to me.

Insurance company being arses, particularly as their client didn't stop. They should pay with good grace and claim back from their knobhead client.

Claim what though, £10/hour, £50/hour, £1,000/hour, a million quid as he 'could' have bought a lottery ticket during the time lost on the phone sorting out the claim! It is right that you can only claim for actual losses otherwise it's open to mega fraud and then all our policy premiums would rocket. Possibly!

What he is claiming seems pretty reasonable.

The issue here isn't what he is claiming it's the tool who left the scene of the accident.

[pork911]

what's the difference in premiums between the 'part time' home in london and the 'real' home elsewhere?

[LoonR1]

pork911 said:

what's the difference in premiums between the 'part time' home in london and the 'real' home elsewhere?

Exactly what I was thinking.

[The Surveyor]

desolate said:

What he is claiming seems pretty reasonable.

How do you, and the insurance companies actually know that. I'd hate to think that an 'inconvenience payment' was being applied to all claims on the basis that it 'seems pretty reasonable'!

[rb5er]

If you are involved in an accident its always an inconvenience. It always involves lots of telephone call to sort out. Thought anyone would know that.

Sounds like you are quibling over a few quid and wasting more of your own expensive time. 45p a mile? Based on what?