Insurance question
Discussion
A good mate bought a 12 plate facelift Civic auto 10 weeks ago from the local Honda dealership. This was after looking for two months for a car of the right spec and year, and the forecourt price was £8795 - it was to be fair like brand new and drove superbly.
Last week it was written off by a woman in a Vauxhall Mokka at about midnight, while parked outside his house - his insurers have only offered £6450, nearly 2 1/2 grand under, stating market value. As far as we can see, to try and replace it like for like would be £8500 at least.
Surely the third parties insurer is bound to make good any losses and put him back in the state he was prior to their driver hitting his car?
Are there any arguments to force the third party to up their offer? Currently the offer is from his own insurer, and as they will recover losses from the third party surely there should be no reason not to make a decent offer - after all he will be seriously out of pocket through no fault of his own...
Any ideas/views welcome
Last week it was written off by a woman in a Vauxhall Mokka at about midnight, while parked outside his house - his insurers have only offered £6450, nearly 2 1/2 grand under, stating market value. As far as we can see, to try and replace it like for like would be £8500 at least.
Surely the third parties insurer is bound to make good any losses and put him back in the state he was prior to their driver hitting his car?
Are there any arguments to force the third party to up their offer? Currently the offer is from his own insurer, and as they will recover losses from the third party surely there should be no reason not to make a decent offer - after all he will be seriously out of pocket through no fault of his own...
Any ideas/views welcome
roadsmash said:
As far as I’m aware you can argue the case by providing like-for-like examples which shows similar specification/age/mileage cars at the price you’re after.
ETA this is where GAP cover can come in handy.
Insurance should put you in the position you were at the time of the crash (which is what the OP is talking about).ETA this is where GAP cover can come in handy.
Gap insurance puts you in a BETTER position (i.e. new car for a not new car).
I guess if you have it though, the Gap provider does the arguing with your main insurer if different.
walm said:
roadsmash said:
As far as I’m aware you can argue the case by providing like-for-like examples which shows similar specification/age/mileage cars at the price you’re after.
ETA this is where GAP cover can come in handy.
Insurance should put you in the position you were at the time of the crash (which is what the OP is talking about).ETA this is where GAP cover can come in handy.
Gap insurance puts you in a BETTER position (i.e. new car for a not new car).
I guess if you have it though, the Gap provider does the arguing with your main insurer if different.
OP, you've asked two questions.
1. If your mate's insurer offer less than he wants, and he accepts it, then the tp insurer is not obligated to make up the difference and they won't. They will pay your mates insurer the exact amount they paid him.
2. There are ABI guidelines in place re writing off recently purchased 2nd hand cars. But 10 weeks may be outside the time limit. But regardless, I would get your mate to send in his 10 week old purchase receipt and ask them to either pay the amount he bought the car for, or supply him with a copy of the ABI guidelines for such cases so he can be assured that he is not entitled to the full amount.
That should, if nothing else, make them realise they are not dealing with your average clueless punter.
1. If your mate's insurer offer less than he wants, and he accepts it, then the tp insurer is not obligated to make up the difference and they won't. They will pay your mates insurer the exact amount they paid him.
2. There are ABI guidelines in place re writing off recently purchased 2nd hand cars. But 10 weeks may be outside the time limit. But regardless, I would get your mate to send in his 10 week old purchase receipt and ask them to either pay the amount he bought the car for, or supply him with a copy of the ABI guidelines for such cases so he can be assured that he is not entitled to the full amount.
That should, if nothing else, make them realise they are not dealing with your average clueless punter.
Mr Tidy said:
roadsmash said:
Exactly my point. Why would you not want to be in a better position?
But why exactly should you be in a better position?Or is a non-fault claim supposed to over-compensate you?
No wonder insurance is getting expensive - the rest of us end up paying for your greed!
Besides, GAP cover is usually separate to a standard car insurance policy and therefore claims on a GAP policy have very little bearing to the rising cost of normal car insurance. The reason car insurance is getting expensive is because there are more people on the roads = more crashes = more ‘whiplash’ claims = bigger/more claims = more expensive policies.
Regarding your personal attack against me and my greed, I’ve never claimed on a car or GAP insurance policy so all I’m doing is paying out premiums and getting nothing but peace of mind back in return.
Mr Tidy said:
But why exactly should you be in a better position?
Or is a non-fault claim supposed to over-compensate you?
No wonder insurance is getting expensive - the rest of us end up paying for your greed!
I think you are getting two completely different types of insurance muddled up.Or is a non-fault claim supposed to over-compensate you?
No wonder insurance is getting expensive - the rest of us end up paying for your greed!
GAP insurance is voluntary and totally seperate from legally required car insurance. It does not put you in a better position, in puts you in the same position your were in when you bought the car.
Normal car insurance is not optional and puts you in the same position you were in at the time of the accident.
GAP insurance is not greed, it's common sense. It is a sperate insurance and has no influence on the cost of normal car insurance. If GAP insurance was not cost effective for both customer and company it would not exist.
You pays your money and take your choice!
Mr Tidy said:
But why exactly should you be in a better position?
Or is a non-fault claim supposed to over-compensate you?
No wonder insurance is getting expensive - the rest of us end up paying for your greed!
Do you not have new for old cover on your household contents cover? Is that greed. Or maybe if burglars steal your 5 year old sofa, you don't fancy buying a 2nd hand 5 year old sofa to replace it. Or is a non-fault claim supposed to over-compensate you?
No wonder insurance is getting expensive - the rest of us end up paying for your greed!
Thanks for the advice guys - her insurance company is adamant they are not moving from their position, but he has a BMW 320 hire car that is been my paid for by them, so his own insurer says he can keep it at her insurers expense until fully settled. Hopefully a potential couple of grand hire fees will prompt a better offer, and he has a letter coming from the Honda dealer stating the true cost of replacing the Civic, and not the usually low Parker’s guide value. As a parting shot to her insurers, he said he is willing to pursue a decent payment through the Financial Services Ombudsman and or the courts - I’ll update it as to any movement from them as it comes along.
TwigtheWonderkid said:
I thought you said it was his insurers that had made the low offer??
That’s what I thought he originally said although he was a bit upset at the time. As of this afternoon the Mokkas insurer is ignoring adverts showing cars at the same price point, but they are being pissy about trim levels, and saying you can buy a comparable car for 6500 at a dealer, or 5000 privately - if only they would also tell us where...vitesse2000 said:
TwigtheWonderkid said:
I thought you said it was his insurers that had made the low offer??
That’s what I thought he originally said although he was a bit upset at the time. As of this afternoon the Mokkas insurer is ignoring adverts showing cars at the same price point, but they are being pissy about trim levels, and saying you can buy a comparable car for 6500 at a dealer, or 5000 privately - if only they would also tell us where...NGee said:
I think you are getting two completely different types of insurance muddled up.
GAP insurance is voluntary and totally seperate from legally required car insurance. It does not put you in a better position, in puts you in the same position your were in when you bought the car.
Normal car insurance is not optional and puts you in the same position you were in at the time of the accident.
GAP insurance is not greed, it's common sense. It is a sperate insurance and has no influence on the cost of normal car insurance. If GAP insurance was not cost effective for both customer and company it would not exist.
You pays your money and take your choice!
No, I really am not in any way confused - I worked in the General Insurance industry for over 30 years! GAP insurance is voluntary and totally seperate from legally required car insurance. It does not put you in a better position, in puts you in the same position your were in when you bought the car.
Normal car insurance is not optional and puts you in the same position you were in at the time of the accident.
GAP insurance is not greed, it's common sense. It is a sperate insurance and has no influence on the cost of normal car insurance. If GAP insurance was not cost effective for both customer and company it would not exist.
You pays your money and take your choice!
What do you mean by "Normal Car Insurance" not being optional? Third Party cover is compulsory, Comprehensive cover isn't.
GAP cover is in effect cover for depreciation, but isn't depreciation the reality of car ownership?
Insurers aren't a charity, they are businesses.
So any insurer operates with a business model intended to produce a profit for them - not for the customer. Welcome to the real world!Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff