rights of insurance after collisions
Discussion
Hi, i am looking for advice upon rights regs of car insurance .. Literally i thought i was fully comp for protection if i had accident.Clearly finding that they can take ownership if your car is to old or hows it,s classed by their wording has totally shell shocked me ..i purchased rcz 6months ago .payed 7k and paying a loan back on it . YET I find insurance company is ready to offer 3k based on its age no damage to major parts have occured i can get all parts myself if need to do cosmetic damage.There was another car involved so i have to go through insurance. But i can not get my head around how a insurance company can take ownership of your car they class has to old for repair yet do not state that before u pay for fully comp .Am i living in another planet for even thinking otherwise or maybe it is because i have never covered subject due to no accidents.. I cannot get my mind around if i need to accept their lowest price they offer .. i owe more for purchase ..Can someone please help me on how i handle or get a understanding on how or who makes these decisions .. TO me fully comprehensive is not worth it unless your car is brand new
they will never pay out this i love the rcz and definitely want to keep it ..IF i can . Plus if i need to take to a garage to check overall for any other damage that i maybe cannot see before the insurance come to cat it is that worth doing so please i am clearly a lady in distress....
they will never pay out this i love the rcz and definitely want to keep it ..IF i can . Plus if i need to take to a garage to check overall for any other damage that i maybe cannot see before the insurance come to cat it is that worth doing so please i am clearly a lady in distress....
It's not all that clear what you are asking.
By the sounds of things, you have a Comprehensive insurance policy on your car, perhaps a Peugeot RCZ, and the Insurer has deemed the car a write off, as uneconomical to repair?
You say they are 'ready to offer' £3k for the car - have they actually made an offer? How does that compare to other similar cars on the market? If not, I would suggest you provide the Insurer with examples of similar cars for sale to justify a higher valuation.
Ultimately what you paid for it will not be relevant if that's not in line with the current market. GAP insurance would bridge the gap, if you bought it.
Perhaps you can clarify the position, so that further advice can be given?
By the sounds of things, you have a Comprehensive insurance policy on your car, perhaps a Peugeot RCZ, and the Insurer has deemed the car a write off, as uneconomical to repair?
You say they are 'ready to offer' £3k for the car - have they actually made an offer? How does that compare to other similar cars on the market? If not, I would suggest you provide the Insurer with examples of similar cars for sale to justify a higher valuation.
Ultimately what you paid for it will not be relevant if that's not in line with the current market. GAP insurance would bridge the gap, if you bought it.
Perhaps you can clarify the position, so that further advice can be given?
1034 said:
Hi, i am looking for advice upon rights regs of car insurance .. Literally i thought i was fully comp for protection if i had accident.Clearly finding that they can take ownership if your car is to old or hows it,s classed by their wording has totally shell shocked me ..i purchased rcz 6months ago .payed 7k and paying a loan back on it . YET I find insurance company is ready to offer 3k based on its age no damage to major parts have occured i can get all parts myself if need to do cosmetic damage.There was another car involved so i have to go through insurance. But i can not get my head around how a insurance company can take ownership of your car they class has to old for repair yet do not state that before u pay for fully comp .Am i living in another planet for even thinking otherwise or maybe it is because i have never covered subject due to no accidents.. I cannot get my mind around if i need to accept their lowest price they offer .. i owe more for purchase ..Can someone please help me on how i handle or get a understanding on how or who makes these decisions .. TO me fully comprehensive is not worth it unless your car is brand new
they will never pay out this i love the rcz and definitely want to keep it ..IF i can . Plus if i need to take to a garage to check overall for any other damage that i maybe cannot see before the insurance come to cat it is that worth doing so please i am clearly a lady in distress....
What? It’s usually made very clear in the policy booklet exactly what happens if your car is written off. Who are you insured with? I’m sure anyone will be able to point at the exact section in there for you to answer whatever question it is that you’re trying (and failing) to ask. they will never pay out this i love the rcz and definitely want to keep it ..IF i can . Plus if i need to take to a garage to check overall for any other damage that i maybe cannot see before the insurance come to cat it is that worth doing so please i am clearly a lady in distress....
Reading between the lines.
You’ve crashed a car and are claiming on your insurance.
They will either repair and you’ll need to pay the agreed excess. Or they’ll decide it’s not worth repairing and offer to pay you what they judge the car is worth (again, minus excess). This is almost certainly not going to be what you paid for it, or what you might think it’s worth.
You don’t get to pick (usually) what happens. You can negotiate the amount of money they pay out if they write the car off. To do this, find other similar cars for sale and record the prices. Prove to them that the car is worth what you say it is worth. You should definitely do this.
When they pay you, it’s their car not yours. Until then it’s your car.
You might be able to buy the damaged car back from them and fix it cheaply. If you’re handy with spanner’s or have friends who are this can be a good option.
Good luck.
You’ve crashed a car and are claiming on your insurance.
They will either repair and you’ll need to pay the agreed excess. Or they’ll decide it’s not worth repairing and offer to pay you what they judge the car is worth (again, minus excess). This is almost certainly not going to be what you paid for it, or what you might think it’s worth.
You don’t get to pick (usually) what happens. You can negotiate the amount of money they pay out if they write the car off. To do this, find other similar cars for sale and record the prices. Prove to them that the car is worth what you say it is worth. You should definitely do this.
When they pay you, it’s their car not yours. Until then it’s your car.
You might be able to buy the damaged car back from them and fix it cheaply. If you’re handy with spanner’s or have friends who are this can be a good option.
Good luck.
Was the accident your fault? If not you might get a better deal talking to the other parties insurer.
If it was your fault then as said negotiate an increase in the payout bu providing adverts of cars for higher prices.
Once you have a settlement process ask if you can buy the car off your insurance company. You’ll get the car for the written off value, and a payment of whatever money is left from the undamaged value
If it was your fault then as said negotiate an increase in the payout bu providing adverts of cars for higher prices.
Once you have a settlement process ask if you can buy the car off your insurance company. You’ll get the car for the written off value, and a payment of whatever money is left from the undamaged value
Struggling here but this sounds like the reason people take GAP insurance.
Car cost £7k and let's assume financed by a 4 year loan at 7.5% total amount repayable is £8067
Car is written off early into a finance agreement and is worth less than than the amount outstanding on the loan.
They've offered £3k, go back with examples for sale with similar spec / mileage / condition and no doubt they'll come up but their offer will not pay off your loan
The insurance is to replace the vehicle, its is not to pay for the line of credit you used to buy it in the first place. You're also insuring the car not a warranty from the initial purchase or any rights from it so you're better off looking at private sales for pricing.
edit:
If you love the car and think you can get it fixed cheaply then ask them how much to buy it back from them? they'll deduct this from your payout so you'll get the car and a pot of cash to fix it.
Car cost £7k and let's assume financed by a 4 year loan at 7.5% total amount repayable is £8067
Car is written off early into a finance agreement and is worth less than than the amount outstanding on the loan.
They've offered £3k, go back with examples for sale with similar spec / mileage / condition and no doubt they'll come up but their offer will not pay off your loan
The insurance is to replace the vehicle, its is not to pay for the line of credit you used to buy it in the first place. You're also insuring the car not a warranty from the initial purchase or any rights from it so you're better off looking at private sales for pricing.
edit:
If you love the car and think you can get it fixed cheaply then ask them how much to buy it back from them? they'll deduct this from your payout so you'll get the car and a pot of cash to fix it.
Edited by andburg on Saturday 1st March 10:25
If someone doesn't have years of life experience and is having motor insurance for the first time in their lives than the whole concept that you would have a financial product that doesn't come close to paying out when you need to claim must seem to be completely bizarre.
For some people the route to car ownership is not conventional because if they don't have any money or access to credit then they can still have a car by paying an inflated price as long as they can afford the never loan ending repayments. Unfortunately when the worst happens they are left high and dry.
For some people the route to car ownership is not conventional because if they don't have any money or access to credit then they can still have a car by paying an inflated price as long as they can afford the never loan ending repayments. Unfortunately when the worst happens they are left high and dry.
Actual said:
the whole concept that you would have a financial product that doesn't come close to paying out when you need to claim must seem to be completely bizarre.
Agreed, the weasel phrase is 'market value' which you assume is what it would cost to replace.They don't tell you it means trade/auction value not retail.Simpo Two said:
Actual said:
the whole concept that you would have a financial product that doesn't come close to paying out when you need to claim must seem to be completely bizarre.
Agreed, the weasel phrase is 'market value' which you assume is what it would cost to replace.They don't tell you it means trade/auction value not retail.Simpo Two said:
Actual said:
the whole concept that you would have a financial product that doesn't come close to paying out when you need to claim must seem to be completely bizarre.
Agreed, the weasel phrase is 'market value' which you assume is what it would cost to replace.They don't tell you it means trade/auction value not retail.Simpo Two said:
Actual said:
the whole concept that you would have a financial product that doesn't come close to paying out when you need to claim must seem to be completely bizarre.
Agreed, the weasel phrase is 'market value' which you assume is what it would cost to replace.They don't tell you it means trade/auction value not retail.rhamnousia5 said:
Probably because that’s not what it means.
It would be more constructive for all if you told us what it does mean, rather than what it doesn't.miniman said:
This is why agreed value insurance is available.
That's what I have. But is it available for all cars? I always thought it was a bit specialist.miniman said:
Simpo Two said:
Actual said:
the whole concept that you would have a financial product that doesn't come close to paying out when you need to claim must seem to be completely bizarre.
Agreed, the weasel phrase is 'market value' which you assume is what it would cost to replace.They don't tell you it means trade/auction value not retail.But as the post up thread says, someone who does not have the life experience of car insurance could easily be made to think a comprehensive policy will pay the "value" for your car, and not leaving you taking a 50% hit on it.
It's not an unreasonable assumption to make tbh, and shouldn't need a more expensive policy type just to get back to the position you were in before (less excess of course).
It all depends on how close to the market value the £7k paid was. I would venture that they type of car owner who hasn't really got to grips with insurance is also one who has probably been sold an overpriced car on a steep credit arrangement (so caught both ways).
As for the insurance company "taking" your car - a customer should have been given the choice about what happens, but in my experience the phone centre bods railroad people into recovering to their "approved" garages. We all know why.
I had to moan to get my motorbike back which I bought back at 10% of write off value and fixed for buttons - I came out a couple of grand up, so I can see why insurance companies want that profit if they can get it.
As the OP is showing, people generally"lean the hard way" with insurance companies, and not to mention they get bounced into decisions when they're quite stressed (ie at the roadside after a crash) or without having all the options explained to them.
Luckily this thread seems to be doing an OK job of explaining it, and we've not even had the usual insurance industry apologists turn up and tell us how lucky we should be they're there to make profit from others' misfortune.
The other frequent advantage of fully comp is a courtesy car, but I fear that is another minefield the OP is about to get led into. Ie it being revoked as soon as an offer is not accepted, or the whole up selling / credit agreement nature of courtesy cars.
It makes me glad I've not had a prang in ages.
Simpo Two said:
rhamnousia5 said:
Probably because that’s not what it means.
It would be more constructive for all if you told us what it does mean, rather than what it doesn't.Someone else was saying car insurance market value means a selling price on another thread but that’s true for other types of insurance but not for car insurance. The financial ombudsman has a page which sets it all out.
Simpo Two said:
rhamnousia5 said:
Probably because that’s not what it means.
It would be more constructive for all if you told us what it does mean, rather than what it doesn't..
It also most definitely doesn’t mean auction or trade in values.
The problem is that everyone thinks their car is the very best and most expensive example of them that’s ever existed and it’s always been wrapped in bubblewrap and cleaned using the finest virgin pubes and unicorn jizz to bring out the shine in the paint.
rhamnousia5 said:
As far as I know it means market value. As in what you could buy another car like yours for. It doesn’t mean the price that someone is asking for that car it’s what you could realistically get it for.
People just don't get this. "The insurers have offered me £18K but here's an ad for a similar car at £20K".
Yeah, and? If I had a car for sale and £18K is what i wanted for it, I'd probably put it up for £20K. If I put it up for the £18K I wanted, someone's gonna offer me 16 or 17. Put it up for £20K, I might get the £18K I want.
t?"BertBert said:
Surely market value could well be what you could get in value (money) if you sell your car rather than what you would need to replace it?
That should be more that trade price and less than dealer price, ie private sale price.
If you are claiming from your own policy the Financial Ombudsman interprets it as the price you would pay for a similar car at a reputable dealer. Their website used to be explicit on that point, nowadays it didn't say so explicitly but they haven't exactly got less consumer friendly over the years, so I assume that's because they see it as so obvious that it doesn't need saying.That should be more that trade price and less than dealer price, ie private sale price.
It's a more interesting question if you're claiming from the third party insurer. In that case your rights are determined by tort law, not consumer law, still less the Financial Ombudsman's guidance. I'm not aware of any case law or general principle in tort law that would require a third party insurer to pay you anything more than the private sale price for your vehicle.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff