Non-fault accident like-for-like

[keepup]

Someone reversed into my new Macan GTS at speed (tried to go forwards fast but selected the wrong gear).

Their insurance company are trying to replace my car with a Ford Kuga - saying it "meets my needs", case law seems to say I have the right for a like-for-like replacement. I don't want to use a Credit Hire Company or Accident Management company as they charge huge fees which hurt us all in insurance payments but want to make sure my legal rights are respected.

Anyone have any insight on this area? Thanks

[Cyberprog]

Pretty sure you are correct, for a no-fault claim they should be providing you with life-for-like, or as close as you can get. A Kuga would not be the same class of vehicle!

[vikingaero]

I imagine you are in dialogue with the third party Insurers who are probably trying to mitigate their costs in them providing you with a hire car.

Tell them that you can at any time refuse to engage in dialogue with them and can seek indemnity from your own Insurers.

[Sebring440]

vikingaero said:

and can seek indemnity from your own Insurers.

But he won't want to contact his own insurers in the mistaken belief that it will affect his insurance renewal premiums for decades.

[keepup]

Sebring440 said:

But he won't want to contact his own insurers in the mistaken belief that it will affect his insurance renewal premiums for decades.

I have notified my insurance company of the claim but given it was a non-fault accident informed me that they aren't a party to it. They did however offer to connect me with a Claims Management Company, who no doubt they get a kick-back from.

You have to declare any accidents, fault or not in any case.

Insurance premiums do go up when you are in a non-fault accident as the statistics say you are more likely to be in an accident but c'est la vie.

[JagYouAre]

This sort of thread comes up quite regularly. I think from what I've read before you would need to somehow justify why you need an equivalent vehicle to play the legal entitlement card, as the insurance co will need to be able to justify spending £££££ on a Porsche or equivalent when technically the Ford has four wheels, five seats and a boot so in that sense it is 'like for like'.

Does sound a bit of a piss take though. Could have at least gone with some sort of BMW X-something-or-other.

[julian64]

Honestly can you not just suck up the ford kuga for a week or two?

[mcflurry]

JagYouAre said:

This sort of thread comes up quite regularly. I think from what I've read before you would need to somehow justify why you need an equivalent vehicle to play the legal entitlement card, as the insurance co will need to be able to justify spending £££££ on a Porsche or equivalent when technically the Ford has four wheels, five seats and a boot so in that sense it is 'like for like'.

Does sound a bit of a piss take though. Could have at least gone with some sort of BMW X-something-or-other.

For a couple of days it would be fine for me, but if I had purchased a 400bhp car with a sub 5 sec 0-60 then is it not unreasonable to expect something more in line such as a Jag -pace, or an Audi A8 Etron?

[akirk]

keepup said:

Someone reversed into my new Macan GTS at speed (tried to go forwards fast but selected the wrong gear).

Their insurance company are trying to replace my car with a Ford Kuga - saying it "meets my needs", case law seems to say I have the right for a like-for-like replacement. I don't want to use a Credit Hire Company or Accident Management company as they charge huge fees which hurt us all in insurance payments but want to make sure my legal rights are respected.

Anyone have any insight on this area? Thanks

I will be controversial here and say that I would feel that is okay. Maybe I am a pragmatist, but it is a similar size and capacity, so exactly what is offered by the Porsche that the Kuga doesn't give? Is it the speed / acceleration? I am sure they would argue that the Kuga is sufficient. Is it the badge / status? I am sure they would argue that to be irrelevant. Does it carry the same amount of luggage / number of people - sure, so meets that criteria. Interior feel - will vary by person as to how they perceive it...

I get that there is the element of I spend xxx per month / have spent xxxxx on the car and am now driving a Kuga - but that is one of the ups and downs of life - The local Jaguar dealer was very surprised the other day that I had no issue with an Audi A1 courtesy car while my f-type was in for work - but the A1 happily took me back home and sat on my drive for a day or two, I didn't feel insulted or awkward - yet apparently many of their customers complain...

the insistence on what we are entitled to is no doubt a big driver in the costs being charged

[Dingu]

mcflurry said:

For a couple of days it would be fine for me, but if I had purchased a 400bhp car with a sub 5 sec 0-60 then is it not unreasonable to expect something more in line such as a Jag -pace, or an Audi A8 Etron?

Don’t ever whinge about insurance prices if you expect fleets of Ferraris and rolls on hand.

[Grumps.]

Wouldn't bother me as long as it had four wheels as it will only be temporary.

Although the OP might well be concerned with what his neighbours might think with a Ford parked on the drive.

[geeks]

keepup said:

Someone reversed into my new Macan GTS at speed (tried to go forwards fast but selected the wrong gear).

Their insurance company are trying to replace my car with a Ford Kuga - saying it "meets my needs", case law seems to say I have the right for a like-for-like replacement. I don't want to use a Credit Hire Company or Accident Management company as they charge huge fees which hurt us all in insurance payments but want to make sure my legal rights are respected.

Anyone have any insight on this area? Thanks

I have some insight, pretty sure you won't appreciate though.

[DaveCWK]

I think the Macan GTS is 4wd? So just say you need a vehicle with 4wd because *reasons* and you will likely be upgraded to an X5 or similar

[ScoobyChris]

keepup said:

case law seems to say I have the right for a like-for-like replacement.

Don't want to derail the thread, but I have never heard of this before (only that they have to provide you with a car while the repair happens) - can you point me at the case law/info you found that says it should be like-for-like?

Thanks, Chris

Edited by ScoobyChris on Friday 11th August 15:58

[keepup]

Thanks all, I appreciate the different views.

I see the equivalent of having booked a business class flight to turn up and having been dropped to economy - "sorry sir, the business section is full but take a seat in economy, unfortunately no refund though"

I don't get the servicing comparison - you are paying for a service, or have done as part of a service pack, that doesn't entitle you to a replacement car of the same unless you pay for it yourself.

Similarly, in an accident of my own fault I totally get it - either you pay for a rental you want or take what you're given.

To me, in a non-fault accident which is going to take three weeks to repair I'm not sure why I should suck up the best of a month's cost of capital and depreciation when I am deprived of the vehicle through no fault of my own.

[keepup]

geeks said:

I have some insight, pretty sure you won't appreciate though.

You're welcome to go full keyboard warrior if it makes you feel better, I'm sure I've heard worse and won't give it a moments thought after reading it.

[Sheepshanks]

akirk said:

I will be controversial here and say that I would feel that is okay. Maybe I am a pragmatist, but it is a similar size and capacity, so exactly what is offered by the Porsche that the Kuga doesn't give? Is it the speed / acceleration? I am sure they would argue that the Kuga is sufficient. Is it the badge / status? I am sure they would argue that to be irrelevant. Does it carry the same amount of luggage / number of people - sure, so meets that criteria. Interior feel - will vary by person as to how they perceive it...

Kuga is a bit smaller.

An "ordinary" equivalent would be Audi Q5 or VW Touareg. That's basically what Macan is, after all.

[keepup]

ScoobyChris said:

Don't want to derail the thread, but I have never heard of this before (only that they have to provide you with a car while the repair happens) - can you point me at the case law/info you found that says it should be like-for-like?

Thanks, Chris

Edited by ScoobyChris on Friday 11th August 15:58

You can see the attached from the Competition Commission, the position is quite clear under the legal Framework, paragraph 9:

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/532...

With regards to "need", they specifically say "In the case of a private individual who has lost access to their vehicle following a road accident, the scenarios in which they would clearly not have need for an alternative vehicle are likely to be relatively limited (eg because they have access to another vehicle or because they are on holiday abroad for the period in which their own car is unavailable)"]

There's a bunch of tort cases which you can find via google, one of the main ones was Darren Bent but there are a lot.

[TwigtheWonderkid]

For me, like for like means auto if you drive an auto, same body type or bigger (estate for estate, suv for suv, suv for an estate), same or more seats (a 7 seater if you have a 7 seater, maybe a 4 seater if you have a 2 seater.)

If I had a Porsche Macan (and funnily enough, it's likely to be our next car), a Fiesta would not be acceptable, but a Kuga would be.

[akirk]

Sheepshanks said:

akirk said:

I will be controversial here and say that I would feel that is okay. Maybe I am a pragmatist, but it is a similar size and capacity, so exactly what is offered by the Porsche that the Kuga doesn't give? Is it the speed / acceleration? I am sure they would argue that the Kuga is sufficient. Is it the badge / status? I am sure they would argue that to be irrelevant. Does it carry the same amount of luggage / number of people - sure, so meets that criteria. Interior feel - will vary by person as to how they perceive it...

Kuga is a bit smaller.

An "ordinary" equivalent would be Audi Q5 or VW Touareg. That's basically what Macan is, after all.

A bit smaller - sure, but the boot space for example is 471 litres in the Kuga and 488 in the Macan - I am sure that would be seen as comparable

keepup said:

Thanks all, I appreciate the different views.

I see the equivalent of having booked a business class flight to turn up and having been dropped to economy - "sorry sir, the business section is full but take a seat in economy, unfortunately no refund though"

I don't get the servicing comparison - you are paying for a service, or have done as part of a service pack, that doesn't entitle you to a replacement car of the same unless you pay for it yourself.

Similarly, in an accident of my own fault I totally get it - either you pay for a rental you want or take what you're given.

To me, in a non-fault accident which is going to take three weeks to repair I'm not sure why I should suck up the best of a month's cost of capital and depreciation when I am deprived of the vehicle through no fault of my own.

I do understand the feelings, but...
your airline class comparison is flawed - that would be to remove the Macan and give you the Kuga permanently (i.e. for the whole period for which you have paid) - this is more akin to "would you mind taking a seat in Economy, we are just sorting out your seat in Business Class and we will have you in there as soon as possible."
My Audi example was not a service - but warranty repair work so effectively the equivalent - an insurance based solution to something that makes the car unusable and of no fault of mine / no choice of mine...

A GTS example monthly lease is £976
A Kuga example is £350 - £478
So, you could argue a £600 difference and sue the other person for £450 for 3 weeks loss of use based on that - not sure you would get very far.

I understand the frustration, but what an amazing service that you have zero inconvenience and a replacement car that will still take you from A to B in comfort and carry 5 adults and luggage - maybe we need in the West to go and live in poor India for a year or two to re-calibrate our expectations of what is normal.

I don't think that we really understand enough in our country about how our sense of entitlement / expectations drives the crazy costs we have in living here. If you travel widely outside the Western world you see that there are different levels of expectations and therefore attendant costs - e.g. if you look at housing in e.g. South America, outside the wealthy elite, housing is not built to the level of finish we expect here, it is arguably much cruder, but perfectly functional - not driving for that perception of perfection keeps costs down a lot - even in a situation like this where the OP can argue that it is not his fault / responsibility, by arguing for everything to be put back as exactly as before simply put is a part of the reasons why our costs of living are spiralling...