No fault accident - Can I insist on repair not write off?

[bass2rez]

Thanks for all the replies.

The cost of the car is based on looking at the price of equivalent cars on AT and adjusting for age. There aren't that many petrol models around so its quite hard to be totally accurate, and that is my point, the car will be hard to replace without travelling some distance at my expense.

I imagine the "Glasses guide" price (or whatever is used these days) will be a lot lower than the £6k, but it's the cost of the replacement vehicle that should be the important figure, surely, not some arbitrary guide figure that is unrealistic.

If I looked at lower specced diesel Mondeo's I'd expect the figure to be a lot lower than £6k, but I don't want a diesel.

TooMany2cvs, it would seem you have issues with Mondeo's, judging by your comments. I'll resist any obvious temptation to retort regarding 2CV's. Yes, Mondeo's are a bit dull and have something of a rep-mobile about them, but they do actually drive quite well for a big old hector, and the Titanium X versions are specced very well, and it's this that I imagine pushes the price up a bit. They are also supposed to be cheap to repair, though £4700 for a bonnet and rear bumper somewhat distort that perception.

[TooMany2cvs]

bass2rez said:

The cost of the car is based on looking at the price of equivalent cars on AT and adjusting for age. There aren't that many petrol models around so its quite hard to be totally accurate, and that is my point, the car will be hard to replace without travelling some distance at my expense.

I imagine the "Glasses guide" price (or whatever is used these days) will be a lot lower than the £6k, but it's the cost of the replacement vehicle that should be the important figure, surely, not some arbitrary guide figure that is unrealistic.

The third party insurer owes you the market value. No more, no less.

They do not have any obligation at all to source you a car at all, let alone a like-for-like replacement if it's not easily available locally, unless your own policy explicitly includes that - in which case, you'd claim from your own insurer, who would settle the claim with the third party. Even then, they're under no obligation to try to source you something that isn't available.

Similarly, if you expect a different, higher value than the market value - and, yes, that will be determined by market guides like Glass's - then you need to have bought an agreed value policy and defined that value from the outset. Again, you'd then claim from your policy. If you disagree with the market value, then you can take it to the ombudsman.

[Aretnap]

TooMany2cvs said:

If you disagree with the market value, then you can take it to the ombudsman.

You can't take a third party insurer to the Ombudsman - they will only deal with complaints about a company of which you're actually a customer. If you can't agree with a third party's insurer about the valuation then ultimately the only way to force the issue is to take them to court. This is a reasonable argument for making a claim through your own policy if you think you're likely to disagree with the insurer's valuation.

For what it's worth though the Ombudsman's view on how a car should be valued is here (I've linked to an old version because in an attempt to make their website more "user-friendly" the Ombudsman has removed most of the useful information from the current version). While the insurer is not technically bound by this guidance when settling third party claims, in practice they will use the same approach. Note that adverts for similar cars are not generally accepted as good evidence of value. The fact that someone advertises a car for £7000 doesn't mean that anyone will buy it for £7000; the seller might accept a lower offer, or it might just sit there attracting no interest until he readvertises it for £6000. So trade guides, which are based on actual selling prices carry much more weight. OTOH if it's a genuinely rare car which isn't well served by the trade guides then adverts might be the best evidence available. But also see Section 11 on accessories and unusual features.

[Blue Oval84]

I doubt you've got any chance of getting a repair OP, your car is really barely worth £6K if indeed it's anywhere near. The 2.3 Auto is probably the least desirable version of the MK4 Mondeo and prices do tend to reflect that. I grant you there's one for sale for £6K but it's very low miles, full history and younger than your car.

Good luck, I do hope you get sorted. If they insist on writing off then maybe try and push for them to replace with the Titanium X on Autotrader? Although when there are Ghia models available for sub £4K you may struggle.

[Alucidnation]

We had a car that was driven into by a third party who admitted liability and the insurance company were going to write it off as the repairs cost was quite close to its value..

Most of it was cosmetic, bumpers front and rear etc.(no airbags went off).

However, i firmly and politely told them that they either, repair or replace, as this was not our fault/problem.

The car was repaired to quite a high standard and has been fine since.

All i can advise OP, is to stand your ground.

[48k]

OP it's worth bearing in mind that the repair vs write-off threshold for insurance companies is not 100% of the value of the car. Most have a much lower limit, in the region of 60%. So if the repair cost is more than 60% of the value, they write it off.

Given you've mentioned it needs a bonnet and a rear bumper - that's some shunt? If it were my car I wouldn't want it back after that, repaired or not.

[hman]

I had a non fault prang which caused extensive damage to the car, including bending the drivers chassis rail and inner wing....it was a write off but.......I agreed a fixed cost to repair instead of having the car written off.

Car was not recorded as a write off and I got my car repaired to a high standard and claimed for a hire car in the meantime (3 months!!!)