Main dealer has written car off
Discussion
I'm with KungFu and others. Given an offer has already been made, discussions about how it happened and who did it are taking us up a blind alley to chase a wild goose that has in its beak a red herring.
This is not a discussion about negligence, we can take that as read by virtue of the offer. This is a discussion about quantum, and how the claim should be settled, and how much the garages insurers should pay and how the garage should make good.
This is not a discussion about negligence, we can take that as read by virtue of the offer. This is a discussion about quantum, and how the claim should be settled, and how much the garages insurers should pay and how the garage should make good.
kestral said:
Gary C said:
Err, read page 1 ?
It does not say. 'Garages' arn't negligent. People carry out negligent acts.So who/which person and how did the negligent act occure?
We don't know. We have just been told "the garage wrote the car off..." how? did the roof fall in did another car run into the OP's car? how?
Let's get the facts first.
Maybe you should have fleshed out the question a bit
KungFuPanda said:
It doesn’t matter! The garage have admitted liability.
It’s only the quantum aspect of the claim that is in dispute.
Why are people muddying the waters?
OP, issue f
king proceedings to get this matter resolved. It’s the only way to go.
It does not muddy the waters at all.It’s only the quantum aspect of the claim that is in dispute.
Why are people muddying the waters?
OP, issue f
king proceedings to get this matter resolved. It’s the only way to go.Just get the fact as a solicitor would from the begining otherwise it is a hypothetical.
This is all speculation on information that is incomplete from the OP's sister.
The OP cannot just issue proceedings because a proper stratagy has to be taken. Due to the amount of money involved the OP will be liable for court costs at the full value of the claim.
It's best if all the facts are in there is no disadvantage in knowing how the peril occured and then the OP can decide who to go for.
At the moment the OP is dancing to the tune of Stratstones Solicitors which he should not be doing. They should be dancing to his tune but he has had it turned on him.
kestral said:
KungFuPanda said:
It doesn’t matter! The garage have admitted liability.
It’s only the quantum aspect of the claim that is in dispute.
Why are people muddying the waters?
OP, issue fking proceedings to get this matter resolved. It’s the only way to go.
It does not muddy the waters at all.It’s only the quantum aspect of the claim that is in dispute.
Why are people muddying the waters?
OP, issue f
king proceedings to get this matter resolved. It’s the only way to go.Just get the fact as a solicitor would from the begining otherwise it is a hypothetical.
This is all speculation on information that is incomplete from the OP's sister.
The OP cannot just issue proceedings because a proper stratagy has to be taken. Due to the amount of money involved the OP will be liable for court costs at the full value of the claim.
It's best if all the facts are in there is no disadvantage in knowing how the peril occured and then the OP can decide who to go for.
At the moment the OP is dancing to the tune of Stratstones Solicitors which he should not be doing. They should be dancing to his tune but he has had it turned on him.
king Christ. LIABILITY IS NOT IN DISPUTE. If it was, do you think the legal representatives of the garage would make an offer of settlement in the first place?It doesn’t matter who was f
king driving at the time of the accident. It will have been a servant/agent of the garage who would have been indemnified by the garage and their insurer. If it was another legal entity, the garage wouldn’t have made an offer of settlement.Slight tangent but this situation has got me thinking about what would happen if a garage wrote off my weekend car.
I pay extra to have an agreed value on my car, it’s about £10k more than the trade value at a guess. Would their insurance only pay out trade value or would their insurers or the garage have to match my agreed value? And similarly I have like for like cover on modified / upgraded parts. Would they and their insurance only have to put original/ pattern parts on or would they have to match what I have insured?
I pay extra to have an agreed value on my car, it’s about £10k more than the trade value at a guess. Would their insurance only pay out trade value or would their insurers or the garage have to match my agreed value? And similarly I have like for like cover on modified / upgraded parts. Would they and their insurance only have to put original/ pattern parts on or would they have to match what I have insured?
RB Will said:
Slight tangent but this situation has got me thinking about what would happen if a garage wrote off my weekend car.
I pay extra to have an agreed value on my car, it’s about £10k more than the trade value at a guess. Would their insurance only pay out trade value or would their insurers or the garage have to match my agreed value? And similarly I have like for like cover on modified / upgraded parts. Would they and their insurance only have to put original/ pattern parts on or would they have to match what I have insured?
All I will say is I really hope you don't ever have to find out. I pay extra to have an agreed value on my car, it’s about £10k more than the trade value at a guess. Would their insurance only pay out trade value or would their insurers or the garage have to match my agreed value? And similarly I have like for like cover on modified / upgraded parts. Would they and their insurance only have to put original/ pattern parts on or would they have to match what I have insured?
Hi everyone
No update on this I’m afraid, had a busy day at work and fell asleep when I got in. Guessing my sister doesn’t want me ringing her right now for an update!
For those who were interested:
- Unknown when car was written off, or who was driving - ‘solicitor’ won’t give details
- sister has seen car as she went to get her stuff out of the boot.
- sisters car had gone into the back of someone at a fair speed we think
- So someone else’s car is involved, not confirmed by dealer but I doubt they drove into a wall?
-Looked like the front left of sisters car took the brunt
- all left hand side of sisters car badly scratched up
- cat s right off
- dealer was v embarrassed when it happened and apologetic, so she didn’t press them on details as trusted them on their word to put right, no shouting at them or being arsey, accidents happen.
These cars are of the same model, engine and age. Sisters car was on 25k miles.
These cars are NOT from the dealer in question, just taken from merc official used. Didn’t want to identify dealer. Although hers is red, maybe red makes them drop in value!
These look like strong money to me, but she did buy hers from a main dealer too. I’m sure you could get them cheaper private, but hers was approved used so feels unfair to compare other than retail.
As said all along, not bothered about money, so not trying to inflate the payout. A like for like car would have been fine. human decency would have been to expect a bunch of petrol station flowers and a box of chocolates. The fact they have gone straight to an aggressive solicitors firm is not what she expected.
No update on this I’m afraid, had a busy day at work and fell asleep when I got in. Guessing my sister doesn’t want me ringing her right now for an update!
For those who were interested:
- Unknown when car was written off, or who was driving - ‘solicitor’ won’t give details
- sister has seen car as she went to get her stuff out of the boot.
- sisters car had gone into the back of someone at a fair speed we think
- So someone else’s car is involved, not confirmed by dealer but I doubt they drove into a wall?
-Looked like the front left of sisters car took the brunt
- all left hand side of sisters car badly scratched up
- cat s right off
- dealer was v embarrassed when it happened and apologetic, so she didn’t press them on details as trusted them on their word to put right, no shouting at them or being arsey, accidents happen.
These cars are of the same model, engine and age. Sisters car was on 25k miles.
These cars are NOT from the dealer in question, just taken from merc official used. Didn’t want to identify dealer. Although hers is red, maybe red makes them drop in value!
These look like strong money to me, but she did buy hers from a main dealer too. I’m sure you could get them cheaper private, but hers was approved used so feels unfair to compare other than retail.
As said all along, not bothered about money, so not trying to inflate the payout. A like for like car would have been fine. human decency would have been to expect a bunch of petrol station flowers and a box of chocolates. The fact they have gone straight to an aggressive solicitors firm is not what she expected.
Edited by Flumpo on Thursday 19th March 01:37
kestral said:
KungFuPanda said:
It doesn’t matter! The garage have admitted liability.
It’s only the quantum aspect of the claim that is in dispute.
Why are people muddying the waters?
OP, issue fking proceedings to get this matter resolved. It’s the only way to go.
It does not muddy the waters at all.It’s only the quantum aspect of the claim that is in dispute.
Why are people muddying the waters?
OP, issue f
king proceedings to get this matter resolved. It’s the only way to go.Just get the fact as a solicitor would from the begining otherwise it is a hypothetical.
This is all speculation on information that is incomplete from the OP's sister.
The OP cannot just issue proceedings because a proper stratagy has to be taken. Due to the amount of money involved the OP will be liable for court costs at the full value of the claim.
It's best if all the facts are in there is no disadvantage in knowing how the peril occured and then the OP can decide who to go for.
At the moment the OP is dancing to the tune of Stratstones Solicitors which he should not be doing. They should be dancing to his tune but he has had it turned on him.
The garage, thru an act of negligence that is not in dispute, wrote off my car. They have paid me £12K having admitted responsibility, which is £5K less than the market value. I am therefore suing for £5K."
The full cost of the claim she is making is £5K. The above info is perfectly acceptable in order to issue a claim. The only decision to be made is if her request for an extra £5K is justified, or not? No need to get into who was driving, how it happened etc.
TwigtheWonderkid said:
You are massively over thinking this. OP's sisters claim would be:
The garage, thru an act of negligence that is not in dispute, wrote off my car. They have paid me £12K having admitted responsibility, which is £5K less than the market value. I am therefore suing for £5K."
The full cost of the claim she is making is £5K. The above info is perfectly acceptable in order to issue a claim. The only decision to be made is if her request for an extra £5K is justified, or not? No need to get into who was driving, how it happened etc.
No, I would imagine any settlement would include language that would prevent her asking for any more money. She is better off rejecting their offer, sending them a LBA for the full market value to replace that car like for like. This is a bit out of small claims territory, so her own insurance may have motor legal cover that might help here, or her house insurance may have help also. If they haven't then tell her to have a free consultation at a solicitors - they will advise better on the next steps.The garage, thru an act of negligence that is not in dispute, wrote off my car. They have paid me £12K having admitted responsibility, which is £5K less than the market value. I am therefore suing for £5K."
The full cost of the claim she is making is £5K. The above info is perfectly acceptable in order to issue a claim. The only decision to be made is if her request for an extra £5K is justified, or not? No need to get into who was driving, how it happened etc.
Cyberprog said:
TwigtheWonderkid said:
You are massively over thinking this. OP's sisters claim would be:
The garage, thru an act of negligence that is not in dispute, wrote off my car. They have paid me £12K having admitted responsibility, which is £5K less than the market value. I am therefore suing for £5K."
The full cost of the claim she is making is £5K. The above info is perfectly acceptable in order to issue a claim. The only decision to be made is if her request for an extra £5K is justified, or not? No need to get into who was driving, how it happened etc.
No, I would imagine any settlement would include language that would prevent her asking for any more money. .The garage, thru an act of negligence that is not in dispute, wrote off my car. They have paid me £12K having admitted responsibility, which is £5K less than the market value. I am therefore suing for £5K."
The full cost of the claim she is making is £5K. The above info is perfectly acceptable in order to issue a claim. The only decision to be made is if her request for an extra £5K is justified, or not? No need to get into who was driving, how it happened etc.
Flumpo said:
Hi everyone
No update on this I’m afraid, had a busy day at work and fell asleep when I got in. Guessing my sister doesn’t want me ringing her right now for an update!
For those who were interested:
- Unknown when car was written off, or who was driving - ‘solicitor’ won’t give details
- sister has seen car as she went to get her stuff out of the boot.
- sisters car had gone into the back of someone at a fair speed we think
- So someone else’s car is involved, not confirmed by dealer but I doubt they drove into a wall?
-Looked like the front left of sisters car took the brunt
- all left hand side of sisters car badly scratched up
- cat s right off
- dealer was v embarrassed when it happened and apologetic, so she didn’t press them on details as trusted them on their word to put right, no shouting at them or being arsey, accidents happen.
These cars are of the same model, engine and age. Sisters car was on 25k miles.
These cars are NOT from the dealer in question, just taken from merc official used. Didn’t want to identify dealer. Although hers is red, maybe red makes them drop in value!
These look like strong money to me, but she did buy hers from a main dealer too. I’m sure you could get them cheaper private, but hers was approved used so feels unfair to compare other than retail.
As said all along, not bothered about money, so not trying to inflate the payout. A like for like car would have been fine. human decency would have been to expect a bunch of petrol station flowers and a box of chocolates. The fact they have gone straight to an aggressive solicitors firm is not what she expected.
Now I am not a lawyer but I expect the dealer to put your sister back into the exact position she was in before.No update on this I’m afraid, had a busy day at work and fell asleep when I got in. Guessing my sister doesn’t want me ringing her right now for an update!
For those who were interested:
- Unknown when car was written off, or who was driving - ‘solicitor’ won’t give details
- sister has seen car as she went to get her stuff out of the boot.
- sisters car had gone into the back of someone at a fair speed we think
- So someone else’s car is involved, not confirmed by dealer but I doubt they drove into a wall?
-Looked like the front left of sisters car took the brunt
- all left hand side of sisters car badly scratched up
- cat s right off
- dealer was v embarrassed when it happened and apologetic, so she didn’t press them on details as trusted them on their word to put right, no shouting at them or being arsey, accidents happen.
These cars are of the same model, engine and age. Sisters car was on 25k miles.
These cars are NOT from the dealer in question, just taken from merc official used. Didn’t want to identify dealer. Although hers is red, maybe red makes them drop in value!
These look like strong money to me, but she did buy hers from a main dealer too. I’m sure you could get them cheaper private, but hers was approved used so feels unfair to compare other than retail.
As said all along, not bothered about money, so not trying to inflate the payout. A like for like car would have been fine. human decency would have been to expect a bunch of petrol station flowers and a box of chocolates. The fact they have gone straight to an aggressive solicitors firm is not what she expected.
This can absolutely be achieved but depends how much you have in terms of financial or time effort.....
So as I said before look to see if you can get 30 minutes free consultation with a solicitor, or pay a few hundred to get them for an hour or two to actually draft up a letter to put the pressure on.
I'd do this myself.
1) Arrange face to face with the DP
2) If that is not suitable outcome, then chat to a lawyer. Have them draft a suitable letter.
3) If no suitable response, issue a LBA giving them 14 days to reply.
4) At this point I would go public on Facebook, here, Google Reviews, email Mercedes Benz UK HQ and copy in the CEO [all the usually knobby stuff]
5) Go to your local paper and also approach the Sun / Daily Mail they all love stories like this
Personally I would want at the very least to be put back in the same spec of car with similar mileage and have at the very least a free service / MOT for a year or two for the stresses of it. The cost of the car isn't really your sisters problem, if the only cars that match are around £17k then that's what the dealer needs to pay to resolve.
The way they are handling it is abysmal IMO there is no excusing that at all.
The dealer is no longer involved. No point in talking to the dealer.
It's the dealer's insurer you need to negotiate with. If you're not happy with their offer, follow the normal procedure, provide with examples of similar models for sale as close as like for like. If it was a main dealer bought car with main dealer warranty and pricing, then look at main dealer cars. If not, don't.
If you're not happy with their final offer, then ombudsman.
Ultimately, if unhappy with the final result, I imagine you have recourse to small claims for the difference between what you want and what they've offered.
It's the dealer's insurer you need to negotiate with. If you're not happy with their offer, follow the normal procedure, provide with examples of similar models for sale as close as like for like. If it was a main dealer bought car with main dealer warranty and pricing, then look at main dealer cars. If not, don't.
If you're not happy with their final offer, then ombudsman.
Ultimately, if unhappy with the final result, I imagine you have recourse to small claims for the difference between what you want and what they've offered.
TwigtheWonderkid said:
That hasn't been mentioned so far. Basically, the garage's solicitor (we don't even know if insurers are involved) are saying "here's £12K, that's all we're giving you". No mention that they've said that if she accepts, she agrees it's in full and final settlement.
It will likely come right at the end before they hand over any cash!TwigtheWonderkid said:
Cyberprog said:
TwigtheWonderkid said:
You are massively over thinking this. OP's sisters claim would be:
The garage, thru an act of negligence that is not in dispute, wrote off my car. They have paid me £12K having admitted responsibility, which is £5K less than the market value. I am therefore suing for £5K."
The full cost of the claim she is making is £5K. The above info is perfectly acceptable in order to issue a claim. The only decision to be made is if her request for an extra £5K is justified, or not? No need to get into who was driving, how it happened etc.
No, I would imagine any settlement would include language that would prevent her asking for any more money. .The garage, thru an act of negligence that is not in dispute, wrote off my car. They have paid me £12K having admitted responsibility, which is £5K less than the market value. I am therefore suing for £5K."
The full cost of the claim she is making is £5K. The above info is perfectly acceptable in order to issue a claim. The only decision to be made is if her request for an extra £5K is justified, or not? No need to get into who was driving, how it happened etc.
)janesmith1950 said:
The dealer is no longer involved. No point in talking to the dealer.
It's the dealer's insurer you need to negotiate with. If you're not happy with their offer, follow the normal procedure, provide with examples of similar models for sale as close as like for like. If it was a main dealer bought car with main dealer warranty and pricing, then look at main dealer cars. If not, don't.
If you're not happy with their final offer, then ombudsman.
Ultimately, if unhappy with the final result, I imagine you have recourse to small claims for the difference between what you want and what they've offered.
Sorry this is complete rubbish. The contact is with the dealer. There is no contract between the claimant and the dealers insurance company. You need to negotiate with the dealer they then negotiate with their insurance company. If their cover is insufficient its not the claimants problem. You cannot complain about the insurance company to the financial ombudsman because you have no contract with them. It's the dealer's insurer you need to negotiate with. If you're not happy with their offer, follow the normal procedure, provide with examples of similar models for sale as close as like for like. If it was a main dealer bought car with main dealer warranty and pricing, then look at main dealer cars. If not, don't.
If you're not happy with their final offer, then ombudsman.
Ultimately, if unhappy with the final result, I imagine you have recourse to small claims for the difference between what you want and what they've offered.
For this amount write down all the details. Some seem to suggest the dealer has accepted liability because of the offer. But I bet its a without prejudice offer.
Find a local solicitor with litigation expeiance. Most will offer a free 30 minutes.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff