Tree has Fallen on my Porsche while visiting family's apt
Discussion
ATG said:
What kind of tree is it? An ash? If so, they're b
ds for shedding branches. They seem to be brittle.
.
So are Sycamore , despite regular inspections and maintenance we had one that would drop quite weighty limbs with no warning ds for shedding branches. They seem to be brittle..
Sudden limb or branch drop is a thing for trees this time of year , but that one does look damaged
Jeremy-75qq8 said:
TwigtheWonderkid said:
Anyone is entitled to claim directly from a third party insurer, and the third party doesn't have the option of only dealing with other insurers. They have to deal with whoever makes a claim against them.
The reason the OP doesn't want to go thru his own insurance is none of the tp insurer's business, be it a good reason or not. The OP could have had no insurance, and been driving illegally. He would still be entitled to put in a claim for his damage to the tree owner's liability insurers, and if the OP can prove negligence, then the tp insurers would have to pay out.
That is interesting as I have an issue at present where my car was damaged by unsecured temp fencing. They are denying negligence but have given their insurers details. I did not know I could make a direct claim The reason the OP doesn't want to go thru his own insurance is none of the tp insurer's business, be it a good reason or not. The OP could have had no insurance, and been driving illegally. He would still be entitled to put in a claim for his damage to the tree owner's liability insurers, and if the OP can prove negligence, then the tp insurers would have to pay out.
AlexRS2782 said:
Given OP's age (19 i think based on a previous thread) i'd imagine that excess value was probably a demand of the insurers or a non negotiable sum agreed with OP as part of them being able to get a reasonably affordable premium to insure a car they really wanted to own.
It's not the same value as OP's car but i remember doing similar back when i was barely 18, had been driving less than a year, and decided to buy a modified R5 GTT. Only way to afford a decent premium back then was with a much bigger excess (£1250 which was also the equivalent of 1/3 of the total value of the car at the time).
Makes sense, but seems like a tremendous risk/trade-off to me. Doubly so given that the cost of insurance to begin with must surely be quite high for a younger chap on a Porsche. I'm all in favour for driving a lovely car, but part of my soul would die being gouged for insurance (premium in particular).It's not the same value as OP's car but i remember doing similar back when i was barely 18, had been driving less than a year, and decided to buy a modified R5 GTT. Only way to afford a decent premium back then was with a much bigger excess (£1250 which was also the equivalent of 1/3 of the total value of the car at the time).
normalbloke said:
That’s your flabber ghasted!
Not really. He’s posted photos of his car before. I feel sorry for anyone who’s car is damaging by falling trees … from written-off personal experience and no GAP policy - and just as I was posting on here Mrs Metro was out scraping the side of our car down some metal gates … door, rear wheel arch and cill area all modified.
OP, is it just scratches or dents as well. It is difficult to tell from the low res photo. What happened to the top of the tree? The bit that appears to be resting on the RR seems to be missing the next bit up of that branch.
AlexRS2782 said:
Given OP's age (19 i think based on a previous thread) i'd imagine that excess value was probably a demand of the insurers or a non negotiable sum agreed with OP as part of them being able to get a reasonably affordable premium to insure a car they really wanted to own.
It's not the same value as OP's car but i remember doing similar back when i was barely 18, had been driving less than a year, and decided to buy a modified R5 GTT. Only way to afford a decent premium back then was with a much bigger excess (£1250 which was also the equivalent of 1/3 of the total value of the car at the time).
Looking at the other linked thread, 'reasonably affordable premium' in this case is apparently £5000+It's not the same value as OP's car but i remember doing similar back when i was barely 18, had been driving less than a year, and decided to buy a modified R5 GTT. Only way to afford a decent premium back then was with a much bigger excess (£1250 which was also the equivalent of 1/3 of the total value of the car at the time).
Edited by AlexRS2782 on Sunday 26th June 02:05
Oakey said:
Looking at the other linked thread, 'reasonably affordable premium' in this case is apparently £5000+
You could argue the OP undertook that 5k was affordable and therefore he will need to pay that and attempt to claim back from the landowner or their insurance. The excess should be an affordable amount that you can afford should a a loss occur, it should not be figures that would leave the policy holder in financial hardship. I trust that is the case, I don’t understand why insurers are encouraging drivers under 25 who they state are HIGH RISK and 50% more likely to claim into high performance kit with entertaining such premiums and excesses if I hire a bmw m3 I have to put up a credit cards to cover many thousands, this should be the case here in mind.
surveyor_101 said:
I don’t understand why insurers are encouraging drivers under 25 who they state are HIGH RISK and 50% more likely to claim into high performance kit
They aren't. Based on a premium and excess of £5K, I'd say they were discouraging it. But they aren't making it impossible. It's not the job of insurers to dictate what's allowable in terms of road safety, that's the job of government. We could easily have a graded by age/experience mutistep driving licence for young drivers, just like we do on motorbikes. But the powers that be have decided that's not required, and it's perfectly ok for a 17 y/o to pass their test and drive a Lamborghini back from the test centre. If they have obtained insurance. Sheepshanks said:
Appreciate it's not a great picture, but I'm not seeing £5000+ worth of damage to your car, or a written off 2020 Range Rover and badly damaged BMW.
Your car and the BMW look hardly touched, and it'd take a hefty amount of damage to write off a 2yr old RangeRover.
That was my thought as well. Your car and the BMW look hardly touched, and it'd take a hefty amount of damage to write off a 2yr old RangeRover.
Stone02 said:
TwigtheWonderkid said:
They aren't. Based on a premium and excess of £5K, I'd say they were discouraging it. But they aren't making it impossible. It's not the job of insurers to dictate what's allowable in terms of road safety, that's the job of government. We could easily have a graded by age/experience mutistep driving licence for young drivers, just like we do on motorbikes. But the powers that be have decided that's not required, and it's perfectly ok for a 17 y/o to pass their test and drive a Lamborghini back from the test centre. If they have obtained insurance.
I suppose my point is how do they know the driver has the means to pay a 5k excess, if I hire such a car a credit card with that level of deposit is needed this guy may well have an issue finding 5k.surveyor_101 said:
I suppose my point is how do they know the driver has the means to pay a 5k excess, if I hire such a car a credit card with that level of deposit is needed this guy may well have an issue finding 5k.
You only pay the excess on repairs to your own car that are unrecoverable - if you can’t pay they just won’t repair it. poo at Paul's said:
£5k for some scratches and marks? Absolute twaddle.
You could repaint the whole car with a colour change for less than that.
It is too difficult to say from the photo. If the OP posted some decent photos of the damage then it could be properly estimated.You could repaint the whole car with a colour change for less than that.
If it as the OP suggests, just scratches across the front end, then it would require the bonnet, wings, and probably the front bumper painting. In my estimation this should cost around £1000 plus VAT. The bodyshop I used to own, before I sold it a few years ago, churned out work on Porsches etc that won awards in concours competitions, and thats what we would have charged.
£300 bonnet (they are a relatively small bonnet)
£200 each wing
£300 for front bumper
These prices are based on the fact that it is a newish car, and as such, the bolts/screws to disassemble things like the front bumper etc are easy to remove and not stuck, no rust, serious stone chipping, other other issues.
If there are a few little dings from the tree that need attended to first, maybe an extra £200.
The £5000 figure is either:
a) The OP being a drama queen and just making up a huge figure in his head.
b) He's taken it to Porsche and they have seized the opportunity to absolutely take the piss. Fit a new bonnet, etc.
c) There are more dents and damage than the OP has described and shown in the photo.
That aside, you would not get anywhere near a colour change to a high standard for £5000. Totally different kettle of fish. Requires complete disassembly of significant portions of the car, glass out, trims off, rubber seals removed and possibly replaced. new clips, new badges, doors disassembled, etc. It is a LOT of hours work. Thats before we even get into the tricky question of what you want it to look like in the engine bay or under the bonnet. Does that need colour changed as well? Engine and gearbox out. Wiring looms and ECU's removed to paint in any areas of visible paint etc. Massive job.
Would be surprised if anyone would undertake such a thing to any reasonable standard for less than £8-10k these days, and thats on a car with few issues. On something with bits of rust and other repairs being needed, the sky is the limit.
This is why there are less and less bodyshops out there who will offer full colour changes, restorations, classic car rebuilds etc. The cost to the owners can be absolutely huge and people don't want to pay it, so it doesn't get offered.
My old 1960's 911 had a respray and 'light restoration' invoices with it for £65k and it wasn't even all done when I bought the car. Still needed tidying in a few areas. Some relatively average running and driving classics, which look half decent, can easily rack up restoration bills of £50k-150k to be tidies up or restored properly.
Edited by anonymous-user on Tuesday 28th June 14:17
Toaster Pilot said:
surveyor_101 said:
I suppose my point is how do they know the driver has the means to pay a 5k excess, if I hire such a car a credit card with that level of deposit is needed this guy may well have an issue finding 5k.
You only pay the excess on repairs to your own car that are unrecoverable - if you can’t pay they just won’t repair it. (A lien....in space, nobody can
Lord Marylebone said:
It is too difficult to say from the photo. If the OP posted some decent photos of the damage then it could be properly estimated.
Indeed, in today's modern world hardly any of us have high resolution cameras in our pockets, at the ready, let alone nineteen year olds.Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff