Insurance Extras
Discussion
If you are ever in the position of having your car damaged to a reasonable degree then don’t forget to ask for the Insurance company to pay you a “Make-up” figure. This payment is kept well under wraps by insurers. I found out when a 17 year old rammed my wife’s parked car some 7 years ago outside my house and should have been written off IMO. It was repaired, and before I took it back I argued with the insurance company that if someone was to look at 2 identical cars for sale and they knew mine had been repaired they would chose the other car. Therefore my car must inherently be worth less money for the rest of its life. Eventually they agreed and paid a cash difference of something like 10 %. It had a proper title and a set amount but they wont tell you unless you ask. Anyone know what the proper arrangement is called ?
its called "claim for diminution"
I ran a case for a PHer whose insurers were refusing to recognise any such claim. Generally speaking, the car has to carry some prestige to succeed, although should apply to 99% of PHers. Engineers report generally required if you are to argue the point vehemently.
>> Edited by shnozz on Tuesday 19th October 14:18
I ran a case for a PHer whose insurers were refusing to recognise any such claim. Generally speaking, the car has to carry some prestige to succeed, although should apply to 99% of PHers. Engineers report generally required if you are to argue the point vehemently.
>> Edited by shnozz on Tuesday 19th October 14:18
My wifes car at the time was a 6 month old Fiat Brava , so no real prestige there. Thanks for the correct term, it was bugging me. I tried for a claim against my day of work, as the car had been hit so hard that it lifted on to the pavement and backwards about 14 feet accros the driveway so i couldnt get my car out for work in the morning: They didnt pay that one ! The car was never right after that. I beleive that if you have serious damage that you should have the choice of having the car replaced or cash to the value of, and they mend the car and sell it after. You are not put in your original situation if you have a massively repaired car !
ilaishley said:
My wifes car at the time was a 6 month old Fiat Brava , so no real prestige there. Thanks for the correct term, it was bugging me. I tried for a claim against my day of work, as the car had been hit so hard that it lifted on to the pavement and backwards about 14 feet accros the driveway so i couldnt get my car out for work in the morning: They didnt pay that one ! The car was never right after that. I beleive that if you have serious damage that you should have the choice of having the car replaced or cash to the value of, and they mend the car and sell it after. You are not put in your original situation if you have a massively repaired car !
nope. quite right, but for some reason claims for diminution are rarely brought unless its a prestigious car. I would assume there is an element of it in every case, its just whether its worth bringing for a lesser valued car. Its generally accepted that 10% of the cars value is "lost" come resale soon a £1k heap its not going to gain you much with all the hassle of claiming. on a £50k motor its worth it.
anniesdad said:
More commonly "diminuition" claims are made against third party insurers in non-fault accidents, as opposed to own insurers. Congrats though, on securing extra payment from your own insurers.
I have no experience against your own insurers as I work in law, not insurance. However, the case law is all against TPIs and I assumed that this was all they were talking about in this thread? The original post suggests it was his son that hit his mum's car.
shnozz said:
More commonly "diminuition" claims are made against third party insurers in non-fault accidents, as opposed to own insurers. Congrats though, on securing extra payment from your own insurers.
I have no experience against your own insurers as I work in law, not insurance. However, the case law is all against TPIs and I assumed that this was all they were talking about in this thread? The original post suggests it was his son that hit his mum's car.
Thought I may have missed the bit about the Son, but having reviewed it can't see where it mentions the Son and Mother. I presumed that the claim was made against own insurers through a comp policy??
anniesdad said:
anniesdad said:
More commonly "diminuition" claims are made against third party insurers in non-fault accidents, as opposed to own insurers. Congrats though, on securing extra payment from your own insurers.
I have no experience against your own insurers as I work in law, not insurance. However, the case law is all against TPIs and I assumed that this was all they were talking about in this thread? The original post suggests it was his son that hit his mum's car.
Thought I may have missed the bit about the Son, but having reviewed it can't see where it mentions the Son and Mother. I presumed that the claim was made against own insurers through a comp policy??
I dont get where you are coming from? the fact that it was Son and mother makes no difference, unless insured on the same policy. Its a standard claim by the mother against the sons insurers, to include diminution. Or have I missed something??!
RoadsterRaks said:
i'm confused more - i thought the 17yr old was just a random kid !?!
better get me some reading glasses
just re-read it again and you appear to be right! Dont know where I got the son/mother thing from then! going
sorry for the confusion.
right, starting from scratch, if its a claim against a third party insurer, its a straight forward diminution claim...
I don't think it's a Mother v Son claim, but regardless whether it is or it isn't, I think its a claim made for vehicle damage through the claimant's own insurers. The Defendant's insurers ultimately liable to pay the costs.
The claimant's own insurers have paid "diminuition", which is IMHO not very common, presumably they will then present this loss to the Defendant insurers.
The claimant's own insurers have paid "diminuition", which is IMHO not very common, presumably they will then present this loss to the Defendant insurers.
anniesdad said:
I don't think it's a Mother v Son claim, but regardless whether it is or it isn't, I think its a claim made for vehicle damage through the claimant's own insurers. The Defendant's insurers ultimately liable to pay the costs.
The claimant's own insurers have paid "diminuition", which is IMHO not very common, presumably they will then present this loss to the Defendant insurers.
where do you get that from though? not being antagonistic but I just read this as being a claim against the third party insurers for diminution. Its an uninsured loss, not an insured loss, AFAIK. Therefore, its not payable by his own insurers but by the TPI, same as general damages..
shnozz said:
i'm confused more - i thought the 17yr old was just a random kid !?!
better get me some reading glasses
just re-read it again and you appear to be right! Dont know where I got the son/mother thing from then! going
sorry for the confusion.
right, starting from scratch, if its a claim against a third party insurer, its a straight forward diminution claim...
Schoolboy error! and you call yourself a Lawyer
shnozz said:
anniesdad said:
I don't think it's a Mother v Son claim, but regardless whether it is or it isn't, I think its a claim made for vehicle damage through the claimant's own insurers. The Defendant's insurers ultimately liable to pay the costs.
The claimant's own insurers have paid "diminuition", which is IMHO not very common, presumably they will then present this loss to the Defendant insurers.
where do you get that from though? not being antagonistic but I just read this as being a claim against the third party insurers for diminution. Its an uninsured loss, not an insured loss, AFAIK. Therefore, its not payable by his own insurers but by the TPI, same as general damages..
Precisely the reason why I said its not very common. It is an uninsured loss. I think we are of the same opinion just coming at this from different angles. Perhaps it's a question the thread author could answer;
Was it your insurers that arranged to repair your car or the insurers of the car that hit you?
>> Edited by anniesdad on Wednesday 20th October 13:30
Gassing Station | Supercar General | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff