accident repair, is this what I should expect?

[Rich911C2]

Hi,

After being involved in a four car accident, my parents Volvo XC90 was left with front and rear damage. The insurance company took it to a Volvo approved body shop and the repair work was done. The car is 3 years old and was in very good condition prior to the accident. However three days after the car was returned I notice one of the tyres was flat (10psi) so got the pump out. Whilst sitting on the floor wait for the tyre to inflate I noticed that one of the screws holding the bumper (replaced) to the wheel well cover was missing. I then got under the car and took a more detailed look, turns out all four corner bumper screws are missing. I'm not a bodywork repair expert and therefore was hoping the gain the opinions of whether these repairs look acceptable?

Missing bumper screws:


Rear bottom of the boot, cover in grey gunk?


Cheap rivets and more missing screws?


Thanks

Richard

[Podie]

Not acceptable in my book.

[Krikkit]

Another ste repair by an "approved" bodyshop - they obviously didn't have the correct clips/bolts etc in stock, so bodged it for a quick turnaround.

[9mm]

It wouldn't be acceptable to me but it's sadly commonplace. It'll only stop when enough people force cowboys like this is do the work again (and again if necessary) until it's done correctly. A professional repair should be undetectable to the layman.

[johnnyBv8]

Not acceptable - all fittings etc should be as they were pre-accident. Take it back and ask them to redo it.

[Dimski]

The problem is that insurance companies have repair centres that they will direct you towards. Unless you know it is your right to take the car to wherever you wish you're hardly going to tell them to go away...

A local repair centre to me, not one recommended by insurance companies I hasten to add, say that a high percentage of their work is re-repairing work by insurance company recommended repair centres.

I'm guessing these 'recommended' centres have paid for the privilege, and are not necessarily recommended because of quality work.

Just guessing!

[VeeDub Geezer]

Dimski said:

I'm guessing these 'recommended' centres have paid for the privilege, and are not necessarily recommended because of quality work.

They're generally the 'recommended' bodyshop because they'll do the work for the pitance the insurance company pays per hour. Some are even supplied parts and paint now so they can't even make profit on those.

It ends up with cars being rushed to meet (or even beat) book times on jobs.

[Leptons]

The grey stuff is seam sealant. It would be under the paint pre crash. They obviously couldnt be arsed to paint it because you cant see it day to day. The rest of it is unnaceptable but as the other poster says, commonplace. If the stuff you can see looks like that Imagine what its like under the bumper...

I had a repair done at an insurance recomended place done once. As I was driving it home the arch liner they hadnt bothered to fasten in place got ripped off by the tyre.

[Monty Python]

Was it a Volvo dealership or one approved to repair Volvos? When I was at the front of a multi-car pile-up, I was first offered a local "approved" body shop which was a Ford garage. As I wasn't at fault I requested it was fixed at a BMW body shop, which it was (and extremely well done it was too).

[Rich911C2]

Thanks for all your advice, I think this has definitely confirmed my thoughts that this is not an acceptable repair.

Leptons, thanks for the information on the grey stuff, it was still soft/wet to touch which I guess is why it was not painted, still not a valid reason.

The body shop who did the work claim to be Volvo approved and the parts list appears to be genuine Volvo parts. We'll speak to the insurance company and get it sent back. I might also try and negotiate an inspection by the Volvo dealer we use for servicing to check it over afterwards.

Thanks once again.