Non fault accident, help needed
Discussion
Hello everyone,
Last week my wife's Volvo C70 was hit from behind by another motorist whilst stationary. The lady got out and admitted fault immediately, and we also have dashcam footage, so liability is not a problem. I have taken the C70 to our local Volvo dealership and the only damage is a small scratch above the rear exhaust, nothing structural and no other damage.
Her insurance company however seem to be being very unhelpful. They have decided that my wife's car is damaged beyond uneconomical repair, without even seeing it, and have offered us 2 options:
A/ They take our car and give us £1190
Or
B/ They give us £1007 and declare the car a total loss.
I have been told that "total loss" and "written off" are fully interchangeable in the insurance world, and if we go with option B the car would have a Cat N placed on it, is this correct?
I also find it hard to belive a respray of the rear bumper will cost 70% of the cars value!
My wife has also been asked for a copy of the V5, which seems strange, is this normal?
My wife has asked for a cash in lieu settlement and the insurance company said they will consider it only if she goes and gets estimates, surely this is there job.
We are pulling our hair out about this so any help will be greatly appreciated.
Last week my wife's Volvo C70 was hit from behind by another motorist whilst stationary. The lady got out and admitted fault immediately, and we also have dashcam footage, so liability is not a problem. I have taken the C70 to our local Volvo dealership and the only damage is a small scratch above the rear exhaust, nothing structural and no other damage.
Her insurance company however seem to be being very unhelpful. They have decided that my wife's car is damaged beyond uneconomical repair, without even seeing it, and have offered us 2 options:
A/ They take our car and give us £1190
Or
B/ They give us £1007 and declare the car a total loss.
I have been told that "total loss" and "written off" are fully interchangeable in the insurance world, and if we go with option B the car would have a Cat N placed on it, is this correct?
I also find it hard to belive a respray of the rear bumper will cost 70% of the cars value!
My wife has also been asked for a copy of the V5, which seems strange, is this normal?
My wife has asked for a cash in lieu settlement and the insurance company said they will consider it only if she goes and gets estimates, surely this is there job.
We are pulling our hair out about this so any help will be greatly appreciated.
If it's an old car worth a grand-ish it will be written off for pretty much any damage. Not just because of the cost of the respray, but also because of the risk of finding more damage when they take the bumper off, and the cost of providing a hire car while they do the work etc. From the insurer's point of view it isn't even worth the expense of sending someone out to look at it. Easiest to write it off and be done with it.
What outcome are you looking for? If you're confident that the damage is minor and cosmetic I'd bite their hand off at the offer of a grand - keep the car, pocket the money and get a scratch and dent man to deal with the scratch. The Cat N marker will cause you no issues unless you plan to sell the car, and even if you do it will make a minimal difference to the value of a car in the £1000 range. If you plan to keep the car until it dies and then trade it in for a couple of hundred quid it will make no difference at all.
The third party insurer doesn't have a duty to arrange repairs - they only have a duty to compensate you for the damage. If they've offered you the full value of the car then by definition they've done at least that, and probably more. Getting quotes for repairs means your have to do more work in order to be paid less money. Unless there's some good reason why you're really keen to avoid having it marked as cat N, that seems like a bad deal to me.
What outcome are you looking for? If you're confident that the damage is minor and cosmetic I'd bite their hand off at the offer of a grand - keep the car, pocket the money and get a scratch and dent man to deal with the scratch. The Cat N marker will cause you no issues unless you plan to sell the car, and even if you do it will make a minimal difference to the value of a car in the £1000 range. If you plan to keep the car until it dies and then trade it in for a couple of hundred quid it will make no difference at all.
The third party insurer doesn't have a duty to arrange repairs - they only have a duty to compensate you for the damage. If they've offered you the full value of the car then by definition they've done at least that, and probably more. Getting quotes for repairs means your have to do more work in order to be paid less money. Unless there's some good reason why you're really keen to avoid having it marked as cat N, that seems like a bad deal to me.
Aretnap said:
If it's an old car worth a grand-ish it will be written off for pretty much any damage. /snip
Thank you - you've just saved me from typing something almost identical.OP - I would suggest you take the offer, Cat N will make no difference if its current value is about £4k or less.
Hit by a bus, been there, done that.
The agreed insurance credit hire rate for an equivalent vehicle (BMW 120 Coupe) is £125.49/day. Assume the repair takes five days (which is will as it will get dragged out - it always does) then the hire charges alone will exceed £600 which is no doubt driving their decision to total-loss your C70 on paper - not worth spending anymore time on it from their perspective no doubt.
I’d be taking the money personally.
I’d be taking the money personally.
ADJimbo said:
The agreed insurance credit hire rate for an equivalent vehicle (BMW 120 Coupe) is £125.49/day. Assume the repair takes five days (which is will as it will get dragged out - it always does) then the hire charges alone will exceed £600 which is no doubt driving their decision to total-loss your C70 on paper - not worth spending anymore time on it from their perspective no doubt.
I’d be taking the money personally.
Consequential charges such as car hire etc are not taken into account when considering whether a vehicle is deemed a total loss, it is based purely on repair costsI’d be taking the money personally.
What is the OP's car worth?
There are a few answers to that depending on whether he's buying or selling.
But personally, I would prefer any car of mine, even a shed, to avoid the CAT N stigma.
Lots of people myself included, won't buy such cars.
Should your car have another mishap, it may affect what you get.
The other party's insurer seems willing to pay a four figure sum.
I would make a counter offer, say I'd accept a very similar sum in full and final settlement., with the car not to be recorded as CAT N.
There are a few answers to that depending on whether he's buying or selling.
But personally, I would prefer any car of mine, even a shed, to avoid the CAT N stigma.
Lots of people myself included, won't buy such cars.
Should your car have another mishap, it may affect what you get.
The other party's insurer seems willing to pay a four figure sum.
I would make a counter offer, say I'd accept a very similar sum in full and final settlement., with the car not to be recorded as CAT N.
OutInTheShed said:
But personally, I would prefer any car of mine, even a shed, to avoid the CAT N stigma.
Lots of people myself included, won't buy such cars.
Most people won't ever have heard of CAT N let alone know what it means and if you are selling a car privately you don't have to tell the buyer anyway (although you do need to answer honestly if they ask). A CAT N on an old banger won't make any difference at all.Lots of people myself included, won't buy such cars.
Yellow Lizud said:
OutInTheShed said:
But personally, I would prefer any car of mine, even a shed, to avoid the CAT N stigma.
Lots of people myself included, won't buy such cars.
Most people won't ever have heard of CAT N let alone know what it means and if you are selling a car privately you don't have to tell the buyer anyway (although you do need to answer honestly if they ask). A CAT N on an old banger won't make any difference at all.Lots of people myself included, won't buy such cars.
Suppose somebody else hits you? Your insurer will then value your car as previously written off.
Suppose you want to trade in to a dealer. It will affect whether he'll touch it.
I might not worry on an old shed close to the end of its life, but if it was a basically OK car which might have a trade in value of a couple of grand or more, I'd probably make the effort.
I think even shed buyers are quite savvy about CAT cars these days, because there are so many of them in your face in AutoTarder.
Bobson said:
Hello everyone,
Last week my wife's Volvo C70 was hit from behind by another motorist whilst stationary. The lady got out and admitted fault immediately, and we also have dashcam footage, so liability is not a problem. I have taken the C70 to our local Volvo dealership and the only damage is a small scratch above the rear exhaust, nothing structural and no other damage.
Her insurance company however seem to be being very unhelpful. They have decided that my wife's car is damaged beyond uneconomical repair, without even seeing it, and have offered us 2 options:
A/ They take our car and give us £1190
Or
B/ They give us £1007 and declare the car a total loss.
I have been told that "total loss" and "written off" are fully interchangeable in the insurance world, and if we go with option B the car would have a Cat N placed on it, is this correct?
I also find it hard to belive a respray of the rear bumper will cost 70% of the cars value!
My wife has also been asked for a copy of the V5, which seems strange, is this normal?
My wife has asked for a cash in lieu settlement and the insurance company said they will consider it only if she goes and gets estimates, surely this is there job.
We are pulling our hair out about this so any help will be greatly appreciated.
Drop the claim or take the money and keep the car. I'd take the second option. Easy money.Last week my wife's Volvo C70 was hit from behind by another motorist whilst stationary. The lady got out and admitted fault immediately, and we also have dashcam footage, so liability is not a problem. I have taken the C70 to our local Volvo dealership and the only damage is a small scratch above the rear exhaust, nothing structural and no other damage.
Her insurance company however seem to be being very unhelpful. They have decided that my wife's car is damaged beyond uneconomical repair, without even seeing it, and have offered us 2 options:
A/ They take our car and give us £1190
Or
B/ They give us £1007 and declare the car a total loss.
I have been told that "total loss" and "written off" are fully interchangeable in the insurance world, and if we go with option B the car would have a Cat N placed on it, is this correct?
I also find it hard to belive a respray of the rear bumper will cost 70% of the cars value!
My wife has also been asked for a copy of the V5, which seems strange, is this normal?
My wife has asked for a cash in lieu settlement and the insurance company said they will consider it only if she goes and gets estimates, surely this is there job.
We are pulling our hair out about this so any help will be greatly appreciated.
OutInTheShed said:
Yellow Lizud said:
OutInTheShed said:
But personally, I would prefer any car of mine, even a shed, to avoid the CAT N stigma.
Lots of people myself included, won't buy such cars.
Most people won't ever have heard of CAT N let alone know what it means and if you are selling a car privately you don't have to tell the buyer anyway (although you do need to answer honestly if they ask). A CAT N on an old banger won't make any difference at all.Lots of people myself included, won't buy such cars.
Suppose somebody else hits you? Your insurer will then value your car as previously written off.
Suppose you want to trade in to a dealer. It will affect whether he'll touch it.
I might not worry on an old shed close to the end of its life, but if it was a basically OK car which might have a trade in value of a couple of grand or more, I'd probably make the effort.
I think even shed buyers are quite savvy about CAT cars these days, because there are so many of them in your face in AutoTarder.
I said "A CAT N on an old banger won't make any difference at all."
You said "I might not worry on an old shed close to the end of its life,"
That looks the same to me
Yellow Lizud said:
Not quite sure why you disagree.
I said "A CAT N on an old banger won't make any difference at all."
You said "I might not worry on an old shed close to the end of its life,"
That looks the same to me
It's the difference between a 'banger' which somebody might want to sell for a 4--figure sum, and a shed, which you don't care about.I said "A CAT N on an old banger won't make any difference at all."
You said "I might not worry on an old shed close to the end of its life,"
That looks the same to me
I jumped to the conclusion that the OP's car might be a banger which would cost him rather more than £1k to replace like-for-like.
If there's the slightest possibility of the 'CAT' factor costing you money, there's no reason to accept it for trivial damage that's not your fault.
If it really is just a small scratch, and the car is only worth a grand, and you really don't want the Cat N marker, then why not counter offer by saying you'll take £500 for the repair cost without them writing off the car.
If it's just a scratch you could probably fix it yourself or get it done for that amount.
If it's just a scratch you could probably fix it yourself or get it done for that amount.
Thanks for all the replys, I appreciate it.
To try and answer the questions in order, I haven't gone through our insurance company as I was advised it could possibly effect our no claims ( don't know if that's true)
I don't want a CatN marker on the car for 2 reasons, the effect on the value and the fact that it also effects the car when the time comes to renew the insurance, some companies will not even insure a CatN car, and I don't see why we should suffer through somebody else's incompetence.
The outcome I would like is a repaired car, not a written off one.
Anyway, there is now some hope ahead, today I visited a Volvo approved bodyshop and chatted to them about it. Insurance companies doing this sort of thing is apparently becoming the norm, they were very surprised the car had been deemed a total loss without an engineers report, or even the insurance company seeing any pictures of the damage to the car.
I was told the current practice is to look up the value of the car on WeBuyAnyCar and then they go by that!
The assessor at the approved bodyshop looked at the damage and said they would cost the bumper respray at between £300 to £400, or roughly between 39 to 45 percent of the cars value, so nowhere near the write off percentage of 60 percent.
So they are now dealing with the claim (thank goodness)
Thanks again for all your replies.
To try and answer the questions in order, I haven't gone through our insurance company as I was advised it could possibly effect our no claims ( don't know if that's true)
I don't want a CatN marker on the car for 2 reasons, the effect on the value and the fact that it also effects the car when the time comes to renew the insurance, some companies will not even insure a CatN car, and I don't see why we should suffer through somebody else's incompetence.
The outcome I would like is a repaired car, not a written off one.
Anyway, there is now some hope ahead, today I visited a Volvo approved bodyshop and chatted to them about it. Insurance companies doing this sort of thing is apparently becoming the norm, they were very surprised the car had been deemed a total loss without an engineers report, or even the insurance company seeing any pictures of the damage to the car.
I was told the current practice is to look up the value of the car on WeBuyAnyCar and then they go by that!
The assessor at the approved bodyshop looked at the damage and said they would cost the bumper respray at between £300 to £400, or roughly between 39 to 45 percent of the cars value, so nowhere near the write off percentage of 60 percent.
So they are now dealing with the claim (thank goodness)
Thanks again for all your replies.
Bobson said:
I don't want a CatN marker on the car for 2 reasons, the effect on the value and the fact that it also effects the car when the time comes to renew the insurance, some companies will not even insure a CatN car, and I don't see why we should suffer through somebody else's incompetence.
.
Not really true. .
t and I could go on.Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff