I don’t see why you should tell your insurance, you were not driving and they will deal with it through their insurers so no worries,
How old is the car?
If it is a write off (hopefully not) and is a good car consider buying it back from the insurance company and get it back on the road, if the damage is easily repairable, e.g. second hand wing of the right colour from ebay/a breaker. Perhaps the garage will help you out with the labour at a reduced rare if they feel bad about what had happened
Edited by Ian D on 21/06/2021 at 14:14
|
I don’t see why you should tell your insurance, you were not driving and they will deal with it through their insurers so no worries,
I'd want to check exactly what my contract said before heeding that advice. More so if the car is a write off.
I suspect the contract requires you to advise the insurer even if no claim. You might also find them useful to have on side if there's a squabble between the garage and the delivery company.
|
|
|
If it is a write off (hopefully not) ..... Perhaps the garage will help you out with the labour at a reduced rate if they feel bad about what had happened
The OP said the car was written off (as was mine, which suffered similar damage by the sound of it). But get repairs done by a bodyshop, not an MoT test centre, unless it happens to also be one.
An 'insurance job' will normally have a thorough estimate, which will usually include OEM parts. An accommodating bodyshop will probably be able to save modest amounts on an actual repair.
|
|
Sorry of your partners daughter's problem not of her making.
I would be talking to the garage to see if they would be prepared to lend her a car while hers is not available. If not then hire one or buy a runabout until she gets payout from their Insurance company. Depend on the value of the car. If she brought a 2nd hand car for say £1000 then sold it after all this is over for say £500 then £500 would form part of her claim against the Garage's Insurance company. Having a hire car for weeks on end and racking up a huge bill will not be looked on favourably by the Insurance company
A road test can form part of the MoT if the tester is unsure of a static test. However this is very rare and I have never heard of it actually being done.
I would be chasing the garage and their Insurance company politely but firmly for a payout.
I would not get my own insurance company involved. The Garage & their Insurance company are legally obliged to put your daughter back in the same situation as she was in immediately prior to the crash.
|
A road test can form part of the MoT if the tester is unsure of a static test. However this is very rare and I have never heard of it actually being done.
One example of a rod test during an MoT is if the vehicle is a 4-wheel drive as the drive system cannot cope with the brake rollers. So they take it up the road with the old fashioned brake gauge. My old 61 plate Ford Kuga was one such vehicle and the MoT computer system warned the tester.
A Pug 208 does not fall in this category, and questions need to be asked as to the reason for the journey.
Does this perhaps fall into the category of taking without owners consent?
|
|
|
|
|
Sorry to mislead you but the car was being taken elsewhere for some additional work to the MOT.
Had a look at the car and it definitely looks a write off.
Hire car been arranged today but the big question is replacing it with the money that is going to be offered by the garages insurance.
The car has been in the family for ten years and was in excellent condition.
|
Hire car been arranged today but the big question is replacing it with the money that is going to be offered by the garages insurance.
The car has been in the family for ten years and was in excellent condition.
If they don't offer enough ask for more !
|
|
I think the usual course is to find similar cars on something like Autotrader and use that as a basis for negotiations.
|
I think the usual course is to find similar cars on something like Autotrader and use that as a basis for negotiations.
I think that is basically what an honest insurance company will do. But in this case any dispute or haggling may be between the garage and their insurers ?
|
|
|
|
The car has been in the family for ten years and was in excellent condition.
Mine was approaching 9 years old at the time, and a matching replacement was valued at £3500. Yours will probably be worth less now, but having the car repaired may still be worth doing if the damage is outer bodywork only. If there is anything structural the car will probably be scrap.
|
|
I would not hesitate to tell your insurer of your claim.
As it happened whilst the car was in the care of the garage it is unambiguously the responsibiity of the garage and their insurer.
However unless they acknowledge their responsibility in writing and provide a hire car there is always the risk they may try to wriggle out of liability. Your insurers should ensure that any claim you make will stick and may be able to facilitate a hire car in the interim.
Fail to inform them, find in a couple of weeks that you cannot resolve the claim amicably, and they may simply shrug their shoulders.
|
|
IIRC, in the UK it is legally the driver rather than the car that is insured, in contrast to the rest of Europe where the car, not the driver, is insured. So I would think that if the owner/driver was not involved with this write-off there is no need to inform their insurance company that they were. If the garage evades its responsibility, which seems unlikely here, it can be sued using one's own solicitor.
|
IIRC, in the UK it is legally the driver rather than the car that is insured, in contrast to the rest of Europe where the car, not the driver, is insured. So I would think that if the owner/driver was not involved with this write-off there is no need to inform their insurance company that they were. If the garage evades its responsibility, which seems unlikely here, it can be sued using one's own solicitor.
A garage business should have general cover for any vehicles in their possession, but the OP's account suggests that blame may lie with THEIR third party - the driver of a van 'on the wrong side of the road'. Things could get complicated.
|
That is the case .
But a hire car has been provided by the garage.
|
That is the case . But a hire car has been provided by the garage.
With suitable insurance?
|
|
Garage insurance is designed to cope with these situations. The garage insurance will pay out to the owner and then claim off the van.
As with any other claim if they offer less than the replacement value research some evidence, provide it, and argue it out.
|
As with any other claim if they offer less than the replacement value research some evidence, provide it, and argue it out.
Of course. But with this particular 10-year-old-plus vehicle, we can't be talking many £100's I would guess ?
|
The garage has offered £1450 which isn't much IMHO for leaving her in a position to find a similar family owned replacement.
Sending details of other similar cars in order to encourage them to raise their offer. The hire car is still on loan.
Grateful what you would consider is a fair offer ?
|
The damaged car had three owners , full service record, 100k miles . Good tyres and we are faced with playing Russian roulette with the motor trade in this banger territory.
Is there another solution we have missed please ?
|
|
Have you tried the 'Value My Car' tool on this site? Be interesting to see what it says for buying this car from a dealer.
Try asking the garage to provide an acceptable replacement from their stock/resources?
Edited by joegrundy on 29/06/2021 at 09:08
|
|
Sadly I think you are on to a loser. There are plenty of 207 SW on Autotrader. If you set criteria of <100k and newer than 2010 prices start at £1300-1700.
As these are asking prices there may be some room for negotiation. £1450 is a reasonable offer although I can understand why a trusted car has a greater value to you than its replacement.
You may do better to take the cash and find a replacement. Holding out for more may be unproductive, and they will soon want the hire car back causing you yet more hassle.
|
|
As the garage was responsible (irresponsible), and you never gave them or the driver concerned explicit permission to drive it on a public road, I personally think you are within your rights to demand they source you a like for like or better replacement, plus substantial compensation for inconvenience/distress/incurred costs/ loss of earnings/etc OR demand they repair your car regardless of cost, at a place you agree to OR pay the total cost to do so in cash to you, again include compensation for any inconvenience etc etc
You will probably need to involve solicitors, these people are specialists that insurance companies (in my case LV) use to persue third party claims, might be worth a chat with them to see what they would see as reasonable.
www.h-f.co.uk/
Edited by brum on 29/06/2021 at 12:28
|
|
Clearly brum, you are not providing legal advice. For another point of view you could argue the garage has no liability. They would (presumably) need to drive the car to the MOT station, as requested. The accident seems to have occurred through no fault of the garage and therefore thre is no cause of action against them. They are not required to have comprehensive insurance in place to drive customers' cars.
|
|
Just accepted a revised offer of £1750 which will go towards a replacement car .
Many thanks for your contributions
|
Just accepted a revised offer of £1750 which will go towards a replacement car .
Many thanks for your contributions
Wise move, always reject the first offer, it’ll almost certainly be revised up.
|
Just accepted a revised offer of £1750 which will go towards a replacement car .
As this car seems to be a family favourite, I think a deciding factor would be whether the damage is superficial or structural. If the latter (the car needs straightening) it is scrap. A purely cosmetic (panels or lamps only) repair would be feasible but still a lot more than £1750 in all probability - and you would not get that if the car was to be repaired.
|
|
She has finally settled for a five year old Fabia petrol . It’s cost around 6k and ended up with a less versatile car.
In these cases isn’t there any way to refuse the insurance offer and insist the garage replaces the car with a like for like, as £1750 does not put you back in the position you were before taking the car for its MOT. This is the premise of all insurance claims !
|
She has finally settled for a five year old Fabia petrol . It’s cost around 6k and ended up with a less versatile car.
In these cases isn’t there any way to refuse the insurance offer and insist the garage replaces the car with a like for like, as £1750 does not put you back in the position you were before taking the car for its MOT. This is the premise of all insurance claims !
I'm a bit confused.com.
She accepted the revised offer of £1750 at the end of last month.
She has settled on a Skoda Fabia. She must have known it was less versatile at the time of purchase.
By accepting the offer of £1750, which you were both happy with at the time, she has already been put back in the position she was in before the MOT - that's what the Peugeot was deemed to be worth.
|
.... £1750 does not put you back in the position you were before taking the car for its MOT. This is the premise of all insurance claims !
It may depend on how you look at it. If you were to go out and buy a near-identical 207SW on a dealer's forecourt (which you could expect to do if your insurer took the damaged car off your hands) you may be right. If you had sold your (undamaged) car privately before the accident, you would be lucky to approach that figure.
Anyway, it seems that you may be a fourth or fifth party in all this, so it may be hard to impose your wish on events without spending more on legal pressure ?
|
|
|
|
|
|
