|
A friend of mine is in dispute with a major insurance company regarding a claim. The car is a Toyota Starlet 1.31 SR ( T Plate 99 ) which is the sport rally version of the Starlet and with the P at then end of the Chassis number denotes that the car was prepared at the point of entry and 15” Speedline Alloys fitted prior to delivery. The claim is for damage and resulting theft of the radio system. He has several specs from old sites and chat rooms but the insurance company is refusing to accept that is the vehicle they originally insured. They say they have rung a Toyota Agents who declares the vehicle was delivered with steel 14” wheels. The description on the Policy is correct i.e. SR and he is attempting to contact the original owner for a declaration of it being as delivered. We contacted a main dealer and they assure us that the spec was Lowered Suspension, Larger exhaust, Speedline 15” Alloys and spoiler. This garage has faxed the insurance company but still they refuse to authorise the repair. So the big question, does any know a contact where the original spec of the car could be obtained or what action to take to expedite the situation. Regards Peter
|
Glasses do a trade guide that outlines the spec of different models, but this is far from concrete. Your best bet is to talk to Toyota Customer Services and get confirmation from them. Another good bet would be to look at the service stamp on the PDI service and get in touch with the original dealer.
With franchises changing hands so regularly these days this is a real problem, with dealer staff rarely knowing anything about models as recent as 2 or 3 years old.
|
|
|
I presume that he doesn't have the original sales documentation ?
There is something a little weird here.
Why are they refusing to accept that it is the same car that they insured ?
Did they actually come out and see the car when it was just a stolen radio ?
Do they mean that it has been customised or do they mean that it is actually a different car ?
Where did he buy the car ? Did he buy it new or did he buy it second hand and was it from a main dealer or privately ?
Is the car actually factory spec ? i.e. are all 1.3 SRs to this spec, or was the spec on this one different for some reason ?
15" alloys fitted to a car normally specified to have 14" steel would be a modification which should be repoted to an insurance company - irrespective of who did it or when.
When they ask if a car has been customised or modified they mean against factory specifications.
If there is nothing untoward, then I would be writing to them settng out the details exactly as you/he see them and asking for their official decision in writing together with justification.
Then see what they send you.
|
>When they ask if a car has been customised or modified they mean against factory specifications.
Does that mean extras? so if you specify 3 spoke alloys instead of steels, do you have to declare that to the insurance company? Metallic paint?
& how on earth do I know whether my car which has had x previous is running on the original factory spec wheels? I tell my insurance company 'no mods that I am aware of, but obviously I cannot be certain'.
|
>>'no mods that I am aware of, but obviously I cannot be certain'.
Firstly, I'm afraid that is your problem not theirs. Mean as it may be, and as difficult to know as it undoubtedly is, its still your responsibility.
standard extras are standard, if you see what I mean. However, if such and such wheel was not a standard option on a vehicle, then that is not standard. And clearly anything which is not standard has to be mentioned to your insurance company irrespective of whether they actualy ask you or not.
Lousy explanation, but hopefully you could make sense of it.
|
|
The car is according to several Toyota dealers “ as per the spec at that time” i.e. T Plate and was sold as factory standard but the P on the chassis number identifies that the car is fitted with the SR bits at point of entry. The door was forced open and requires a new door and the rear class was smashed to remove the parcel shelf with the speakers so an assessor inspected the car and he declared that the car was fitted with allows and was non standard. We are gaining more and more evidence that this was a “Standard Car” at the time as there were no alternative levels of fit for the SR and it must be the data base that is incorrect. We await confirmation from Toyota and several dealer/main agents. The hire car runs out on Friday thus the urgency. Speedline confirm the style, part number and size for the allows that were fitted to the SR so we appear to have plenty of evidence but still a blank “ NO” from the leading insurance company. Regards Peter
|
|
|
> I'm afraid that is your problem not theirs.
Quite, hence my disclaimer - which always confounds the person on the end of the phone who ticks the 'no' box. And frankly, I've offered them the opportunity to say we won't cover you if you cannot confirm this.
Which brings me to the point of the question. How on earth can you ever know? Even a main dealer might struggle to know the answer - I seriously doubt whether a main dealer would give you a certificate for your second hand car to say 'this has no mods'.
And if you don't know, and the dealer doesn't know, how does the insurance company... so isn't it bad 'law'?
|
I don't know.
The word "reasonable" will undoubtedly come up. It is reasonable that you would know the turbo charge was not a standard item, its not reasonable that you should know the rear discs have been changed.
Pretty much it would also have to be a contributory or significant factor as well. i.e. paint colour would not be relevant if it was hit whilst parked whereas non-standard lights might be.
Clearly in the example above they believe that the extras on the car made it more likely to be broken into.
|
How on earth does the fact that the car has alloy wheels vs steel wheels make the stereo more attractive to steal. I think if the can was involved in an accident where speed was a possibility or if the alloys in question were stolen I would see the insurer?s point, but this just smacks of any excuse not to pay out on a claim to lower their costs and increase profit.
Carse
|
I think the company would suggest that fancy alloys give the impression that a fancy stereo might also be installed.
I think in a lot of cases, they're probably correct.
|
|
|
>>How on earth does the fact that the car
In fairness to them, if you were a thief looking round a carpark for a stereo to pinch, looking at the wheels is a fair way to decide whether this car tinyurl.com/6dgg5 or this car tinyurl.com/4rhbt would be a better bet for a good stereo.
|
to be realistic Mapmaker a good set of wheels generally indicates a good alarm. therefore more hassle to try and steal something from it.
If an owner hasnt spent a lot on the car they probably havent gone for a decent alarm, but may still have a reasonable standard fit stero.
|
|
|
Completely irrelevant comparison as both vehicles are significantly different years and specification and neither state in the advert what stereo is fitted.
To flip the argument on its head the older less spec'd vehicle may have an aftermarket stereo fitted as the standard fit unit may be deemed insufficient, where as the VR6 owner may think the standard unit acceptable.
I go back to my previous point which states there is NO relationship between wheel fitment and stereo theft.
Carse
|
|
Very true Carse, Very true. However some people will argue for the sake of arguing, in order to feel more knowledgable than others.
|
|
|
I didn't say "wheels". I said "extras".
Surely there can be no doubt that the appearance of a car will lead someone to be more or less likely to notice it and more or less likely to think there was something worth breaking in for.
Now if I saw a flashed up car, *I* would expect that there would be a flash stereo in it as well. *I* might be wrong. But if *I* was in the habit of breaking into cars, I'd more likely go for a car that had obviously had a great deal of money spent on it, since in *my* opinion that money is likely to be spent inside as well.
And, as a general point, if a car has been modified and you have not told your insurance company then you will probably have your claims refused. In this case they seem to believe that the car has been modified. That seems to be eroneous and hopefully the right result will out.
This is not the insurance company "scamming" you. It is you getting the cover that you have paid for, not the cover you have suddenly decided you wanted after the fact.
|
|
Hi, Result ! Finally got a contact at Toyota UK that confirm that the P in the Chassis number and that model was fitted at Point of entry and was not available without the alloys thus it was standard to that SR model. We got the insurance company to contact the Toyota Customer Service and the insurance then rang to authorise the repair. 8 days delay due to them and the assessor not doing a simple check Toyota commented this was not an uncommon problem. Solved for the moment but is the insurance company going to up the price at renewal at the end of the month. Due to this hassle a couple of the guys here have checked there policies directly with the insurer to find errors, one had had his NCD protection removed at last renewal apparently due to missing a tick in the box during online renewal with the same company. The other guys cover was increased on the spot due to alternative BMW alloys on his BM. It really pays to check and double check these policies. Regards Peter
|
>>Due to this hassle a couple of the guys here have checked there policies directly with the insurer to find errors,
And both those errors are their fault, not the insurance companys'. Yet in the event of a claim, they'd complain.
You're absolutely right, it does pay to check exactly what you're covered for & make sure that it's what you need to be covered for!
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
