News0 min ago
How best to proceed with claiming when car is written off
18 Answers
My second son has had his car written off. Youngster lost control on a bend, car came off the road and slammed into my son's car, parked completely off the road in a driveway. Both cars caught alight and are write-offs, two other cars in the driveway are also written off, a wooden garage caught alight. Mercifully the idiot that did it wasn't injured.
Help please Gouldc (or anyone else). The vehicle was insured TPFT. Clearly he'll get the value back - provided this idiot has insurance. But he needs his car for his work. Can he hire a car himself (no such clause allowing this in his TPFT policy), then seek to claim the cost back from the idiot's insurer. His policy does have the legal protection clause.
What about goods in the car and in the boot - he had about �250 worth of presents in the car and his policy is limited to �100 of cover - can he seek to claim to claim this loss against the idiot's insurer.
How do we find out quickly whether this idiot did have insurance? Preferably before he decides to rent a vehicle. Thanks, BM
Help please Gouldc (or anyone else). The vehicle was insured TPFT. Clearly he'll get the value back - provided this idiot has insurance. But he needs his car for his work. Can he hire a car himself (no such clause allowing this in his TPFT policy), then seek to claim the cost back from the idiot's insurer. His policy does have the legal protection clause.
What about goods in the car and in the boot - he had about �250 worth of presents in the car and his policy is limited to �100 of cover - can he seek to claim to claim this loss against the idiot's insurer.
How do we find out quickly whether this idiot did have insurance? Preferably before he decides to rent a vehicle. Thanks, BM
Answers
1 to 18 of 18
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by buildersmate. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
Hi Buildersmate
Sorry, in same boat as bednobs, I don't have an answer for you but hope someone comes along soon and gives you a response, after all the people you help on this site.
Is it feasible to contact the police to see if they can tell you about this driver's insurance, or would your son's insurance company have access to a central database of insured vehicles/drivers and release the data?
Regarding the goods in the car, I had assumed that the maximum amount of cover was all you could claim regardless of who's at fault, unless there are other legal avenues you could pursue - would your legal cover allow you to pursue this?
Sorry, in same boat as bednobs, I don't have an answer for you but hope someone comes along soon and gives you a response, after all the people you help on this site.
Is it feasible to contact the police to see if they can tell you about this driver's insurance, or would your son's insurance company have access to a central database of insured vehicles/drivers and release the data?
Regarding the goods in the car, I had assumed that the maximum amount of cover was all you could claim regardless of who's at fault, unless there are other legal avenues you could pursue - would your legal cover allow you to pursue this?
Am wondering whether you got this sorted out?
The legal protection policy shoudl deal with this.
I was always of the opinion that you can claim back any damages from the responsible party that should allow you to be in the the same position you were in before the accident.
Usually this means that as long as liability is not disputed you should be able to claim back your repair and vehicle costs and any related hire costs. When the car is written off I think a different view is taken so be careful before you do anything.
The legal protection policy shoudl deal with this.
I was always of the opinion that you can claim back any damages from the responsible party that should allow you to be in the the same position you were in before the accident.
Usually this means that as long as liability is not disputed you should be able to claim back your repair and vehicle costs and any related hire costs. When the car is written off I think a different view is taken so be careful before you do anything.
Hi Builders mate - If he has legalprotection then they would usually check that the third party insurance is in place and once they are certain of that I would expect them to organise a hire car for your son BUT usually hire car charges cease to be recoverable once the vehicle has been declared a write off so be very very careful it might be cheaper inthe long run to buy a replacement vehicle sooner rather than later
If it hasnt been declared a write off - whilst we all have a duty to keep our claims to a minumum i(.e. dont hire a BMW if your car was a fiesta ) he has a legitimate need for a hire car. If the Legal protection side of his policy does not pay for the hire car and then recover it from the Third PArty thenhe would have to hire and pay for it himself and then submit the receipt as part of the recovery from the Third Party. The problem here is thatno one can guarantee when he will get his money back and unfortunately some insurers will take forever to pay out. He would not be able to reclaim any interest if he had to borrow to pay for the hire car.
He would need to produce some sort of evidence of what was in his car that was destroyed - the burnt remains ? or receipts? Not sure quite how thispart of your claim would go - he is entitled to recompense but could find it difficult to prove his claim - your Legal/Uninsured Loss recovery should help you here. Good Luck
If it hasnt been declared a write off - whilst we all have a duty to keep our claims to a minumum i(.e. dont hire a BMW if your car was a fiesta ) he has a legitimate need for a hire car. If the Legal protection side of his policy does not pay for the hire car and then recover it from the Third PArty thenhe would have to hire and pay for it himself and then submit the receipt as part of the recovery from the Third Party. The problem here is thatno one can guarantee when he will get his money back and unfortunately some insurers will take forever to pay out. He would not be able to reclaim any interest if he had to borrow to pay for the hire car.
He would need to produce some sort of evidence of what was in his car that was destroyed - the burnt remains ? or receipts? Not sure quite how thispart of your claim would go - he is entitled to recompense but could find it difficult to prove his claim - your Legal/Uninsured Loss recovery should help you here. Good Luck
Thanks for the comments so far, and particularly the assistance from Woozer.
It has been established that the third-party in all this did have insurance, and my son's insurer is forking out for a car for him (presumably because he has legal cover and his insurer knows they'll get the cost back off the third party) even though there is no specific clause in his policy.
The car is a write-off - a wreck still in the driveway.
I'll check out how long he gets the hire car for.
It has been established that the third-party in all this did have insurance, and my son's insurer is forking out for a car for him (presumably because he has legal cover and his insurer knows they'll get the cost back off the third party) even though there is no specific clause in his policy.
The car is a write-off - a wreck still in the driveway.
I'll check out how long he gets the hire car for.
Nice to see I'm in demand. And for the record, I'm a tatooed male with a skinhead and comedy moustache (rarely mistaken for the female of the species!).
I think Woozer has hit it on the head - if your son doesn't have legal expenses cover, then the best option is to contact a company such as Albany, or DAS Legal Expenses, and they should (hopefully) provide him with a hire car for the duration of the case.
They would normally also arrange for an engineer to see his car, arrange repairs where applicable, but will stop short of actually paying for the total loss of the vehicle.
They would also take care of the personal effects, etc (uninsured losses).
HOWEVER, as has been pointed out, if there is any sort of issue (i.e. drink or drugs), then there may be issues over the other insurers paying out - they'd still have to long term, but they may drag it out due to investigations, etc.
If you do have the other guy's registration, I'm happy to run a search for the insurers
I think Woozer has hit it on the head - if your son doesn't have legal expenses cover, then the best option is to contact a company such as Albany, or DAS Legal Expenses, and they should (hopefully) provide him with a hire car for the duration of the case.
They would normally also arrange for an engineer to see his car, arrange repairs where applicable, but will stop short of actually paying for the total loss of the vehicle.
They would also take care of the personal effects, etc (uninsured losses).
HOWEVER, as has been pointed out, if there is any sort of issue (i.e. drink or drugs), then there may be issues over the other insurers paying out - they'd still have to long term, but they may drag it out due to investigations, etc.
If you do have the other guy's registration, I'm happy to run a search for the insurers
Thanks for your comments.
Update as follows. He has a hire vehicle provided by his insurer. However, having been told by the agent of his insurer (assessor presumably) to 'remove the car', he has subsequently been told that, because he removed it to a scrap yard, they are threatening to cancel his claim because they hadn't yet seen it. We are talking about a burnt-out shell here, which was blocking the moving of other cars further up the driveway but wholly off the road. The police have pictures, the fire brigade have pictures, he has pictures, which he has now emailed to this agent. Hopefully they will realise the enormity of what happened.
The agent cannot answer the question, 'where did you expect me to remove it to'. His vehicle required a specialist to remove it because the police advised it was a toxic shell.
Any comments or suggestions? - is this agent just being bloodyminded?
Update as follows. He has a hire vehicle provided by his insurer. However, having been told by the agent of his insurer (assessor presumably) to 'remove the car', he has subsequently been told that, because he removed it to a scrap yard, they are threatening to cancel his claim because they hadn't yet seen it. We are talking about a burnt-out shell here, which was blocking the moving of other cars further up the driveway but wholly off the road. The police have pictures, the fire brigade have pictures, he has pictures, which he has now emailed to this agent. Hopefully they will realise the enormity of what happened.
The agent cannot answer the question, 'where did you expect me to remove it to'. His vehicle required a specialist to remove it because the police advised it was a toxic shell.
Any comments or suggestions? - is this agent just being bloodyminded?
Am I correct in thinking that you are saying the person appointed by your sons insurer told him to move the car and then said your son had invalidated the claim by doing just that ? I can still (after all these years) be surprised by the attitude of some insurers but I would say that the insurers representative is being ridiculous particularly as there is a Third Party for them to recover from. But I suppose technically your son has now denied his insurers access to the salvage. GouldC is probably the best person to help you out on this point.
If your own insurer can really invalidate your claim because of this then there is nothing to stop you claiming directly from the Third Party which is what you would have had to do anyway if you had only got Third party only cover.
Normally I would say dont change your uninsured loss representative mid claim - it usually makes thinks more of a muddle.
If your own insurer can really invalidate your claim because of this then there is nothing to stop you claiming directly from the Third Party which is what you would have had to do anyway if you had only got Third party only cover.
Normally I would say dont change your uninsured loss representative mid claim - it usually makes thinks more of a muddle.
That is precisely what happened yesterday, Woozer. They told him he could 'remove it' (from where it was sitting - off the road, but blocking others in). The police had previously told him they had finished their investigation of the incident but that he needed to use a specialist to remove it because of toxic material on the shell. So he phoned around and got an organistion able to do this. Later the same day, the agent said that by 'remove it', they meant remove it somewhere else, but not to a scrapyard.
I don't think they yet realise the enormity of the situation in terms of the ensuing fire, and that he could drag it away somewhere very local. The vehicle was worth about �1000. They have now been sent photos of it.
I don't think they yet realise the enormity of the situation in terms of the ensuing fire, and that he could drag it away somewhere very local. The vehicle was worth about �1000. They have now been sent photos of it.
not read all the posts/answers but looking at it briefly we would put this in the hands of a non-fault accident company, helphire or such like. They will supply replacement vehicle and fight the claim on his behalf, always worth a phonecall..
If he had fully com it might not of been much use as regards hire vehicles most ins. companies only supply one for a limited time when the vehicle is a write off in some instances only 48 hours.
If he had fully com it might not of been much use as regards hire vehicles most ins. companies only supply one for a limited time when the vehicle is a write off in some instances only 48 hours.
They normally mean to move it to a place of free storage, but in cases where the car is a complete burn out, there is the risk of a certain type of acid (forget it's name, think it begins with an F) being released due to the plastics/materials being burnt.
I would have expected common sense to have kicked in at some point (I know, it's largely lacking), and so long as there are images of the vehicle, then it shouldn't be an issue. If the yard it was taken to still has it, they should allow the agents to instruct an engineer to see it in situ, but you do have fire brigade report, etc, to back it up.
Quite honestly, I fail to see the problem - an engineer would struggle to ascertain if there were any pre-existing defects affecting the value if it's now a shell in any case.
Most salvage dealers need specific licences to deal with burn out's due to the ELV (End of Life Vehicle) initiatives from a few years back.
As he already has someone dealing, don't go swapping - it'll just cause twice the paperwork, and take twice as long.
I would have expected common sense to have kicked in at some point (I know, it's largely lacking), and so long as there are images of the vehicle, then it shouldn't be an issue. If the yard it was taken to still has it, they should allow the agents to instruct an engineer to see it in situ, but you do have fire brigade report, etc, to back it up.
Quite honestly, I fail to see the problem - an engineer would struggle to ascertain if there were any pre-existing defects affecting the value if it's now a shell in any case.
Most salvage dealers need specific licences to deal with burn out's due to the ELV (End of Life Vehicle) initiatives from a few years back.
As he already has someone dealing, don't go swapping - it'll just cause twice the paperwork, and take twice as long.
1 to 18 of 18
Latest Posts
They Just Can't Help It Can They?
News8 mins ago
Crosswords9 mins ago
Crosswords19 mins ago
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.