Car - Total Loss

[mooreda]

Hi All

Whilst stopped in a line of traffic, a car hit me in the rear at speed (apx 35 - 40mph. Consequently my car was a total loss, I was taken to hospital and I am having to pursue personal injury compensation.

It has been over a month and I am still waiting for my total loss cheque from my own insurer. I have agreed this as an interim payment only because I am not happy with the settlement that the engineer proposed and would like advice regarding the following: -

Should I be able to recover the following items as well: -

a) the vehicle had a full tank of Petrol (engineer says this is not covered),
b) my stereo (not standard to the vehicle) failed to work properly after the impact - will not play radio/CD (engineer says he cannot include the cost of this in the valuation despite the policy covering audio equipment up to £1000),
c) a month prior to the accident, I paid out for a new TIMING/CAM belt, exhaust, money that has effectively been thrown down the drain (engineer says that he cannot include or offer contribution towards).

The engineer has also made a deduction for damage to 3 alloy wheels (damage being no more than wear and tear that you would expect for the vehicle being 7 years old). I think this is unfair.

Now, in view of the fact that the accident was not my fault, the insurer did not provide me with a courtesy car for the duration of time that it took to assess whether my vehicle was repairable/write-off. In addition, since learning that my car was a write-off, I have not claimed a hire car and therefore have been without a car and have had to rely on friend and family to run me about.

I have complained to the insurer but the engineer has refused to increase the offer. Does anyone have any advice on the above?

[craigwalton]

Hello,

Right

1st point - petrol - Not covered by your own insurance, however, if you have kept the receipt / pay by debit/credit card and have the statement, you can pursue this as a ULR via the TP Insurers

2nd - The Engineer is not an audio specialist, so it would be unfair for him to increase the valuation on this basis. Again, if you have the receipt, forward this to your Insurers and/or an estimate to replace the stereo on a L4L basis.

3rd - Sorry, but I agree with the engineer. He has quoted for a car that is in working order. The cam / timing belt enforced the fact that it is in working order.

4th - Alloys - It sounds like the engineer has used his words badly. The car insurance policy is not a new for old policy, it is an indemnity policy. He said that he has taken a deduction for damage, however, I suspect he has quoted for 7 year old alloys.

Hope this helps

[patdavies]

If you were hit from behind when stationary thne this is presumably a no fault accident. Your claim is against the other driver (and his insurer). I don't understand why you are claiming on your policy; you (or your insurer) shouyld be pursuong the other party for all costs.

As it is not you fault, you are entitled to be put back into the same position as though the incident had not happened, at the other driver's expense. This means that your payout should be the retail cost of an identical make/model with similar mileage/condition. Including, in your case, an aftermarket radio/CD player to match yours; a tank of petrol; a recent cambelt change.

Do not ket your insurers fob you off with their low market value for the vehcil (bevcause ultimately they will not be paying it; they will claim from the other insurer). If they refuse to pursue the other party on your behalf, then accept their settlement and add the difference between the settlement value and the retail costs to your uninsured losses and go after the other driver for these.

When a similar thing happened to me, I even recovered the cost of placing the VRM onto retention.

[mooreda]

Thanks Craig/Pat

Re the Fuel - I did forward these to my solicitor who is handling my case and he stated that strictly speaking my insurer should have included this. I no longer have the receipt for the stereo, but it was left in the vehicle, and I have suggested a suitable replacement on a like for like basis which the engineer said was not covered.

I have had to claim on my own insurance because of some other complications. The vehicle that collided into the back of my car was insured but not driven by its legal owner. Although the driver was permitted to use the vehicle (by his girlfriend), he was not on her insurance and did not have insurance of his own. Consequently, the vehicle's insurer stated that they needed to make their own indemnity enquiries which could take some time. The Police fined him around £250 and he has had points added to his licence. I also understand he is to be reported for driving with undue care and attention etc.

I will not be fobbed off - I have complained and am now awaiting a response. Hopefully I should get somewhere shortly. It is a shame after being insured with the same firm for nearly 10 years now and this being the first claim. Not sure if I will stay with them - depends on the outcome of my complaint.

[Chesterexpress]

The fact that it wasn't being driven by it's legal owner doen't matter, the vehicle was insured therefore you can still claim against the other vehicles insurance.

[craigwalton]

Originally Posted by Chesterexpress

The fact that it wasn't being driven by it's legal owner doen't matter, the vehicle was insured therefore you can still claim against the other vehicles insurance.

Not strictly true there....

They will cover it because the driver had the permission of the owner / Insured Person to drive it.

[Gary29]

If you have no joy, with your insurance company ask them for the telephone number to the Motorists Insurance Bureau, they should have it on file. They maybe able to help you.

[patdavies]

Originally Posted by craigwalton

Not strictly true there....

They will cover it because the driver had the permission of the owner / Insured Person to drive it.

No. Chesterexpress is right.

They will cover it because the RTA requires them to imdemnify third parties regardless of whether the vehicle was being driven within the conditions of the policy. What they will not cover is the losses of the second party (ie the policyholder)