Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • This is a ridiculous situation.  The lender has made so many stupid errors of judgement.  I refuse to bow down and willingly 'pay' for their mistakes.  I really want to put this behind me and move on.  I can't yet. 
    • Peter McCormack says he has secured a 15-year lease on the club's Bedford ground.View the full article
    • ae - i have no funds to appoint lawyers.   My point about most caggers getting lost is simply due to so many layers of legal issues that is bound to confuse.  
    • Lenders have a legal obligation to sell the property for the best price they can get. If they feel the offer is low they won't sell it, because it's likely the borrower will say the same.   Yes.  But every interested buyer was offering within a range - based on local market sales evidence.  Shelter site says a lender is not allowed to wait for the market to improve. Why serve a dilapidations notice? If it's in the terms of the lease to maintain the property to a good standard, then serve an S146 notice instead as it's a clear breach of the lease.   The dilapidations notice was a legal first step.  Freeholders have to give time to leaseholders to remedy.  Lender lawyers advised the property was going to be sold and the new buyer would undertake the work.  Their missive came shortly before contracts were given to buyer.  The buyer lawyer and freehold lawyers were then in contact.  The issue of dilapidations remedy was discussed..  But then lender reneged.  There was a few months where neither I nor freeholders were sure what was going on.  Then suddenly demolition works started.   Before one issues a s146 one has to issue a LBA.  That is eventually what happened. ...legal battle took 3y to resolve. Again, order them to revert it as they didn't have permission to do the works, or else serve an S146 notice for breach of the lease   A s146 was served.  It took 3y but the parties came to a settlement.   (They couldn't revert as they had ripped out irreplaceable historical features). The lease has already been extended once so they have no right to another extension. It seems pretty easy to just get the lawyer to say no and stick by those terms as the law is on your side there.  That's not the case   One can ask for another extension.  In this instance the freeholders eventually agreed with a proviso for the receiver not to serve another. You wouldn't vary a lease through a lease extension.  Correct.  But receiver lawyer was an idiot.   He made so many errors.  No idea why the receiver instructed him?  He used to work for lender lawyers. I belatedly discovered he was sacked for dishonesty and fined a huge sum by the sra  (though kept his licence).  He eventually joined another firm and the receiver bizarrely chose him to handle the extension.  Again he messed up - which is why the matter still hasn't been properly concluded.   In reality, its quite clear the lender/ receiver were just trying to overwhelm me (as trustee and leaseholder) with work (and costs) due to so many legal  issues.  Also they tried to twist things (as lawyers sometimes do).  They tried to create a situation where the freeholders would get a wasted costs order - the intent was to bankrupt the freeholders so they could grab the fh that way.   That didn't happen.  They are still trying though.  They owe the freeholders legal costs (s60) and are refusing to pay.  They are trying to get the freeholders to refer the matter to the tribunal - simply to incur more costs (the freeholders don't want and cant's afford to incur)  Enfranchisement isn't something that can be "voided", it's in the Leasehold Reform Act 1967 that leaseholders have the right to.... The property does not qualify under 67 Act.  Their notice was invalid and voided. B petition was struck out. So this is dealt with then.  That action was dealt with yes.   But they then issued a new claim out of a different random court - which I'm still dealing with alone.  This is where I have issues with my old lawyer. He failed to read important legal docs  (which I kept emailing and asking if he was dealing with) and  also didn't deal with something crucial I pointed out.  This lawyer had the lender in a corner and he did not act. Evidence shows lender and receiver strategy had been ....  Redact and scan said evidence up for others to look at?   I could.  But the evidence is clear cut.  Receiver email to lender and lender lawyer: "our strategy for many months  has been for ceo to get the property".  A lender is not allowed to influence the receivership.   They clearly were.  And the law firm were complicit.  The same firm representing the lender and the ceo in his personal capacity - conflict of interest?   I  also have evidence of the lender trying to pay a buyer to walk.  I was never supposed to know about this.  But I was given copies of messages from the receiver "I need to see you face to face, these things are best not put in writing".  No need to divulge all here.  But in hindsight it's clear the lender/ receiver tried - via 2 meetings - to get rid of this buyer (pay large £s) to clear the path for the ceo.   One thing I need to clarify - if a receiver tells a lender to do - or not to do - something should the lender comply? 
    • Why ask for advice if you think it's too complex for the forum members to understand? You'd be better engaging a lawyer. Make sure he has understood all the implications. Stick with his advice. If it doesn't conform to your preconceived opinion then pause and consider whether maybe he's right.
  • Recommended Topics

  • Our picks

    • If you are buying a used car – you need to read this survival guide.
      • 1 reply
    • Hello,

      On 15/1/24 booked appointment with Big Motoring World (BMW) to view a mini on 17/1/24 at 8pm at their Enfield dealership.  

      Car was dirty and test drive was two circuits of roundabout on entry to the showroom.  Was p/x my car and rushed by sales exec and a manager into buying the mini and a 3yr warranty that night, sale all wrapped up by 10pm.  They strongly advised me taking warranty out on car that age (2017) and confirmed it was honoured at over 500 UK registered garages.

      The next day, 18/1/24 noticed amber engine warning light on dashboard , immediately phoned BMW aftercare team to ask for it to be investigated asap at nearest garage to me. After 15 mins on hold was told only their 5 service centres across the UK can deal with car issues with earliest date for inspection in March ! Said I’m not happy with that given what sales team advised or driving car. Told an amber warning light only advisory so to drive with caution and call back when light goes red.

      I’m not happy to do this, drive the car or with the after care experience (a sign of further stresses to come) so want a refund and to return the car asap.

      Please can you advise what I need to do today to get this done. 
       

      Many thanks 
      • 81 replies
    • Housing Association property flooding. https://www.consumeractiongroup.co.uk/topic/438641-housing-association-property-flooding/&do=findComment&comment=5124299
      • 161 replies
    • We have finally managed to obtain the transcript of this case.

      The judge's reasoning is very useful and will certainly be helpful in any other cases relating to third-party rights where the customer has contracted with the courier company by using a broker.
      This is generally speaking the problem with using PackLink who are domiciled in Spain and very conveniently out of reach of the British justice system.

      Frankly I don't think that is any accident.

      One of the points that the judge made was that the customers contract with the broker specifically refers to the courier – and it is clear that the courier knows that they are acting for a third party. There is no need to name the third party. They just have to be recognisably part of a class of person – such as a sender or a recipient of the parcel.

      Please note that a recent case against UPS failed on exactly the same issue with the judge held that the Contracts (Rights of Third Parties) Act 1999 did not apply.

      We will be getting that transcript very soon. We will look at it and we will understand how the judge made such catastrophic mistakes. It was a very poor judgement.
      We will be recommending that people do include this adverse judgement in their bundle so that when they go to county court the judge will see both sides and see the arguments against this adverse judgement.
      Also, we will be to demonstrate to the judge that we are fair-minded and that we don't mind bringing everything to the attention of the judge even if it is against our own interests.
      This is good ethical practice.

      It would be very nice if the parcel delivery companies – including EVRi – practised this kind of thing as well.

       

      OT APPROVED, 365MC637, FAROOQ, EVRi, 12.07.23 (BRENT) - J v4.pdf
        • Like
  • Recommended Topics

Car Valuation Dispute with Insurance Company


style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 5309 days.

If you need to add something to this thread then

 

Please click the "Report " link

 

at the bottom of one of the posts.

 

If you want to post a new story then

Please

Start your own new thread

That way you will attract more attention to your story and get more visitors and more help 

 

Thanks

Recommended Posts

I was involved in an accident which was the other drivers fault (he and his insurance company have admitted liability). I have been offered a low sum of £300 pounds for my car, it is too old to be in Glasses guide, an independent engineer has valued the car between £1,200 and £1,500. I paid £1,500 a year ago for the car.... but his Insurance Company will not budge on their offer of £300. The FSA and Ombudsman can not help because I am claiming effectively as a third party on his Insurance and am therefore not the policy holder.(seems odd to me but thats life in Britain:confused:)

 

What can I do about this? Do I have any options or do I have to accept the offer, any advice appreciated.

 

Thanks.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Not sure on the EXACT procedure, but you are entitled to your ACTUAL financial loss. If you feel the offer is not your actual loss, then you could go to small claims. However, I am unsure whether you would sue the insurance company directly, or the individual - I suspect the latter.

7 years in retail customer service

 

Expertise in letting and rental law for 6 years

 

By trade - I'm an IT engineer working in the housing sector.

 

Please note that any posts made by myself are for information only and should not and must not be taken as correct or factual. If in doubt, consult with a solicitor or other person of equal legal standing.

 

Please click the star if I have helped!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

HI,

I have been through similar to this before. Basically if you can go and find 2 or 3 cars the same make, model (basically similar) that are being offered for sale by sellers, and show the Insurance company that THIS is the TRUE market value of your car. ie; what it would currently cost for you to replace that car in today's market.

Try autotrader, adtrader etc and find the same cars as yours but look for the highest priced ones.

Send this evidence off recorded post with a covering letter, and ask them what there offer made to you of £300 is ACTUALLY BASED ON??

 

Hope this helps in some way,

Kind Regards

Lisa

Link to post
Share on other sites

Are there similar vehicles available in car magazines? You could ask the insurers to put you back in your original position by replacing your car like for like. If you can find adverts listing the same car at a higher price you could send them to support your claim.

Poppynurse :)

 

If my comments have been helpful please click my scales!!!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Your contract with your insurance company allows for the vehicle to be valued by them at 'trade' price. ie they will not pay the dealer's mark-up. However, the other driver has admitted liability and thus this does not apply.

 

You are entitled to be put back into the same position as you were before the accident at the other driver's cost.

 

This either means repairing or replacing your car.

 

Firstly, all contact should be with the other driver. You have no contract with his insurance company and have no need to deal with them - that is for him to do; he is the one who holds the contract of insurance with them to indemnify him against claims like yours. Be clear, in writing, that you are holding him responsible for returning you to the same position as before the accident. He will undoubtedly pass any letters onto this insurance company - but that is his choice and you continue to contact him.

 

Obtain estimates for the repair of your vehicle; obtain quotes from somewhere like Autotrader to replace your vehicle with an identical make/model and similar condition/age/mileage.

 

Send copies of these to the other driver and make it clear that you will be seeking £XXXX to repair/replace your car. Do not accept any sort of offer from his insurance company - deal only with him in rejecting such an offer. Also, claim you other losses (eg car hire or fares whilst your car is off the road)

 

Eventually, you may have to end up with LBA/suing in the county court, but you will win.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the replies..........I have sent off adverts for other cars of the same type, condition and mileage as my own to the Insurance Company, however they remain adamant I can buy a car the same as mine for £300,( in fact I can, but it will be in very average condition, with a much higher mileage and probably a lot of rust). The Insurance Company argument is that a newer Orion Mark 3 quoted in Glases guide with 120,000 miles is worth £300, therefore a Mark 2 Orion with a genuine 60,000 miles in excellent condition must be worth less:(....Even if due to rarity they fetch more money on the market when in excellent condition. The independent engineers report seems to carry no weight and I am concerned if I go to the small claims court how much the legal costs will be if the judgement goes in favour of the Insurance Company.

 

 

I had not considered contacting the other driver directly but I know his name and have his address, so this is possible. I think I need to speak to a solicitor about this. The strange thing is I had legal protection on my policy but the solicitor assigned is only dealing with my personal injury claim and says she can not help with a vehicle valuation dispute.....in fact the only thing she advised was contacting watch dog:rolleyes:

 

What do you think? Anyone been through the courts with this kind of problem before and what are my chances?

Link to post
Share on other sites

This link to Honest John in the Telegraph repeats the advice I have given - story = Campaign for. This is another - story = carnage

 

What his insurance company thinks is irrelevant to you - your action is against the other driver. I repeat, you have no contract with his insurance company, therefore you do not need to deal with them.

Link to post
Share on other sites

- If you can prove the value of the car, the chances are 100%.

- Legal fees are not chargeable even if you lose at SCC, as it is designed to be followed without solicitors. The most you should get charged if you lose(which is unlikely) is the court fee of around £50.

7 years in retail customer service

 

Expertise in letting and rental law for 6 years

 

By trade - I'm an IT engineer working in the housing sector.

 

Please note that any posts made by myself are for information only and should not and must not be taken as correct or factual. If in doubt, consult with a solicitor or other person of equal legal standing.

 

Please click the star if I have helped!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi,

 

I would speak to your insurers claims department and remind them that as you have not accepted the 3rd party insurers proposals the claim is still 'open' and it is their obligation to help you come to a satisfactory conclusion. You may not get exactly what you want but neither should accept the first offer - this is all part of what you pay legal cover for, they are there to help you and it is usually a different team of solicitors that deal with personal injury so ask to speak to the team dealing with your vehicle claim.

 

I wouldn't advocate speaking directly with the other party - you will both have been advised by your insurers to direct all correspondence to your own insurer - make them work for you. I once dealt with a chap that felt his insurers weren't dealing quickly enough with his claim and he went directly to the other party only to be warned by the police that he was verging on harassment charges if he carried on!

 

Hope this helps and good luck.

 

p.s. Unless you have an 'agreed value' clause, usually issued on classic or cherished vehicle policies very rarely do you get the value you want on an older vehicle regardless of the outstanding condition or low mileage - the insurers go by a value for that car, that age and of average condition for its age. Sad but true.

Edited by OMyDayz

I'm the Mummy and quite frankly, the CSA can kiss my butt!! :lol::lol:

Link to post
Share on other sites

I would speak to your insurers claims department and remind them that as you have not accepted the 3rd party insurers proposals the claim is still 'open' and it is their obligation to help you come to a satisfactory conclusion. You may not get exactly what you want but neither should accept the first offer - this is all part of what you pay legal cover for, they are there to help you and it is usually a different team of solicitors that deal with personal injury so ask to speak to the team dealing with your vehicle claim.

 

True.

 

I wouldn't advocate speaking directly with the other party - you will both have been advised by your insurers to direct all correspondence to your own insurer - make them work for you.

 

However, the OP's insurers have currently refused to deal further. He is under no obligation whatsoever top deal with the third party's insurers - he has no contract with them. His claim is against the third party - if they choose to deal with their insurer, then that is their choice.

 

I once dealt with a chap that felt his insurers weren't dealing quickly enough with his claim and he went directly to the other party only to be warned by the police that he was verging on harassment charges if he carried on!

 

There is a world of difference between properly pursuing a valid claim and harassment. The third party cannot insist that the OP deal with the TP's insurer instead in him.

 

Unless you have an 'agreed value' clause, usually issued on classic or cherished vehicle policies very rarely do you get the value you want on an older vehicle regardless of the outstanding condition or low mileage - the insurers go by a value for that car, that age and of average condition for its age. Sad but true.

 

If the OP's car was being written off by his insurer, I would agree with you. However, if the third party is negligent,, then the OP is entitled to be put back into the same position as he was before the incident. This is why his claim is against the third party and not the third party's insurer. If the insurer will not fully cover the replacement cost, then that is just tough on the third party. He remains liable.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Right now I am confused.......

 

Can I claim for the vehicle costs against the third party myself, whilst my solicitor, assigned by my Insurance Company, is pursuing a personal injury claim via the third parties Insurance Company?

 

Or should I be dealing via my solicitor with the third party directly for the injury claim and trying myself to get a reasonable settlement on my car directly via the third party, possibly using the SCC?

 

Thanks

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmmm... what has your insurers claims department advised you re: the settlement offer from the 3rd party's insurer. I might be being a bit dim but have they refused/declined to deal further with this - I couldn't find it in your post, sorry if I've missed it.

 

Shouldn't they be negotiating on your behalf - a service you have paid for? Don't let them fob you off.

 

As someone else suggested, there is the SCC option but I don't know much about that - maybe there is someone out there that can advise further.

 

Good luck

:)

I'm the Mummy and quite frankly, the CSA can kiss my butt!! :lol::lol:

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 1 year later...

Simply brilliant response after 18 months!

7 years in retail customer service

 

Expertise in letting and rental law for 6 years

 

By trade - I'm an IT engineer working in the housing sector.

 

Please note that any posts made by myself are for information only and should not and must not be taken as correct or factual. If in doubt, consult with a solicitor or other person of equal legal standing.

 

Please click the star if I have helped!!

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...