Jump to content


  • Tweets

  • Posts

    • Hi T911 and welcome to CAG. As you say, an interesting screw up. So much for quality control! Anyway, our regular advice is to ignore all of their increasingly threatening missives... UNLESS you get a letter of claim, then come back here and we'll help you write a "snotty letter" to help them decide whether to take it any further with their stoopid pics. If you get mail you're unsure of, just upload it for the team to have a look.
    • Thanks @lolerzthat's an extremely helpful post. There is no mention of a permit scheme in the lease and likewise, no variation was made to bring this system in. I recall seeing something like a quiet enjoyment clause, but will need to re-read it and confirm. VERY interesting point on the 1987 Act. There hasn't been an AGM in years and I've tried to get one to start to no avail. However, I'll aim to find out more about how the PPC was brought in and revert. Can I test with you and others on the logic of not parking for a few months? I'm ready to fight OPS, so if they go nuclear on me then surely it doesn't matter? I assume that I will keep getting PCNs as long as I live here, so it doesn't make sense for me to change the way that I park?  Unless... You are suggesting that having 5 or so outstanding PCNs, will negatively affect any court case e.g. through bad optics? Or are we trying to force their hand to go to court with only 2 outstanding PCNs?
    • That is so very tempting.   They are doing my annual review as we speak and I'm waiting for their response once I have it I will consider my next steps.    The debt camel website mentioned above is amzing and helping to. Education me alot    
    • Sending you a big hug. I’m sorry your going through this. The letters they send sound aweful, and the waiting game for them to stop. But these guys seem so knowledgable and these letters should stop. Hang in there, and keep in touch. Don’t feel alone 
    • In my time I've never seen a payout/commission from a PPC to a landlord/MA. Normally the installation of all the cameras/payment of warden patrols etc is free but PPCs keep 100% of the ticket revenue. Not saying it doesn't happen mind. I've done some more digging on this: Remember, what your lease doesn't say is just as important as what it does say. If your lease doesn't mention a parking scheme/employment of a PPC/Paying PCNs etc you're under no legal obligation to play along to the PPC's or the MA's "Terms and conditions". I highly doubt your lease had a variation in place to bring in this permit system. Your lease will likely have a "quiet enjoyment" clause for your demised space and the common areas and having to fight a PPC/MA just to park would breach that. Your lease has supremacy of contract, but I do agree it's worth keeping cool and not parking there (and hence getting PCNs) for a couple months just so that the PPC doesn't get blinded by greed and go nuclear on you if you have 4 or 5 PCNs outstanding. At your next AGM, bring it up that the parking controls need to be removed and mention the legal reasons why. One reason is that under S37(5b) Landlord and Tenant Act 1987,  more than 75% of leaseholders and/or the landlord would have needed to agree, and less than 10% opposed, for the variation to take place. I highly doubt a ballot even happened before the PPC was bought in so OPS even being there is unlawful, breaching the terms of your lease. In this legal sense,  the communal vote of the "directors" of the freehold company would have counted for ONE vote of however many flats there are (leases/tenants) + 1 (landlord). It's going to be interesting to see where this goes.  
  • 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

Accept or reject insurer's first offer?


Hurley31
style="text-align: center;">  

Thread Locked

because no one has posted on it for the last 2303 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

Hello all.

 

I am helping my dad with a car insurance claim.

 

I've never claimed anything on insurance before so am new to the process.

 

I hope you can help.

 

The general advice is,

that when your car is a written off,

as is the case here,

the insurers will try to low ball you on the first offer and you should reject it.

 

Some background on the incident is that

my dad parked his car on a hill,

some time later something failed

and the car rolled, writing his

and another vehicle off.

 

I have researched the car and it's difficult to tell whether the offer is low based on second hand car listings on ebay and autotrader.

They have offered £750 minus excess of £100.

 

Some similar cars are on sale for double that,

others have sold for around the same.

Obviously condition and other factors aren't going to be identical between the cars on sale and my dad's car.

 

Should I just go ahead and settle on the offer, or would I be a fool to?

 

I appreciate any advice, thanks for reading.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Well it seems from a couple mins search the average price is around 1300-1500 quid.

So offer seems a little low.

 

However the insurance company may argue that the vehicle was not in good condition, in fact they may say safety devices were not maintained.

 

I.e. You state " something failed" causing it to roll down a hill.

I presume you mean the handbrake.

 

it depends on whether you want letter tennis with insurance company for a while or settle at the amount.

 

Me,

personally would reject the offer and supply details of other vehicles for sale of the same make/model.

 

But I wouldn't think they would go above £1000.

 

They might start the argument of disrepair or failing to maintain a safety feature etc.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the replies.

 

This is what is baffling.

 

We assumed it was the handbrake,

but they say they have had that checked and everything seems in good order.

 

They didn't expand on what might have been the problem, if they even know.

 

It had an MOT about a month prior to the incident.

 

The car was fine and rolled a couple of hours after it was parked.

Link to post
Share on other sites

In that case,

if they investigated and found the handbrake system in working order

then go for top amounts of other comparable cars for sale.

 

On the matter of a MOT.

 

The mot is only saying the car is roadworthy on the day it was tested.

 

It matters not if done a month ago or 363 days ago.

 

Its a guide

  • Haha 1
  • Confused 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

What would 'We Buy Any Car' offer for the VRN and mileage?

Can you provide Service history or receipts for purchase of new tyres/battery?

What was the estimated value at last renewal?

Suggest they offer £1200 in full & final settlement, but be prepared to settle for less.

Link to post
Share on other sites

does automatic or manual gearbox play a part here too re Park selection?

 

neighbour only got £500 on an auto jag s-type 2004 that had been parked on a hill everyday for 4.5yrs previous

he always engaged park and always engaged the additional electronic hand brake option.

 

the battery failed in cold weather, the ECU released the auto and hand brake, it went opps and hit 3 cars fwd of it down the hill

 

later by downloading the ECU data the insurance company ruled it was his fault for not replacing the battery.

 

strange world

 

dx

please don't hit Quote...just type we know what we said earlier..

DCA's view debtors as suckers, marks and mugs

NO DCA has ANY legal powers whatsoever on ANY debt no matter what it's Type

and they

are NOT and can NEVER  be BAILIFFS. even if a debt has been to court..

If everyone stopped blindly paying DCA's Tomorrow, their industry would collapse overnight... 

Link to post
Share on other sites

parking = i.e. mechanical fault? cause of an incident? car maintained?

so many questions but see Para 11 above.

 

seen so many arguments in 60 years as to Insurance claims which end up parked up (small amounts) where people think they should have full retail / trade in price for car written off etc,

 

also seen some weird and wonderful explanations as to why an accident occurred, my ex use to be an engineers secretary for a very big Insurance company and homework in bad weather etc carried out all night, I helped by batching up claims for her to deal with in order and believe you me some very good fiction stories came to light.

 

in a hell of a lot of the cases MAINTENANCE cause of many a problem i.e. lack of!

even one try to claim off my wife after a pot hole incident @ 3 MPH and the wonderful world of the Ford Car and back bumper complete write off?

pity a camera showed the claimant father breaking the bumper to further a claim,

he came shouting at me that get another car hire for son, and pushed his pot belly up to me against the wall, pity he picked on the wrong one - he did run well for a 20 stone pig, the insurance engineer was not amused after the inspection of the other car (Ford) and they got less than Glasses guide etc, or be reported for fraudulent claim!

:mad2::-x:jaw::sad:
Link to post
Share on other sites

I ended up asking for more.

 

I was only after general advice, as the consensus seems to be 'always reject the first offer' but apparently that's not the case.

 

it's too late now so we'll see how it goes.

 

Thanks again.

Link to post
Share on other sites

insurers tend to value a vehicle at what you would sell it for to a dealer, not what you would pay to buy the same vehicle.

 

sometimes you can get past this with a rare marque by insisting they find another one for you to put you back in your original position

and then they tend to pay a truer value because they cant be bothered to go round looking for a replacement.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    • No registered users viewing this page.

  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...