Van unjustly "written off" as Category B?

vertical_fool

Hi all.

I was involved in an accident in March where whilst I was stopped at traffic lights a lady drove into me. Causing minor damage although the door hinges/area were allready suffering from corrosion, which when lifted by the accident snapped the remaining metal on the lower hinges. A cheap fix for me would have been knocking the bumper back into shape and repairing the hinges.

Anyway they wrote it off as a "category B" which means it can never go back on the road and can only be bought by people with the breakers license. I wanted to be able to buy it back which I could have done if they had done it to a category C.

I spoke to the engineer who was a @#$%&#, he said he thought it was too dangerous to put back on the road because of the doors. I told him it was ridiculous blah blah blah, he said he'd never recategorised a vehicle in 20 years.

Anyway I've appealed and now they are saying I can buy it back. Once I get it back I'll need to get it repaired, call the insurers back up where an engineer can assess the repairs and then reclassify the van as a category C if they think the repairs are to a sufficient standard?

Can they do this? Shouldn't they just give it me back as a Category C, as cars/vans are sold as cat c's without any conditions?

Regards

Vertical

vertical_fool

Anybody can walk into a salvage yard and buy a cat c vehicle. They are NO restrictions or requirements for this. So I don't see why the insurance think I should be held to these requirements or whether they can do legally.

My point is regarding the technicalities of what the insurers are doing. I don't think they should be able to do this.

Oooooooohhhh wrote: »

No

It sounds like you want to do a bodge job of the repair which wont be safe, the insurance company dont need to facilitate this

If you plan to repair it to a safe and legal standard there wont be any problems

There is simply no evidence to suggest that I' planning "to do a bodge job".

"the insurance company dont need to facilitate this" facilitate what, the repairs shouldn't be any of their business.

vertical_fool

My problem is it should be either CAT C or CAT B.

The damage is NOT sufficient in my opinion to warrant a CAT B.

If there going to let me have it I should only get it as a CAT C. Legally I don't believe I should have it because in order to purchase a CAT B vehicle I would need a breakers licence for disposing of vehicles. I don't have one or would expect any member of the public to have one.

I think they are saying I can have it back as a CAT B which will be changed if the repairs are deemed acceptable to a CAT C. I think they are covering up the actions of their overzealous engineer and are saying I can have it as a CAT B to justify his original assessment which has written it off as a CAT B. I think in reality it may come to me as a CAT C...............

If it comes to me as a CAT B, I have it repaired and then they say its staying as a CAT B.

Vertical

vertical_fool

Oooooooohhhh wrote: »

At the moment they are putting it down as B hence it shouldnt be sold to you, they are willing to do you a favour and do it as a C on the condition they feel the repairs you do are suitable

I don't think insurance companies do "favour"s.

Vertical

raskazz

vertical_fool wrote: »

My problem is it should be either CAT C or CAT B.

The damage is NOT sufficient in my opinion to warrant a CAT B.

Exactly - that's your opinion.

Likewise the expert opinion of the engineer is that it is a category B. May I ask what expertise you possess that makes you believe that you are correct over a professional working in this field?

Category B total losses are vehicles which can be broken for spare parts and should not be returned to the road.

I'm not sure that you have understood what the insurer is proposing - either that or the insurer is not following the correct process. I think it is far more likely that they are asking you to arrange a different engineer to inspect the vehicle as it is and submit a report. Then if it can legitimately be reclassified as Category C according to the new report you can retain the salvage - however even if this becomes the case you will still need to complete a VIC (and also most insurers will not cover previous total losses unless you also obtain a new MOT after repairs).

vertical_fool

raskazz wrote: »

Exactly - that's your opinion.

Likewise the expert opinion of the engineer is that it is a category B. May I ask what expertise you possess that makes you believe that you are correct over a professional working in this field?

I base it on the fact that his reasoning is due to the corrosion/damage at the hinges. (They are actually hanging on only one hinge each. The remaining hinge also has corrosion the extra weight on this has damaged this hinge from within the door). He states that this reason and this reason alone is sufficient for it to be deemed too dangerous to go back on the road.

My argument against this is that some vans have roller shutter doors, some are even open backed i.e. milkfloats, flatbeds etc. therefore The structural integrity of that area should not be of such significance to justify it being deemed too dangerous to go back on the road.

I have considered the options of installing a roller shutter or welding up the two rear doors entirely (using the two side doors) but it will probably be quicker, easier and cheaper to just fix the doors and hinges probably with fabricating new hinges and at different mounting points where there is no corrosion.

raskazz wrote: »

I'm not sure that you have understood what the insurer is proposing - either that or the insurer is not following the correct process. I think it is far more likely that they are asking you to arrange a different engineer to inspect the vehicle as it is and submit a report. Then if it can legitimately be reclassified as Category C according to the new report you can retain the salvage - however even if this becomes the case you will still need to complete a VIC (and also most insurers will not cover previous total losses unless you also obtain a new MOT after repairs).

After appeal the senior engineer has agreed to give it me back as a CAT B. (I've sent the cheque of for the salvage and should be getting it back soon.) He's said I can have it back and once I've got it repaired, contact them to send an engineer out to inspect it. If he deems it repaired to an acceptable standard then he'll reclassify it as a CAT C.

This is another area that I find questionable as there are many vehicles that are sold as CAT C's with much, much more damage than mine and much more dangerous if badly repaired yet the insurers couldn't give a damn who they are sold on to.

raskazz wrote: »

however even if this becomes the case you will still need to complete a VIC (and also most insurers will not cover previous total losses unless you also obtain a new MOT after repairs).

The senior assessor also seemed to be under this impression although unless the law has changed in the last 18 months then as its a commercial vehicle it doesn't require a VIC, only a new MOT.

Regards

Vertical

Catssquirrel

Had a traffic light rear-end shunt recently which turned into an epic. Despite, no liability on my behalf, I began to wonder whether I was in some Kafka novel. To cut a long story short, the car was classified as a 'C' beyond economic repair, however I insisted on a second opinion and ended up with said car back on the road as an Engineer approved third party repair.

sara1880

hi vertical,

sorry did i misunderstand what you wrote or did you say that the insurance company? have sold a Cat B to someone who is not a licensed broker? isn't that breaking or bending one or two rules there on their part?

I think just in my opinion that your first thought was correct, some guy maybe jumped the gun a bit wrote it off then didn't want to admitt to having made an error.

So what happens if you fix it and they decided its not up to standard and they wont reclassify it?