We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.
This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
Airport Parking - Car Broken
Comments
-
dirkbenedict wrote: »I know.....but we have the OP banging on about compensation and insurance claims and the WIG egging her on with false information!
These are the types that make those god awful 'no win no fee' adverts running......
Where has common sense gone ?
WE ARE NOT AMERICAN!
Given the suspicious and odd behaviour by the parking company, we don't know whether the gear box failed due to the age of the car or due to being mis-used.
If it failed due to mis-use, then the OP is entitled to some form of compensation. If it failed due to old age, then why all the suspicious behaviour from the company if they'd done nothing wrong?Should've = Should HAVE (not 'of')
Would've = Would HAVE (not 'of')
No, I am not perfect, but yes I do judge people on their use of basic English language. If you didn't know the above, then learn it! (If English is your second language, then you are forgiven!)0 -
Given the suspicious and odd behaviour by the parking company, we don't know whether the gear box failed due to the age of the car or due to being mis-used.
If it failed due to mis-use, then the OP is entitled to some form of compensation. If it failed due to old age, then why all the suspicious behaviour from the company if they'd done nothing wrong?
Exactly!!!!!! Good summing up there...0 -
And if the car is found by the insurance inspection to have had 'damage' caused this would make it much easier to persue costs against the parking company in whose care it had been when this damage was undoubtedly caused.
Car driven to car park ok
Car seen driven by parking employeee ok
Upon return to pick up car, car unable to be driven and gearbox has been damaged by perhaps impact damage at high speed.
If it turns out like this the OP will have a great case, and the insurer might help in the first instance to recover the money on the insured's behalf.0 -
The op isn't actually asking for compensation though are they? They just want the company to talk to them about what has happened. If I left my car with a company and got back to find the mileage re-set, and the gearbox gone, and was then told different stories 3 times I think I would also be suspicious. I would also want to be re-imbursed for the money spent making alternative travel arrangements and repair bills if it does transpire something dodgy was going on.
I appreciate the gearbox is something that will need replacing with wear, but why did staff say it was like that when they were given the car until video evidence appeared to the contrary?0 -
Wig, thanks for your helpful comments.
They are treating it as a claim, but they will try and get the company to accept liability and then it won't affect our no claims.
How is a mechanical defect an insurance claim????
And why would the car park people stump up when your 12 yr old car breaks down??????"Love you Dave Brooker! x"
"i sent a letter headded sales of god act 1979"0 -
-
Brooker_Dave wrote: »How is a mechanical defect an insurance claim????
And why would the car park people stump up when your 12 yr old car breaks down??????
I already addressed that, I think it is being inspected to see if it is damage caused by a third party or impossible to distinguish from mechanical wear and tear.
They would stump up if it can be proven it was the former.0 -
I already addressed that, I think it is being inspected to see if it is damage caused by a third party or impossible to distinguish from mechanical wear and tear.
They would stump up if it can be proven it was the former.
At the end of the day how the hell is that going to make a difference
The only way it would is if the OP could prove that the car had been driven by the car company for purposes other than the service they put it in for
The OP has already conceded that they have no proof.
If the OP is to have a hope in hell they need proof the car was driven without permission and also will need to prosecutre the company for theft.
Even if the car comes back as being misused how do they know the OP isnt just a crap driver or boy racer
This case is going nowhere and those egging on the OP are simply going to end her up with a large bill from the insurers when they realise its not an insurance matter0 -
Theft is an act to permanently deprive. Theft does not come into this at all.
It is straight forward and laid out in #58
At the end of the day you nor anyone knows what the inspection will discover. If it finds evidence of a severe impact that caused the gearbox to seize and the vehicle to be undriveable, then the car became damaged whilst in their care. And they will have to pay.0 -
At the end of the day you nor anyone knows what the inspection will discover. If it finds evidence of a severe impact that caused the gearbox to seize and the vehicle to be undriveable, then the car became damaged whilst in their care. And they will have to pay.
Turns out Polo gears are a bit of an "issue"...
http://www.carsurvey.org/viewmorecomments_review_89521_2.html"Love you Dave Brooker! x"
"i sent a letter headded sales of god act 1979"0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 352.4K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.7K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 454.4K Spending & Discounts
- 245.4K Work, Benefits & Business
- 601.2K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177.6K Life & Family
- 259.3K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.7K Read-Only Boards