Need Desperate help! Cat D right off am i entitled to deposit back?!?

ssimon

pgilc1 wrote: »

Its also worth noting that some insurance companies will not cover you if you have bought a CAT D / CAT C car, and that if you subsequently have an accident in it, they will often pay out considerably less.

But i'm sure you told your insurance company that you've been driving around in a self repaired write off SSimon?

yes i let them know it had been a cat d and cat c and it didnt make any difference to them. and of course been an insurance company as soon as they type the reg in they already know of the status of the car any was seen as it is an insurance company that has given it the cat d or c

motorguy

dacouch wrote: »

piglc the reason a car can be a Cat C or Cat D write off and be bouught by Joe Public and repaired cheaply is that the Insurers normally have to use new manufacturers parts to repair and need to repair all damage caused by the accident. Joe Public can buy generic parts or used parts from a salvage yard / ebay, do the work themselves or get a cash deal from a garage and if they are happy to live with a few minor scratches or small dents they can.

The Insurer has too give the car back to their customer in "pre accident condition"

I'm fully aware of the reasons why CAT C and CAT D cars get back on the market, what i have issue with is SSimons belief that "it doesnt really matter" and that "it was probably only panel damage". That is not correct. It can matter a lot in terms of the value of the car, the insurability of the car, and in some instances, the safety of the car.

If you buy a car that has been a CAT D and repaired, you have no idea what the pre accident damage was and if it was repaired to a high standard or if it was a botch job. Too often the seller of a CAT D will tell you "oh it only needed a wing", when this merely suits their sales patter.

At the very bottom of the pool of pond life, are those who buy damaged cars, repair them, then pass them off as the genuine article - which does happen very often.

ssimon

i never said that i did not matter or it will only have been panel damage! what i did say is that cat d's are usually only panel damage and that if you've inspected the car and happy with it and it is roadworthy (ie mot'd ect) then it wont really cause a problem buying that car as long as you're not paying over the odds for it (ie 25% off the retail value)

dacouch

If you buy a Cat C or Cat D car without realising it and the damage / repairs are not obvious it does not affect the value you would receive from the Insurer as they normallly would have to pay the same amount as if it had not been a Cat C or Cat D

motorguy

ssimon wrote: »

i never said that i did not matter or it will only have been panel damage! what i did say is that cat d's are usually only panel damage and that if you've inspected the car and happy with it and it is roadworthy (ie mot'd ect) then it wont really cause a problem buying that car as long as you're not paying over the odds for it (ie 25% off the retail value)

Yes, you did - here.

ssimon wrote: »

a CAT D right off is usually only cosmetic damage and when repaired is as good as new. if you was happy with the car when you viewed it then you shouldn't see this as been a problem.

How would an average member of the public know if it had been repaired correctly - particularly as they werent told it was damaged in the first place?

"you shouldnt see this as been a problem" - yes buying a car being presented as genuine and at full retail price (as was the O/Ps situation) that turns out to have been written off CAT D / CAT C car IS a problem as it can reduce the value by up to 25%, it can affect your insurance, and it may be unroadworthly because you dont know who fixed it and to what standard.

motorguy

dacouch wrote: »

If you buy a Cat C or Cat D car without realising it and the damage / repairs are not obvious it does not affect the value you would receive from the Insurer as they normallly would have to pay the same amount as if it had not been a Cat C or Cat D

So you;re saying anyone could buy a damaged / repaired car and say 'oh i didnt know it had been a write off' if they have an accident down the line and the insurance company would go "thats ok then, heres the full value" - i just dont see that happening.

dacouch

Yes it is right

motorguy

Heres an example of what can pass as a CAT D car.

http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/2008-CITROEN-C2-COOL-cat-d_W0QQitemZ250446614881QQcategoryZ18174QQcmdZViewItem

Note from the picture of the rear it needs

rear bumper
boot lid
rear wing (at least one)
rear panel
rear end of car resprayed

Its also fair to assume the boot floor will be crumpled, and that there may be some structural damage.

However, an unscrupulous person could buy that, stick a second hand bumper, boot lid on it from an older car, hammer out the rear wing, filler it and paint it, then sell it on. Therefore they could save them replacing the rear panel, replacing the rear wing, resolving any floor issues and also save them considerably on the cost of parts, but effectively selling a car with a substandard repair job.

motorguy

dacouch wrote: »

Yes it is right

We'll have to agree to differ then. I've never known an insurance company to give anything away they dont have to - particularly when it would be up to the individual to prove they didnt know.

dacouch

Enjoy...

14. vehicles previously "written-off" and then repaired

Most buyers are (rightly or wrongly) put off by the knowledge that a vehicle was previously "written-off", no matter how well it was later repaired – and this can affect its value.
If the policyholder knew the vehicle was a repaired write-off, he/she is likely to have paid less for it. So we are likely to decide that it is not unfair for the insurer to make an appropriate deduction – not more than 20%, unless the insurer can provide good independent evidence for a higher deduction.
But if we are satisfied that the policyholder innocently bought (and insured) the vehicle in complete ignorance of its history, and the repairs were not obviously noticeable, he/she is likely to have paid full price (and a full insurance premium) for it. So we are likely to decide that it would be unfair for the insurer to pay less than the full market value.


http://www.financial-ombudsman.org.uk/publications/technical_notes/motor-valuation.html#14