'without prejudice'

OrkneyStar

hi there,
I wonder if anyone can help me.
Our car was damaged in last weeks storms and our insurer (Direct Line) has (finally) agreed to authorise the repairs at a local garage, after seeing the quote/photos etc from this garage (they have no approved garages where we live as it is a small island so had to seek local garage).
When they told me, tonight, they simply stated that it was 'authorised' and I would need to speak to my garage next to find out timescales and how it was progressing etc. However when I spoke to my garage he advised they had authorised him 'without prejudice'. Can anyone advise what this statement hightlighted means please ? For the record I have an excess to pay as it was a shed which landed on the car (not ours) and the claim was assessed as 'no fault', meaning not my fault but could not be claimed back from other party either (unless negligence could be proven).
Thanks and please ask for any more info that might help explain this.
Cheers

Road_Hog

OrkneyStar wrote: »

However when I spoke to my garage he advised they had authorised him 'without prejudice'. Can anyone advise what this statement hightlighted means please ?

Yep, without going into the whole legal terms, what it means is the following. They (the company) have agreed to pay out for your claim, but it does mean that they are not admitting liability, merely that they have officially agreed to pay out for your claim/demands.

What that means to you is, they're going to pay for what you have asked, but you can't sue them for anything extra or claim that they've admitted associated costs and liability just because they've paid to sort your car out.

It's basically a way of paying out but closing the claim, so that you can't come back and claim for other stuff in a few weeks/months time.

atrixblue.-MFR-.

also means that when you car is repaired, and you accept the repair, you cant go back to DL and ask for the works to be corrected later down the line if the work is poor or faulty as they wont hold reposability to the workmanship because the garage is not their approved body shop, you would have to deal with the garage directly with what T and C they have in place and their warranty and garantee on thier work. as road hog said but with the added bonus of washing their hands of any problems you face with the cars repair afterwards leaving you to assure the work has a warranty and deal direct with the garage not DL.

OrkneyStar

Thanks Road_Hog and atrixblue._MFR-., that explains it nicely.
Regarding it not being an approved garage, customers up here have no choice but to use their own/locally recommended garage as DL have no approved ones up here (and I had to sort it all out personally, thankfully my local garage had good recommendations for body work/windscreen work up here!). Something to be aware of for future insurance, as through no fault of our own, it immediately excludes us from the normal 5 year guarantee which works completed in the approved garages carry. I understand why they cannot guarantee an independent garage, but I presumed (stupidly without checking) they might have at least one approved one, being as there is a population of 20000 and lots of cars!
Anyway thanks again, just have to wait now until they get all the bits ordered and they come (again longer time than normal, don't ya just love the sound of island life lol). Car-less over Christmas (hired a car for a bit but not incl. on ins so not for too long )- hmmm, does that mean more mulled wine for me .

Road_Hog

OrkneyStar wrote: »

I understand why they cannot guarantee an independent garage, but I presumed (stupidly without checking) they might have at least one approved one, being as there is a population of 20000 and lots of cars!

Perhaps it is, that none of the garages want to sign up to DL terms and conditions, up your way.

There are always two sides to a coin and I will offer a reasons why.

A) DL terms are onerous and they don't won't to be beholden to a corporate business.

They have a captive market and not much competition and they make plenty of profit and can take or leave the business, or at least on their terms.

PS My own experience of Orkney (and Shetland for that matter) is that there isn't much competition, even in Kirkwall.

OrkneyStar

Road_Hog wrote: »

Perhaps it is, that none of the garages want to sign up to DL terms and conditions, up your way.

There are always two sides to a coin and I will offer a reasons why.

A) DL terms are onerous and they don't won't to be beholden to a corporate business.

They have a captive market and not much competition and they make plenty of profit and can take or leave the business, or at least on their terms.

PS My own experience of Orkney (and Shetland for that matter) is that there isn't much competition, even in Kirkwall.

Yeah, perhaps you are right. Main thing is they have agreed to the repairs (subject to excess). And yes there is not much competition, in all sorts of things.....don't get me started on that one lol .

colino

This is odd on a number of levels. DL and other insurers often give authorisation in this legalspeak to give them wiggle room later. I'm surprised your garage is confused, perhaps they don't do much insurance work?
Don't leave it open ended, you might find yourself asked to pay a different excess before you collect the repaired car otherwise.
DL cleverly, during their enormous growth phase, signed up repair garages everywhere with decent terms and helped create the brand. They quickly, after getting many bodyshops to invest heavily to retain this "lucrative and continuing work", rationalised their contracts, cutting out many completely and forcing 'shops who wished to continue to accept quite ridiculous rates.
If anything, you are better off having a non-DL affiliated garage doing the work, but they sound a bit naive and might become a bit disgruntled about the rates DL will pay and the times allowed for work.
With customers and colleagues, completely down to affiliated workshops being on the treadmill and chasing turnover instead of profit and abandoning good practice, I've never seen a DL repaired car that hasn't needed to go back for remedial work.

OrkneyStar

colino wrote: »

This is odd on a number of levels. DL and other insurers often give authorisation in this legalspeak to give them wiggle room later. I'm surprised your garage is confused, perhaps they don't do much insurance work?
Don't leave it open ended, you might find yourself asked to pay a different excess before you collect the repaired car otherwise.
DL cleverly, during their enormous growth phase, signed up repair garages everywhere with decent terms and helped create the brand. They quickly, after getting many bodyshops to invest heavily to retain this "lucrative and continuing work", rationalised their contracts, cutting out many completely and forcing 'shops who wished to continue to accept quite ridiculous rates.
If anything, you are better off having a non-DL affiliated garage doing the work, but they sound a bit naive and might become a bit disgruntled about the rates DL will pay and the times allowed for work.
With customers and colleagues, completely down to affiliated workshops being on the treadmill and chasing turnover instead of profit and abandoning good practice, I've never seen a DL repaired car that hasn't needed to go back for remedial work.

The garage wasn't confused as such, I think they just wondered why the term was used in this case. As for me having to pay a different excess, well DL have agreed my excess with me and they have agreed the figures for the work which the garage provided, so not sure how my excess can change ?
As for your last comment, can I ask what this is based on ? Professional, or simply what you have seen (in other words do you have real stats to back this up, comparing DL with other insurers).
Thanks for the reply.

colino

My last comment is my experience of my own private car, friends, relatives and customers. If you were in the industry you would be aware of the sharp practices that DL employed to divide and conquer bodyshops, and regretably many now appear to rely entirely on this production line, low profit work.
My own car, many years ago, was a very easy to match Baltic Blue that not only was the colour match terrible, the prep was rushed and poor and returned on two occasions before a good result. That was in a bodyshop that pre-DL I would have recommended to customers in East Kilbride, but with that mis-managed and entirely avoidable hole in their funds (insurers don't pay again for bad work) I simply wouldn't use again.

OrkneyStar

colino wrote: »

My last comment is my experience of my own private car, friends, relatives and customers. If you were in the industry you would be aware of the sharp practices that DL employed to divide and conquer bodyshops, and regretably many now appear to rely entirely on this production line, low profit work.
My own car, many years ago, was a very easy to match Baltic Blue that not only was the colour match terrible, the prep was rushed and poor and returned on two occasions before a good result. That was in a bodyshop that pre-DL I would have recommended to customers in East Kilbride, but with that mis-managed and entirely avoidable hole in their funds (insurers don't pay again for bad work) I simply wouldn't use again.

So based on own experience then ? Sorry you have had bad experiences, but I am sure there are good ones too.
Happy Christmas!