My rights - Like for Like car replacement

sarahg1969

Also, OP, don't forget, you are ultimately responsible for the hire charges. It will be your name on the hire agreement, saying you agree to pay £200 per day, or whatever.

Phantom247

adamc260 wrote: »

Well the S4 Saloon is £229.27 per day as per GTA rates that credit hire companies work on... I assume the convertible can't be too far off that! When purchasing a car the convertible carries a nice 'premium' to it.

Actually, the S4 Saloon could be as high as SP10 due to the convertible unless it is actually mentioned as such on the ABI GTA framework, as it allows for the vehicle if it was in fact a SP8 and a convertible AI Claims would be allowed assuming they can give a valid reason to charge the higher group.

"7. For customers with a convertible, unless the model listed is already a convertible, convertibles are treated by placing them into the group higher than the hard top version e.g. BMW M3 is in SP9. The convertible equivalent would be in SP10."

olly300

OP, a colleague of mine who has several cars took one of his sportier cars to be serviced to a specialised place where the guy also dealt in the type of car.

The dealer drove an old estate car.

Didn't make his servicing any worse, and it became apparent why he drove the car when my colleague looked inside.

AI Claim Solutions and the other side's insurers can quite easier argue, whether you were working or not, that it's not necessarily for you to drive an exact like for like car regardless of what you are selling.

Simply because your customers will go for a test drive in the cars you are trying to sell them.

bouncydog1

Christopher7 wrote: »

I believe maintaining a certain status or reputation is a legitimate reason for having a like for like.

OP - have you thought that by driving around in an expensive car people might think that your prices for your vehicles are going to be high? I know people with v. expensive "status" vehicles who don't have a penny to their name and are heavily in debt. Likewise I have friends who are lawyers and doctors who drive non-descript vehicles. Cars say nothing about you at all IMO!

Trebor01

All once again thank you all for your comments.

The point here is that I pay insurance for a type of car X (let say this was an Aston Martin), and that by it being out of action I should be able to have the same car as per the like for like agreement. If I took this to an extreme position, if my car was hit by a third party, and then it was repaired and then immediately was hit again etc etc etc, and each time I was put into a "like for like" hire car which was effectively not a equivalent car (i.e. I don't need an Aston Martin so let put him in a Ford Focus), this would make a mockery of having to pay for insurance for my original car (Aston Martin) in the first place, i.e. I would not be put back into a similar position to the one I was in before any accident.

In the past I have not had this issue, I was hit and the third party insurers provided an M3 convertible whilst mine was being repaired. Then spend more money on the admin to try and enforce cost savings than the actual hire costs, and this is why insurance goes up.

In a nut shell insurance companies are just out to rip people off, and that is the bottom line.

Trebor01

Sgt Pepper - Drive on me those 3 he it bothers you that much....pardon......????????

Trebor01

InsideInsurance - Cars range from newish MX5's, to Boxsters, Audi's and Mercs to name but a few, all about 2/3 years old.

Trebor01

Olly300 - I understand this so am not even sure why they ask the question, as it seems no matter what your reply is AI Claims Solutions will deem it not necessary for you to have a "like for like" car, therefore "like for like" means nothing of the sort. It either is or isn't like for like, yet all too often people try to twist meanings to suit their own cause, usually to save money.

rs65

Paying for your insurance and claiming hire costs from another party are two different things.

Do you have a hire/replacement car benefit under your own policy?

There used to be good case law on temporary replacement cars but the last time I looked at this was before credit hire companies appeared.

Trebor01

Bouncydog - I agree but it appears that the AI Claims position is very different, otherwise why ask the question in the first place. In essence they will try to use an reason not to provide a "like for like" as it may in some cases be expensive, so my point is why offer like for like in the first place. People who drive a Bentley don't need one, but they choose to drive one. Regardless of whether work or not, they could be wealthy and retired, they chose a Bentley and because the third party was careless they should still be able to drive a Bentley or equivalent if "like for like" is what it implies. Being extreme but taking this point to its limit, the insurers could just stick anyone in a really cheap new basic car (lets say £7000) indefinitely if the repair bill was allot higher (lets say a write of Phantom £150,000) and never actually pay for the repair bill at all. Make good business sense if the fact that like for like is being able to be abused as it clearly is at present.