Car Insurance Claim - Engine Damage.

Coffee_Bloke

Any advice here would be much appreciated, it's a bit of a long shot.
Sorry if I'm speaking at all technically (doubtful - I'm no mechanic). If it seems that way, ignore the story and skip to the bottom where the real questions are asked.

On the way to work this morning we drove through a very large puddle/flood (you can see where this is going, right?). Although all other cars passed through fine, and the council clearly didn't see fit to place a flood warning sign in advance (another issue I may end up taking up), by the time I got to the end of the "puddle", I could tell something was wrong. Sure enough, a few seconds later and the car was at a standstill by the side of the road, not starting up.

Rather than the normal story in such cases of the engine needing to dry for a bit, it was more severe. Oil was pouring out from underneath, so clearly there was some damage. I don't know if this was from the engine going wrong due to water intake (I'm guessing a 90% likelihood) or whether we hit something hidden under the water and it damaged the oil sump or any other part of the bottom of the engine (10% likelihood?). RAC seem to think it's more likely to be the first one, but didn't examine it fully as he could just tell the engine wouldn't start, so towed us back.


So the questions are as follows:

1. Are the insurance company likely to pay up on my now possibly irreparable engine if indeed it was due to water intake from a flooded road with no warning signs out? Incidentally it was a fast-moving A-road going to and from London from Hertfordshire.

2. Are they just going to tell me it's: a) My own fault (true); b) Mechanical fault, so not covered.

3. If they accept the possibility that it was something in the road hidden by the water, are they presumably required to pay up?

4. How will they get this all checked out? I'm not a mechanic so I don't know exactly what it was down to (well clearly driving through the huge puddle - but you know what I mean), and it will possibly need a mechanic to remove the engine in order to inspect it, if the damage is indeed there. That's not a cheap job - are they going to be willing to have that done?


Well more importantly than those questions, if anyone has any tips for persuading the insurance company that they should be having to pay out, please do advise...
I'm good at convincing O2 and NTL that they should give me things for free, but this one is a rather bigger deal. Any tips would be appreciated.

Many thanks.

brazilianwax

Coffee_Bloke wrote:

Any advice here would be much appreciated, it's a bit of a long shot.
Sorry if I'm speaking at all technically (doubtful - I'm no mechanic). If it seems that way, ignore the story and skip to the bottom where the real questions are asked.

On the way to work this morning we drove through a very large puddle/flood (you can see where this is going, right?). Although all other cars passed through fine, and the council clearly didn't see fit to place a flood warning sign in advance (another issue I may end up taking up), by the time I got to the end of the "puddle", I could tell something was wrong. Sure enough, a few seconds later and the car was at a standstill by the side of the road, not starting up.

Rather than the normal story in such cases of the engine needing to dry for a bit, it was more severe. Oil was pouring out from underneath, so clearly there was some damage. I don't know if this was from the engine going wrong due to water intake (I'm guessing a 90% likelihood) or whether we hit something hidden under the water and it damaged the oil sump or any other part of the bottom of the engine (10% likelihood?). RAC seem to think it's more likely to be the first one, but didn't examine it fully as he could just tell the engine wouldn't start, so towed us back.


So the questions are as follows:

1. Are the insurance company likely to pay up on my now possibly irreparable engine if indeed it was due to water intake from a flooded road with no warning signs out? Incidentally it was a fast-moving A-road going to and from London from Hertfordshire.

2. Are they just going to tell me it's: a) My own fault (true); b) Mechanical fault, so not covered.

3. If they accept the possibility that it was something in the road hidden by the water, are they presumably required to pay up?

4. How will they get this all checked out? I'm not a mechanic so I don't know exactly what it was down to (well clearly driving through the huge puddle - but you know what I mean), and it will possibly need a mechanic to remove the engine in order to inspect it, if the damage is indeed there. That's not a cheap job - are they going to be willing to have that done?


Well more importantly than those questions, if anyone has any tips for persuading the insurance company that they should be having to pay out, please do advise...
I'm good at convincing O2 and NTL that they should give me things for free, but this one is a rather bigger deal. Any tips would be appreciated.

Many thanks.

I doubt your insurers will want to know TBH. As it's mechanical failure they'll say you aren't covered.

Not sure how you could persuade them otherwise!

Sorry!

iceicebaby

This doesnt come under the remit of your insurance sorry.

Its a machanical failiure so needs to be dealt with like all other mechanical failiures. After all you wouldnt claim on your insurance if your clutch cable snapped or something else like that.

Coffee_Bloke

Thanks (to both).

I did figure that was probably the case, but given that it could have been something in the road/under the water, that hit the engine (though how I or they can show this beyond doubt, I'm not sure), I wanted to check.

I mean, if you hit a rock in the road under normal circumstances, and it damages your car, you can claim that? So the fact that it may have hit something hidden shouldn't make a difference? And sure, it's mechanical damage, but simply mechanical damage caused by there being a physical hole somewhere underneath the car.

Of course, that's me clutching at the 10% straw that it was something we hit, rather than just something going wrong from water intake. From the oil spill though, there was definitely something that caused a physical hole to form in the engine. I don't know if water can do/cause that.

I think I just sort of feel aggrieved that - as someone who looks after his car, has never caused an accident, and drives very safely - I'm going to have to fork out so much for something that I had to go through (there's no turning around on that road), which damaged my car badly.

Thanks for the replies though.

mattymoo

Don't give up yet. It is mechanical damage but caused by an external factor - the puddle. If it was wear and tear then yes, defo not covered.

I seem to recall settling claims for engine damage caused by salt water flooding in the past. Owner had left car on beach and tide came in.

If you post name of your insurers we should be able to call up the policy wording online and check the exclusions.

Coffee_Bloke

Thanks a lot. It's Direct Line.

We actually called them this morning and they seemed to get onto the case right away. We're being given a hire car which we're told by the hire car company themselves (as asking Direct Line might have given the game away that we had doubts over the validity of the claim) is always covered by Direct Line even if they decide not take up the claim at a later stage, and one of our local garages has already called to arrange collection of the car.

So, fingers crossed. Of course I'm trying to be realistic, so am assuming they're probably just going to get the car in there, call Direct Line and tell them this is mechanical fault, and then we'll get a call telling us we aren't covered.

But at least they're acting already. When I called, I did explain (truthfully) all that I factually knew (i.e. I drove through a flood/puddle and the car came to a stop right after, the engine would no longer start and there was oil pouring from the bottom of the car), and they didn't mention a word of not being covered, and started putting it all through. All I could assume was that this is just someone who answers the phones, puts the details down on paper, and it's then passed onto someone else to check out whether it's valid or not. If the person who I spoke to was more than a first line of contact, and is actually someone who can determine validity of the claim, then things could be hopeful.

but caused by an external factor - the puddle

Right. That was my only thought too. I mean, had the external factor been a tree, they'd have paid up? Had it been a wall, they'd have paid up? Driving into a tree or wall is actually harder to do and more careless (on the face of it) than going through a puddle when on an A-road that I couldn't turn around on. Though I guess you could say that if there was a wall or tree in front of you, you wouldn't try driving through it lol.

Could be wrong, but if inanimate (or even animate! I did once hit a badger ) objects strike/are struck by your car, can you claim for the damage? If so.....

Astaroth

It is not a clear cut case.

As usual agree with mattymoo.... and have previously paid out on claims very similar to this.

The area of concern is why the water caused the damage to the vehicle.... if it is a case that the water has ruined the electronics (as was the case in the claim I previous had) then this is 100% an external issue and so is covered. If your vehicle was not in a good state of repair and the water got into the engine through a warn out part (eg ruptured oil filter etc) then you have most likely breached a condition of your policy and therefore may not be covered.

The person that will decide if the damage is covered or not will be the engineer employed by DL who regularly visits the garage rather than someone in a call centre

Coffee_Bloke

Cheers, glad to hear that there's at least some hope.

Astaroth wrote:

The area of concern is why the water caused the damage to the vehicle.... if it is a case that the water has ruined the electronics (as was the case in the claim I previous had) then this is 100% an external issue and so is covered. If your vehicle was not in a good state of repair and the water got into the engine through a warn out part (eg ruptured oil filter etc) then you have most likely breached a condition of your policy and therefore may not be covered.

I see. Well all I can say is that the car was well maintained, driven safely, there have never been any claims made against me for my actions when driving, and the car had no problems that I was aware of, or had been pointed out on recent MOT/service documentation.
Of course, whether they choose to believe that is a different matter. And whether there was a problem with the car that I wasn't aware of - also a different matter.

Astaroth wrote:

The person that will decide if the damage is covered or not will be the engineer employed by DL who regularly visits the garage rather than someone in a call centre

Ok. Fair enough.

The expert opinions I'm getting are appreciated.

Coffee_Bloke

Just to update this:
Direct Line have agreed to pay out without question or argument.
When we spoke to the mechanic a couple of days ago he said he felt the DL Engineer would be sympathetic to our situation given the state of the car beforehand. And that was indeed the case.

We're now just awaiting a valuation/offer. My last write-off (this doesn't happen often I swear - second time and the first was when a learner driver drove into the back of me at the lights by hitting the accelerator rather than brake), the insurer was very generous and offered probably 130% of what I'd have valued it at myself.

Thanks again to those who replied.
This is definitely one of the nicer insurance company experiences. Definite thumbs up thus far for Direct Line. Dealt swifty, gave us hire car the next morning and haven't even argued to not pay out despite the non-clear-cut circumstances.

mattymoo

Good result. Glad it seems to be sorted. Fingers crossed the valuation is fair.