We'd like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum... Read More »
📨 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!
Engineer's Total Loss / Write Off Valuation Lowered by Insurer
Comments
-
-
.........Had the report valuation been the same as the offer, in this case £2,100, that is £900 short of the £3,000 declared value so no, that would not have been accepted on that basis as that's not in the ball park.
But the "declared" value is meaningless unless it was agreed!
Someone has made a mistake as you have been given 2 valuations.
You need to substantiate why the mistake is the lower "official" offer you have been given. You cannot keep saying they must abide by the other offer if that was given in error!0 -
But the "declared" value is meaningless unless it was agreed!
Someone has made a mistake as you have been given 2 valuations.
You need to substantiate why the mistake is the lower "official" offer you have been given. You cannot keep saying they must abide by the other offer if that was given in error!
Sorry Quentin, it's probably me not explaining this very well. Just to be clear, I'm not saying they should expect £3,000 I was simply stating that they were happy with the valuation they were given when they received a call from the company assessing the vehicle who said "it's a write off, the value market value is £2,668. They acted on that and replaced the vehicle with one similarly priced. I only mention the declared value to demonstrate that it was in the region of what they were expecting.
You asked if they were offered more than given in the report, would they still want to use the experts valuation. I then went on to explain that if the initial figure given on the report was low, then they would have wanted to negotiate as it would not have been near their expectations.0 -
You made an issue of the "declared value" on post #6. Where did that figure come from, and what is its relevance?
My understanding of your advice over this is that irrespective of the market value, you believe that the settlement should be based on the phone call from the engineer (who may or may not have made a mistake) rather than the correct market value.
But if there was a mistake made by the engineer, then you cannot expect it to be honoured.
The way to get the insurer to increase their offer is to show their valuation on offer to be wrong!0 -
I didn't really "make an issue" of it, it was in answer to the point made in post #3.You made an issue of the "declared valie" on post #6. Where did that figure come from, and what is its relevance?
No, I'm not entirely sure how else to explain it, it's really not that difficult a concept to grasp is it?My understanding of your advice over this is that irrespective of the market value, you believe that the settlement should be based on the phone call from the engineer (who may or may not have made a mistake) rather than the correct market value.
But if there was a mistake made by the engineer, then you cannot expect it to be honoured.
The way to get the insurer to increase their offer is to show their valuation on offer to be wrong!
The insurer has not mentioned anything about a mistake. I suspect they are simply attempting to mitigate their losses and trying it on in an effort to pay out as little as possible. I suspect that they did not know the engineer had given them the valuation over the phone. Many people accept the first offer, not knowing that they have the option to negotiate - or is that just me being cynical?
If it was me, I'd raise a complaint on the basis that a clear and precise valuation was given to them by a company who were instructed and paid by the insurer. To that end, they are representing the insurance company and speaking on their behalf. My friends subsequently acted on that information in good faith.
Why should my friends have to fight for a higher valuation than the (probably speculative) revised one? For that matter, why should they have to prove that a mistake has been made at all. they certainly haven't admitted to one. The fact that the initial figure was in line with their expectations is relevant because had they been given a value of £30,000 and rushed out to spend a similar figure, that would clearly be unreasonable.
However, that's not the case, as it stands I think anyone with any sense - and certainly the ombudsman will agree that the insurer is not acting reasonably or demonstrating TCF in this case. That would form the basis of my complaint, if I was dealing with it.0 -
Your friends don't have to "prove" any mistake has been made.
They do need to show why the insurer's offer is wrong!
To simply say they want what they were first told isn't the way to go about it!0 -
Your friends don't have to "prove" any mistake has been made.
They do need to show why the insurer's offer is wrong!
To simply say they want what they were first told isn't the way to go about it!
Well Quentin, I appreciate your view and hope to prove you wrong. I'll let you know how it goes.0 -
You may get a better offer from the insurer. but I doubt you would from the FOS.
If the initial offer was a mistake and higher than the true value, it's unlikely the FOS will force the insurer to put you in a better position than before the loss.
They will instruct the insurer to use to market value to settle the claim.0 -
Well Quentin, I appreciate your view and hope to prove you wrong. I'll let you know how it goes.
To me what Quentin is trying ot say is pretty clear; irrespective of what an engineer gave as a "valuation" verablly - if your friend is dissatisfied with the actual offer, then they need to prove that the market value of the vehicle pre-accident was greater than the amount of the offer (taking into account that excess and unpaid premium will be deducted from the value).
How can they do that? Well Mikey72's link earlier in the thread gives them all they need to know.0 -
Why not? The insurer already stated that my friend could send in adverts for similar vehicles so it's obvious that they are prepared to offer more. If the revised offer is below market value the FOS use price guides to establish that and award a higher valuation.You may get a better offer from the insurer. but I doubt you would from the FOS.
My argument is that the vehicle has already been accurately valued by an engineer who has visually assessed the first hand and accounted for specification and condition.
The insurer has made no mention of a mistake, I suspect they are speculatively starting with a low 'rounded' figure. I think they had no idea that the engineer had already advised of the value of the car. Neither valuation would put them in a better position than before the loss, no one is asking for that.If the initial offer was a mistake and higher than the true value, it's unlikely the FOS will force the insurer to put you in a better position than before the loss.
Great!They will instruct the insurer to use to market value to settle the claim.0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 351.7K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.4K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 454K Spending & Discounts
- 244.6K Work, Benefits & Business
- 600K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177.3K Life & Family
- 258.3K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.2K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.6K Read-Only Boards