Should their insurance replace my repair fuel costs?

notanewuser

A neighbour hit my nearly new parked car last year. Needed new wing etc.

I took the car to my chosen repairer for an estimate. 36 mile round trip I wouldn't otherwise have made.

I took the car in for repairs and was collected by the hire car company before driving home. 36 mile round trip I wouldn't otherwise have made.

I went to collect the car, only to find that the bonnet alignment was out. Refused to take the car and left it with them to sort out. 36 mile round trip I wouldn't otherwise have made.

I went to collect again and now the wing alignment was out (owner was mortified). Refused to take the car and left it with them to sort out. 36 mile round trip I wouldn't otherwise have made.

Finally collected the car and returned the hire car. 36 mile round trip I wouldn't otherwise have made.

I claimed back £81 (180x45p) for the journeys but nothing for my time (garage owner did give me wine and flowers to apologise for the errors so I felt that covered that!!). Especially because my (2 litre 4x4) easily does 35mpg whereas the 3.5l Mercedes 4x4 they gave me struggled to do £25. :mad:

lejogger

keith1950 wrote: »

Hassle ?? What hassle ? , your car was repaired, they collected the car , they returned the car and you quibble about a couple of gallons of fuel.
Most bodyshop's I know would just tell you to jog-off.

Well... The hassle of being involved in an accident and the stress of my son being in the vehicle, the hassle of phoning my insurance, and of multiple calls to her insurance. The hassle of arranging time out of work for the repair estimate, for time out of work to arrange the collection of my vehicle, for time out of work to collect the hire car...
The hassle of having to drive to work every day rather than cycle because they weren't sure when they would be finished and need to return it, the hassle of arranging time out of work to return the hire car and time out of work to take delivery of my repaired vehicle, the hassle of queuing at the forecourt at Friday night rush hour to replace the fuel they used because there wasn't even enough left to get me halfway home.

If I had caused the accident I would expect a little hardship, but as an innocent party I think the least they could do is return my car with the same level of fuel as when they took it. To be honest my gripe isn't really about what I can and can't claim for, it's more just the lack of consideration.

Anyway. Best to close this thread here I would have thought. I don't think there's much more to be added.
Thanks to all for your contributions.

vaio

forgotmyname wrote: »

Not a ridiculous comment at all.

If you cycle to work then why did you need a hire car? So you have a hire car yet never used it?

Mitigating losses?

I'd argue that the duty to mitigate means retaining your normal life style (including the availability of a car) at minimum cost.

Hence credit hire is only available if you can't afford up front hire costs without impacting normal spending power.

InsideInsurance

dacouch wrote: »

The standard of advice is shocking, InsideInsurance was circa 10% out on his calculations.

Inexcusable!

I was already hanging my head in shame, no need to rub it in

mattyprice4004

keith1950 wrote: »

Hassle ?? What hassle ? , your car was repaired, they collected the car , they returned the car and you quibble about a couple of gallons of fuel.
Most bodyshop's I know would just tell you to jog-off.

Hassle because the OP didn't ask for someone to crash into his car, and is now out of pocket for something that is in no way his fault perhaps?!

He had the fuel in the car, and now it's not through no fault of his own.