Admiral and Elephant claim problems, Help please

Max66

I was recently involved in a car accident, both the other driver and his insurance company admitted fault.

My car has been taken away for repair, they are now trying to get out of some of the repair by sighting existing damage, this is not the case.

In addition they have given me a lesser loan car that really is not suitable for my needs.

Does anyone have experience in this matter as I am beginning to feel that I am being treat unfairly, and the guilty party when clearly I'm not.

My other problem is that his insurance is a sister company to mine, so am guessing premium increase next year even though no blame has been put on me.

Thanks

notanewuser

Your premium is likely to increase anyway - and they may well rate for a non-fault claim too.

Whose insurers are managing the repairs and supplying the car? Yours or the third party's?

InsideInsurance

Speak to them if the car is not suitable for your needs and explain why. Remember as a claimant you have a legal duty to mitigate your losses so if its not suitable because you've got a dozen kids and they've only given you a Corsa then its reasonable to ask for something bigger. If you have a Mercedes SLS simply because you can and you're complaining they've only given you an SL AMG instead then your not going to get anywhere.

As to the pre-existing damage, it is always a hard one to argue around. Did their own engineer inspect it or was it an independent? Certainly raise a complaint if it is your own insurers dealing with it.

Max66

Thanks for the responses so far, to answer some queries,

There was no Pre existing damage, but they are claiming there was, the garage have surveyed and sent pictures to the insurance company and they have formed their own incorrect opinion and therefore trying to offer a cash settlement instead of the repair. I am sticking to wanting the car returned in the Pre damage condition.

In relation to the car, they offer a fiat 500 for a family with two kids and a dog?, finally they agree the car is not suitable and they then send a saloon car, can't really put the dog in the boot, and the hire company have a policy of no dogs, so I don't have normal use.

I believe I am in my rights to have an equivalent loan car suitable for my needs, and I am entitled for the car to be fully repaired. Surely they need to offer firm evidence if they believe existing faults, seems that as the innocent party it's down to me to prove it?

I must have some rights as I was in the right place at the wrong time.

Thanks

rs65

What car do you have?

What damage is allegedly pre-existing?

vaio

if your insurer is dealing then the replacement car is whatever your policy says it needs to be.

If the at fault insurer is dealing then they should provide an equivalent car to yours.

In both cases if the offered car isn't suitable you are at liberty to source your own and recover the costs from the at fault party.

If liability is clear cut and you can't afford to pay for a hire car then the credit hire firms will be only too pleased to help

Max66

The damage was not Pre existing, but they are arguing that the damage was, as such they are only going to offer a cash settlement. Seems that we are stuck with me not accepting thier findings and they not budging.

Could really do with some advice, I supplied pictures of the car from 3 months ago, details of the garage that serviced the car 2weeks prior to the incident. The insurance just refuse to discuss further.

In relation to the hire car, it was not fit for my needs and I was therefore car less all weekend.

I really am being treated as the guilty party, when their own driver has admitted responsibility.

And points or law, agencies etc i could use?

Max66

I have now received the garage quote via Admiral from the garage which totals repairs at £2000, they wanted to offer £1600! They have also attached a tail end of an email saying "looks like this one is going to turn into a complaint before we have lifted a spanner"