Council unlawfully scrapped my sister's car

betterthanyours

k3lvc wrote: »

Now you're just taking the !!!! - no doubt the perfume bottle was full and was the latest designer fragrance, the stereo was a high end aftermarket system and the pram was brand new from Harrods - this is all in keeping with the image given of the car and the location it's parked which looks far from 'premium' and obviously didn't cause her any stress or anxiety to walk down there and park


The more your story get embellished the less likely you are to achieve the magic compo you're after

The perfume was coco chanel, the stereo was actually an alpine stereo system which cost 100£ at retail. The pram was a gift from her siblings in anticipation of the new arrival.

If you read my OP, I'm pretty sure I noted in there that the street she parks on, is not the street she lives on. The street she lives on is a newly developed new build area and is a "car free zone". The street she parks on is admittedly a !!!! hole.

The bottom line is, the vehicle was stolen.

Who are you though? Is your name Michael by any chance. The manager of the department who incompetently disposed of a roadworthy and legally parked vehicle?

umad??

I posted here asking for help and advice. You are doing neither of those. Do one.

betterthanyours

Quentin wrote: »

Did you find out if she has any uninsured loss recovery (aka "Legal Cover") when talking to her insurer?


If so they will pursue her claim for uninsured losses (which will include her costs getting replacement transport whilst awaiting her settlement for the write off)

That's a very good point. She had a comprehensive policy. Thanks for that.

Umkomaas

The OP came here for help - not criticism, attack or ridicule. Clearly he is starting at a negotiating position - where do you think he should start if there have also been supplementary losses - or does anyone really want to accuse him of lying - if so, say it?

I'd let the council fight its own battles and let them argue the finer points of the claim. They messed up don't forget - and they've admitted it - as the OP has reported.

Quentin

betterthanyours wrote: »

I posted here asking for help and advice. ....

Which you have had a lot of!!


Though it seems you have ignored a lot. (The advice to contact her insurer regarding any legal cover she might have was over a week ago) - What happened about getting this in the local paper?


And has she spoken to her insurer regarding no longer having any car on cover? She needs to do this ASAP as she may find her cover cancelled?


She should be keeping all her transport receipts (taxi fares etc) and when well enough to drive consider a hire car until she gets her settlement for the write off.

betterthanyours

Quentin wrote: »

Which you have had a lot of!!


Though it seems you have ignored a lot. (The advice to contact her insurer regarding any legal cover she might have was over a week ago) - What happened about getting this in the local paper?

Hi Quentin, yes I have had a lot of advice. I was mostly referring to the unhelpful replies by a certain member of the board. It wasn't directed at you or anybody else.

I seemed to have missed the legal cover part last week. I did contact Metro via email but they haven't responded. It might be best to contact them via Social Media?

Quentin wrote: »

And has she spoken to her insurer regarding no longer having any car on cover? She needs to do this ASAP as she may find her cover cancelled?

As soon as the insurer was made aware that the vehicle no longer existed, the policy was cancelled. As you stated, there is no substantial vehicle against the policy. However, we were advised that as she was insured at the time, they would be happy to process a claim, should we obtain a crime reference number.

The police say this was a mistake though, not a crime. I wonder how far a civilian would get claiming theft was a mistake?

Quentin wrote: »

She should be keeping all her transport receipts (taxi fares etc) and when well enough to drive consider a hire car until she gets her settlement for the write off.

She has been keeping receipts of cab journeys. Is it a good idea to hire a vehicle? Council's are seemingly stingy. They might say it was unecessary? I'm waiting to hear whether she had legal cover, if she did then I will suggest that she hires a car since these would be claimed back and dealt with via the provided solicitor / lawyer/

Quentin

If she needs a hire car she will normally have to pay for it and reclaim it along with her other uninsured losses unless she can persuade a credit hire company to take up her case.

Quentin

betterthanyours wrote: »

However, we were advised that as she was insured at the time, they would be happy to process a claim, should we obtain a crime reference number.

The police say this was a mistake though, not a crime. I wonder how far a civilian would get claiming theft was a mistake?

You originally went big on this being a crime (eg the incorrect thread title), so maybe her insurer got the wrong end of the stick, and believe it was stolen.


If she can claim on her policy, and as the council have already accepted liability it will be a no fault claim. Maybe this would be your speediest solution!

betterthanyours

Quentin wrote: »

You originally went big on this being a crime (eg the incorrect thread title), so maybe her insurer got the wrong end of the stick, and believe it was stolen.

The initial thread title was literally on discovery about what had happened. A "panic" title, if you may! The insurer has made it clear though. There's no claim unless it is for theft. The police are unwilling to log a crime against a local authority.

Quentin wrote: »

If she can claim on her policy, and as the council have already accepted liability it will be a no fault claim. Maybe this would be your speediest solution!

She could, if she was able to obtain a crime reference number but as I stated earlier. The police are unwilling to accept that this is a crime. Just that it was taken by mistake. My comment to the police at the time was; most people who commit crimes feel that it was a mistake afterwards.

Quentin

Although her motor policy doesn't cover this, but if she has "legal cover" (which is really for reclaiming "uninsured losses"), they only take you on if you have a good chance of winning - which she does as the council already accepted their liability.


Whether or not this is covered by any "legal cover" can only be established by checking the policy wording or making a claim (against the "legal cover"). Most insurance "legal cover" does provide a "legal help line" which you can contact for assistance even if no claim is possible.


This won't cost anything and might provide a speedy solution if she can use it, or some "proper" advice if not.


She will need to check her paperwork to see if any legal cover was included in her comprehensive policy, or if she took it out as an extra.

betterthanyours

Quentin wrote: »

Although her motor policy doesn't cover this, but if she has "legal cover" (which is really for reclaiming "uninsured losses"), they only take you on if you have a good chance of winning - which she does as the council already accepted their liability.


Whether or not this is covered by any "legal cover" can only be established by checking the policy wording or making a claim (against the "legal cover"). Most insurance "legal cover" does provide a "legal help line" which you can contact for assistance even if no claim is possible.


This won't cost anything and might provide a speedy solution if she can use it, or some "proper" advice if not.


She will need to check her paperwork to see if any legal cover was included in her comprehensive policy, or if she took it out as an extra.

Just had confirmation back. Whilst legal cover was included on her policy - the cover is only for motor accident claims and nothing else.