Help needed arguing Esure's valuation

motorguy

Genuinely thats all the guides are. I know quite a few dealers these days who've "thrown the guides away" when it comes to what retail price to pitch a car at these days.

maddogb

Ozzuk wrote: »

You had opportunity - they offer, you reject and supply evidence. I googled 'rejecting first car insurance offer' and there are loads of posts suggesting best course of action, and yes that includes finding examples to support your desire for better price.

I'd focus my energy on that rather that fix a system you think is broken. Is it too late for you to reject and do this? I'm not reading back over this to find out.

Just to add - they are a business, of course they will normally try and offer you the lowest price they can get away with. (Though actually when I wrote a car off years ago I had a brilliant first offer). It may cost you time proving a better valuation but it is the best way to get what you want.

The point here is, I wasn't given any opportunity to debate/argue/negotiate or to provide evidence, this was never suggested by Esure and in fact their entire procedure is working against this.
This problem is compounded with the FOS statement on it's website implying adverts are not a reliable source of valuation, they really need to qualify that better.


If you have experience of this scenario you will know how to pre-empt the manipulation, I did not have the benefit of that experience and would not expect my insurers who are under a legal obligation to play fair, to deceive me with misdirection.

rs65

maddogb wrote: »

The point here is, I wasn't given any opportunity to debate/argue/negotiate or to provide evidence, this was never suggested by Esure and in fact their entire procedure is working against this.

How did you get the offer increased from £2850 to £3000?

AdrianC

maddogb wrote: »

The point here is, I wasn't given any opportunity to debate/argue/negotiate or to provide evidence, this was never suggested by Esure and in fact their entire procedure is working against this.

Yes, you were. And they agreed to increase it slightly.

This problem is compounded with the FOS statement on it's website implying adverts are not a reliable source of valuation, they really need to qualify that better.

Hold on a minute, I'm just placing some random but convincing fake ads asking for five grand for a ten year old Fiesta similar to the one I've just wrapped around a tree,

If you have experience of this scenario you will know how to pre-empt the manipulation, I did not have the benefit of that experience and would not expect my insurers who are under a legal obligation to play fair, to deceive me with misdirection.

The escalation procedure, and the criteria the ombudsman uses, are all public information. Your policy Ts & Cs explain what they deem to be market value. What else is being "misdirected"?

verityboo

Sorry, but you seem to suggest OP that because guide books are based on historical data then everything is out of date.

One of the most used guides - Cap - also provide estimated future values and it is from such data that the future values of cars for PCP finance are estimated for when they are 2, 3 or 4 years old. The guides are used because they give a pretty good estimate

It seems to me that your problem is that car values vary around the country which is nothing to do with insurance companies or the fos. You want to be paid out more than you can buy an equivalent vehicle which means you want everyones insurance to go up.

maddogb

obviously you guys weren't there so you either have to take my word for it or consider it to be variable in either case it would be churlish to argue against.


The manipulation was one of being forced down a pre-determined path, quite obvious in retrospect but not so at the time.
The misdirection was being forced down the path of arguing about the guide values when in reality they are not relevant and you guys have fallen for that as I did.
The argument about all the info being available is simply not true, I have the documented evidence to prove that unlike esure who's total evidence for their decision by the adjudicator was nil.

maddogb

verityboo wrote: »

Sorry, but you seem to suggest OP that because guide books are based on historical data then everything is out of date.

One of the most used guides - Cap - also provide estimated future values and it is from such data that the future values of cars for PCP finance are estimated for when they are 2, 3 or 4 years old. The guides are used because they give a pretty good estimate

It seems to me that your problem is that car values vary around the country which is nothing to do with insurance companies or the fos. You want to be paid out more than you can buy an equivalent vehicle which means you want everyones insurance to go up.

Again misdirection, do I pay insurance to get a payout based on caps guide? ,no I pay insurance to indemnify against losses, there exists no agreement that in the event of a total loss I will trawl the country looking for a suitable vehicle. like a lot of law it's what is not written that is most important here.
As for the historical data it is the insurers that insist on the value being on the date of loss, therefore by their own argument the guides are further discredited from being useful for this purpose.
Oh and before you go spreading the myth that my £1000 extra means everyones insurance goes up,
ask Esure if they plat to return any of the £44 million of profit in the form of reduced policy cost.

verityboo

maddogb wrote: »

Again misdirection, do I pay insurance to get a payout based on caps guide? ,no I pay insurance to indemnify against losses, there exists no agreement that in the event of a total loss I will trawl the country looking for a suitable vehicle. like a lot of law it's what is not written that is most important here.
As for the historical data it is the insurers that insist on the value being on the date of loss, therefore by their own argument the guides are further discredited from being useful for this purpose.
Oh and before you go spreading the myth that my £1000 extra means everyones insurance goes up,
ask Esure if they plat to return any of the £44 million of profit in the form of reduced policy cost.

And how do they quantify your loss, looking in respected guides such as CAP would seem like a good way?

How would you suggest they value your car. Look at the prices of overpriced cars which might not sell for anything like the asking price. Would you expect the insures to spend hours looking at adverts and comparing specs and prices. Perhaps before you go any further you should look into guides such as CAP, what data they gather and from where. Perhaps then you might appreciate that a value based on such a guide is a fair starting point

Ozzuk

Of course if you want to avoid this issue you could always pay more for insurance and get an agreed value policy. By not taking this option you are leaving yourself more open to the insurers valuation of your car. Everytime I've insured/renewed my vehicles I'm warned it might not match my valuation.

bigjl

Ozzuk wrote: »

Of course if you want to avoid this issue you could always pay more for insurance and get an agreed value policy. By not taking this option you are leaving yourself more open to the insurers valuation of your car. Everytime I've insured/renewed my vehicles I'm warned it might not match my valuation.

An agreed value policy on an old Ka Luxury?

The problem is simply one of optimistic expectations as to the value of the car.

Happens all the time.

If you really think the car is that great then get it given back as part of the settlement then fix it yourself.