We’d like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum.
This is to keep it a safe and useful space for MoneySaving discussions. Threads that are – or become – political in nature may be removed in line with the Forum’s rules. Thank you for your understanding.
📨 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!
Company avoiding insurers
Comments
-
The problem is that you quoted someone else who was giving correct advice and slapped them down with apparent certainty, so the OP would be inclined to believe you. If you'd said 'I think that ...' then the OP could have interpreted that.
I could have added my knowledge, but saw that sufficient weight had been applied to correct your fake-fact.
I'd rather a world where incorrect things were corrected than one where myths were allowed to roam free.
Since it was a side discussion, it neither helps nor hinders the OP.
The OP is concerned about the quality of the work done by the third party. He has the right to go through his own insurance for them to get the work done by them and for them to get their money from the third party if he doesn't trust the third party's arrangements.
A theoretical and metadiscusssion on the legalities of companies and insurance has no bearing on what the OP is asking.
He can either go along with the company's accident procedure or not. Going along with the company's procedure will be the least hassle and he should seek reassurances on the guarantee of the work done by the garages that the third party uses. Otherwise he can make a claim against the third party using his own insurance.0 -
Mercdriver wrote: »Since it was a side discussion, it neither helps nor hinders the OP.
The OP is concerned about the quality of the work done by the third party. He has the right to go through his own insurance for them to get the work done by them and for them to get their money from the third party if he doesn't trust the third party's arrangements.
A theoretical and metadiscusssion on the legalities of companies and insurance has no bearing on what the OP is asking.
He can either go along with the company's accident procedure or not. Going along with the company's procedure will be the least hassle and he should seek reassurances on the guarantee of the work done by the garages that the third party uses. Otherwise he can make a claim against the third party using his own insurance.
🎣 🎣🎣🎣🎣
We've caught us a whopper.0 -
Mercdriver wrote: »He can either go along with the company's accident procedure or not. Going along with the company's procedure will be the least hassle and he should seek reassurances on the guarantee of the work done by the garages that the third party uses. Otherwise he can make a claim against the third party using his own insurance.
Well.....now that you have chosen to advise the OP, then you miss out on the other options open to him, which mean he has more than the 2 options you tell him he has.
eg: He can instruct an accident management company/deal with this himself then pursue the offender to reimburse him/get his own chosen repairer to send a pro forma invoice to the offender/etc)
Thought you would have realised by now that giving us your "opinion" disguised as your educated and authoritative advice on subjects you get found out not to be the authority on is dangerous0 -
Well.....now that you have chosen to advise the OP, then you miss out on the other options open to him, which mean he has more than the 2 options you tell him he has.
eg: He can instruct an accident management company/deal with this himself then pursue the offender to reimburse him/get his own chosen repairer to send a pro forma invoice to the offender/etc)
Thought you would have realised by now that giving us your "opinion" disguised as your educated and authoritative advice on subjects you get found out not to be the authority on is dangerous
He clearly can see the wood for the trees.0 -
LOL
No pleasing some people. They agree to repairnit and provide a courtersey car and your still not happy.
What do you think their insurer will do differently?0 -
When your car is damaged by a third party you normally have the right to have it repaired at your choice of repairer.LOL
No pleasing some people. They agree to repairnit and provide a courtersey car and your still not happy.
What do you think their insurer will do differently?
In this case the "culprit" wants to use a repairer of their choice and force the innocent OP to accept their choice!
(And you are always entitled to be reimbursed by the "offender" the cost of a replacement car you need whilst yours is off the road due to being damaged by a third party)0 -
this has got a bit off track and will be off putting to original poster
the company in question is not doing anything underhand and the quick contact from their legal department is an attempt to keep some control on what this accident will eventually cost them
if you go to an accident management company then the OP will get there car repaired and will get a hire car for the duration and the car will be a credit hire car that will cost an eye watering amount and the management company will make a mint out of the claim, if you go to your own insurance company then chances they will just pass it to an accident management company
I would say in the first instance work with the legal department of the van drivers company ask them where the car will be taken for repair and if you are not happy with their choice of repairer ask if the car can be repaired at a centre of your choice or if it can go back to a main dealers who will probably farm the work out to an approved repairer anyway, I cant see them doing a bodge job in a back street garage chances are they will send the car to one of the insurance/manufacturer approved accident repair centres0 -
When your car is damaged by a third party you normally have the right to have it repaired at your choice of repairer.
In this case the "culprit" wants to use a repairer of their choice and force the innocent OP to accept their choice!)
they op said the "car will be taken away and repaired" there is no mention of them forcing anything and this is just you jumping to conclusions, how do you know the will not allow the OP to use a repairer of their choice?0 -
If you read the OP you will see that the OP is concerned about the quality of the proposed repair!
yes the OP is concerned about the quality of the repair and rightly so, they are also concerned as they are not familiar with the repair process being proposed by the third partyIn this case the "culprit" wants to use a repairer of their choice and force the innocent OP to accept their choice!)
but at no point did they say they are being forced into anything, and i suspect they have not even asked where the car is going to be sent for repair or asked if they have any say as to where it goes0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 355.8K Banking & Borrowing
- 254.9K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 456.1K Spending & Discounts
- 248.3K Work, Benefits & Business
- 605.9K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 179K Life & Family
- 263.7K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.2K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.7K Read-Only Boards