To sue or not to sue?

ChocolateCough

Whilst at work last month I had the misfortune of receiving a phone call from a policeman informing me that my girlfriend's car had caught fire.
What I have been told is that a local roofing company, who were doing work on a neighbouring property, had left their equipment unattended (according to a neighbour) which then somehow caught fire and their large gas canister took the form of a flamethrower and incinerated the front of my girlfriends BMW. The car is a write-off and the roofing company have accepted full liability for the accident.
The problem is, for reasons known only to her, she did not take GAP insurance when taking out the finance deal on her car. The insurers have valued the car at 6k and there is still 7.5k outstanding on the finance deal. So through no fault of her own (she was 5 miles away!) she will be left 1.5k out of pocket and no car to show for the past two years of payments.
We are considering taking legal action as their is clearly a strong case for gross negligence on the part of the roofing company, what are your thoughts?
Thanks!

Johno100

A Diminution Claim I believed they are called, very popular in the US but don't know about here or whether it is one of those things you can do yourself or you really need a solicitor to fight your corner.

IamNotAllowedToUseMyName

ChocolateCough wrote: »

Whilst at work last month I had the misfortune of receiving a phone call from a policeman informing me that my girlfriend's car had caught fire.
What I have been told is that a local roofing company, who were doing work on a neighbouring property, had left their equipment unattended (according to a neighbour) which then somehow caught fire and their large gas canister took the form of a flamethrower and incinerated the front of my girlfriends BMW. The car is a write-off and the roofing company have accepted full liability for the accident.
The problem is, for reasons known only to her, she did not take GAP insurance when taking out the finance deal on her car. The insurers have valued the car at 6k and there is still 7.5k outstanding on the finance deal. So through no fault of her own (she was 5 miles away!) she will be left 1.5k out of pocket and no car to show for the past two years of payments.
We are considering taking legal action as their is clearly a strong case for gross negligence on the part of the roofing company, what are your thoughts?
Thanks!

Interesting. I think it is a tricky one. If this is a PCP deal, so the finance is specific to that car and as it is a total loss the finance house has to be re-imbursed then I would say that the roofing company should be liable, as through no fault of her own, the daughter now has a debt to clear assuming that the £7.5k will be paid back by the insurance plus her contributing another £1.5k.

On the other hand, if this was just a car loan, then presumably the loan will simply continue and although there is no car to secure it against I would expect the finance house to allow it to continue. In which case, assuming a replacement vehicle can be bought for £6k she is no worse off and the roofing company could not be made liable for betterment (though they could still be liable for any excesses).

It would not be unreasonable to claim for a hire car in the meantime, and a contribution towards the hassle of replacing a car.

I'd suggest seeking advice from a solicitor - you can normally get a free consultation.

Before using the magic word "sue" your other path is to talk to the roofers or their insurers and they may be happy to do a deal as they will recognise that any legal claim would involve them in the expense of solicitors. Legal action is a last resort, and you should firstly show you have taken reasonable steps to resolve the problem. I would expect the roofers to be using their public liability insurance, but of they are covering it themselves, then first port of call is a friendly phone call - they may be highly embarrassed and willing to resolve this amicably.

martinsurrey

IanMSpencer wrote: »

I think it is a tricky one.

Not a tricky one at all, OP lost a car worth £6k and will get £6k back. How they financed the car is irrelevant

Civil claims are not to punish people they are restorative, if the OP gets £7.5k back they will be in a better position than they were before the fire, as they could buy a similar car AND clear the finance, which is betterment.

OP you wont get any more than the cars worth, negligence or not.

you are right about a hire car in the meantime though.

ChocolateCough

How would she be able to buy another car and clear the finance though if she receives 7.5k? That would only clear the finance and leave her nothing leftover.

loskie

As the car is the property of the finance co get them to take up the issue with the roofer's insurer.

Shaka_Zulu

Ah the joys of PCP jiggery pokery. Have you done your homework on what the car is really worth retail from a dealer?

glentoran99

loskie wrote: »

As the car is the property of the finance co get them to take up the issue with the roofer's insurer.

that's not how it works

ChocolateCough

Shaka_Zulu wrote: »

Ah the joys of PCP jiggery pokery. Have you done your homework on what the car is really worth retail from a dealer?

loskie wrote: »

As the car is the property of the finance co get them to take up the issue with the roofer's insurer.

She looked online and similar cars are up for between 8-9k.

Car_54

loskie wrote: »

As the car is the property of the finance co get them to take up the issue with the roofer's insurer.

It's their property, but they will have passed the responsibility for insuring it to the OP's friend.

System

ChocolateCough wrote: »

How would she be able to buy another car and clear the finance though if she receives 7.5k? That would only clear the finance and leave her nothing leftover.

In law she only has to be put back in the position she was in and if she had a £7.5k car then that is to give her £7.5k. If she ends up with no car and no money after paying off the finance then that is a situation she has created for herself by buying a car on finance. Had she bought one with money she had then she would have a £7500 cheque to buy another. But she didn't, she bought it with borrowed money so has to give that cheque to the finance company.

You mentioned GAP insurance so I'm assuming she is on a PCP deal. I'm assuming she doesn't have the money for the balloon payment so she was always going to end up with no car unless she took out another deal, this just brings that date forward.

If she wants a car she'll have to do what she would have had to do at the end of the PCP deal and take out another deal. If she can convince the insurers her car is worth £8k-£9k she'll have a £500-£1500 deposit.

Personally I'd learn the lesson from this, buy a cheap car outright that she can actually afford to pay for in full and save up for a newer one so if she ever ends up in a total loss situation again at least she'll have money to buy a replacement instead of having no money and no car.