Diminished Value - Car Insurance Claim

Tom123456789

Hi

Sorry I’m new to this and cannot find much information via google........

My car is currently undergoing repairs from a non fault accident. Once repaired I’m led to believe that the car will then be categorised as cosmetic non structural repairs which looks like Cat D on my google searches.

Are there grounds to claim against the other insurer for diminished loss in value.

I have checked autotrader and the Cat D vehicles are always the first ones available in price order, looking at similar vehicles to mine I think I will lose between £3-£4K on today’s prices.

I have spoke to my insurers who have put it through to the legal protection that I took out with the policy, they are going to call me within 7 days.

Please could anyone who has any advice on the subject please let me know their thoughts so I’m a little more educated when I recieve that call

Thanks 🙏

Aretnap

I suspect that you've been misinformed or have misunderstood something somewhere down the line.

It sounds like you're thinking of a Category N write-off marker. The thing is, a write-off marker should only be applied to your car if it is being, well, written off - which it presumably it isn't if it's being repaired.

Normal repairs where the car is not written off would not result in any marker being placed on publicly accessible databases. So assuming that the repairs are done to a good standard they should have no effect on the car's value.

OTOH if you car is being written off you will (or should) be paid its full value. If you decided to spend that money getting it repaired that would up to you. The third party would not be liable for the fact that once repaired it would be worth less than a pristine vehicle of the same age - they have already compensated you for the damage.

Tom123456789

Thanks

That does clear it up, it does look like category N, no structural damage.

Does that mean that the accident won’t show up on future HPI checks for resale

OnanTheBarbarian

Diminution in value is a valid head of claim, depending partially on what the vehicle is, such as whether it is something prestige or exotic, of perhaps a classic car where loss of originality could effect the value. Rank and file fodder (3 year old Kia Picanto) may be less caught by it.

To succeed with a diminution claim, the general rules are that:

1- Vehicle should be under 3 years old
2- Must have been repaired to a commercially acceptable standard and an independent engineer needs to physically inspect the repaired vehicle (desktop report no good) and confirm this in their report, whilst also giving an opinion as to the % in value the vehicle has diminished by.
3- The repairs ideally need to be structural (repaired metal or replaced panels or worse). A bumper scuff needing a quick blow over on a corner is not going to be sufficient.

The fact that a repair claim is not on a register does not hamper a diminution claim. Essentially, the reasons that qualify a diminution claim (in addition to what I have stated above) are that you are arguing the following 2 points.

1- When you come to sell the car or trade it in, if you as the seller are asked if it has been subject to an accident repair, you are then obliged to confirm this.

2- Generally, even a good repair will be detectable by someone in the motor trade and again is likely to enquire about this. So you would stand a good chance of having to declare this.

Based on the above 2 issues, you have a situation where if 2 identical vehicles are for sale (same model, age, mileage etc) and the buyer is aware one has an accident repair history and the other does not, the punter is going to be more drawn to the history-free vehicle, unless some concession is given in the price of the vehicle with the history. This is the measure of diminution in value - the amount the seller would most likely need to reduce the price of the vehicle by expressed as a % of the value of the vehicle at the date the damage arose.

I previously worked for law firms dealing with RTA claims and have successfully made diminution claims on a variety of vehicles from 1920's Riley to current sports cars like 911 Turbos etc.

OnanTheBarbarian

These are the engineers I have used with successful claims.

http://www.hartecuk.co.uk/services.html

If the solicitors who you are put in touch with do wish to take the claim forwards, they will probably have a preferred firm to use.

It's not an inviting claim for them to make for you as there are no costs in it for them at all, so they will probably not be keen for it and say you don't have "reasonable prospects of success".

But if you meet the criteria I have outlined above and what is on the engineers website, you could argue you have a claim with "reasonable prospects of success" - which is the key driver to getting anything done under a "legal expenses policy"

If you decide to go it alone, they are worth contacting.

OnanTheBarbarian

Obviously, if it was written off and you repair it, Diminution does not apply.

hamza_2803

Hi onanthebarbarian, i am planning to claim for devaluation of my car. I have a 67 plate lexus and the repair done to my car was just 8k. Would it be best if I pay for an independant engineer inspection and then go through my insurance company with the engineers report ready to hand? Many thanks

RupH19

You will need to contact the fault insurer direct to make your claim, assuming your insurer repaired your vehicle; your insurer wont take this up although as alluded to above if you have legal expense cover on your policy you can use this add on to pursue the claim.
All you would need to do is obtain your own engineers report, however please ensure they physically inspect your car and do not prepare a 'desk top report' which is compiled purely on the repair invoice, photos and related documentation, it will hold little weight in the Courts.
Expect to pay anywhere between £85-£200 for the report.
Insurers don't like diminution claims and often don't know how to handle them so will often simply refuse to pay alluding to the fact your vehicle will have been repaired to commercially acceptable standard so be prepared to have to take this in to the small claims Courts if needs be.
Payton v Brooks (1974!) remains good law and alludes to the fact the actual repair may not be the full diminution a further reduction in the value of the vehicle may still remain.