Garage involved in car crash.

Jumblebumble

csgohan4 wrote: »

I agree with above, when your car is written off you have to release it to the insurer and change the ownership,

This is made up nonsense. The OP's mother may very well be able to buy back the salvage, keep the car and have it repaired herself.
How do you know the driver who caused the accident is not self insuring in any event?

OnanTheBarbarian

The way I see it is the garage owe you a duty of care to take reasonable care for the vehicle whilst in their possession. They have not breached that duty of care as they were not negligent in causing the damage suffered to the vehicle. so the claim for the vehicle always needs to be directed to the insurer of the negligent third party driver.

The garage are now out of pocket for the labour and materials used to repair the vehicle and any potential claim for their economic loss must be directed to the insurer of the party at fault for the collision as the garage were unable to fulful their contract with your mother and return a repaired vehicle having been fully road tested. They probably have an equitable interest in the vehicle as they can preserve a lien against the vehicle for their pending invoice payment.. The insurers will resist the claim however unless it finds the way to a handler who knows what they are doing (unlikely at first instance in the Accident Damage teams). The contract with the garage has been frustrated by the collision damage.

Hmmm, this really is one where professional advice shoud be sought

uk1

Jumblebumble wrote: »

This statement is incorrect if the car has sufficient damage to make it a write off which the OP has indicated is likely to be the case. They are not obligated to repair the car.
The position that the Garage (or their insurers) needs to either return the car fully repaired or they hand over £4500 to the OP and keep the salvage ( or give back the car as is with a salvage deduction)
The OP needs to pay the garage £2000 either way

You are confused.

Cars being "written off" is done by insurers who have a financial interest in the cars they insure and are obligated to mitigate losses to a minimum. Garages do not decide on behalf of car owners when a car is to be written off.

They are obligated to return the car repaired. If they refuse then the owner can pursue them for the value of the car.

uk1

OnanTheBarbarian wrote: »

The way I see it is the garage owe you a duty of care to take reasonable care for the vehicle whilst in their possession. They have not breached that duty of care as they were not negligent in causing the damage suffered to the vehicle. so the claim for the vehicle always needs to be directed to the insurer of the negligent third party driver.

The garage are now out of pocket for the labour and materials used to repair the vehicle and any potential claim for their economic loss must be directed to the insurer of the party at fault for the collision as the garage were unable to fulful their contract with your mother and return a repaired vehicle having been fully road tested. They probably have an equitable interest in the vehicle as they can preserve a lien against the vehicle for their pending invoice payment.. The insurers will resist the claim however unless it finds the way to a handler who knows what they are doing (unlikely at first instance in the Accident Damage teams). The contract with the garage has been frustrated by the collision damage.

Hmmm, this really is one where professional advice shoud be sought

This has nothing to do with duties of care or negligence. It is a contractual issue. The garage is contracted to return the car in a working condition with a new engine. If it is damaged then they will be insured and they can claim on that insurance or claim from the person damaging the car. Your stuff about contracts being frustrated is just nonsense.

Yant0s

I still believe insurance should pay the garage.

The garage was involved in a car accident before work was complete. The crash they were involved in destroyed the garages work before contract was complete and the car was handed over to their customer.

A customer should not pay for a destroyed product, the person you destroyed their work is liable.

uk1

Yant0s wrote: »

I still believe insurance should pay the garage.

The garage was involved in a car accident before work was complete. The crash they were involved in destroyed the garages work before contract was complete and the car was handed over to their customer.

A customer should not pay for a destroyed product, the person you destroyed their work is liable.

The reason why your opinion is correct is that the owner of the vehicle is not obligated to negotiate and be arbitrating between the garage and "the other driver" in terms of who was to blame and cannot do so because they were not there. If he agreed to do so he would be placed at risk of both sides denying liability.

He simply needs to insist on the car being returned to him in the condition it should have been. The garages problem is not the OP's problem.

paddyandstumpy

uk1 wrote: »

The reason why your opinion is correct is that the owner of the vehicle is not obligated to negotiate and be arbitrating between the garage and "the other driver" in terms of who was to blame and cannot do so because they were not there. If he agreed to do so he would be placed at risk of both sides denying liability.

He simply needs to insist on the car being returned to him in the condition it should have been. The garages problem is not the OP's problem.

But equally, the OP's mum should be no better off for having had their car in an accident.

Had the accident not occurred, they would have paid the garage bill and had a working car worth £4500.

They can't now claim the value of the repaired car without paying for the repairs.

chanz4

Didn't the car go in with a totally broken engine? So they should be entitled to remove their engine and put your old broken one in and then you can claim of the other party for the car written off

Yant0s

Maybe they are entitled to remove the engine. I'm not sure what the insurance company would say or even allow it?

If the garage started removing parts it may invalidate their claim for loss of product/time that got destoyed in the crash.

Jono111

It is two separate claims. The OP needs to pay the garage as they would have had the accident not occurred and then start the new insurance claim against the driver of the 2nd accident.