Car Written Off - Lousy Deal from LV

Sandtree

RedditchResident said:

AdrianC said:

RedditchResident said:

AdrianC said:

RedditchResident said:

It is very clear that you are not an impartial commentator here.

You are wrong, and you are shooting the messenger.

Good luck. You will need it.

You defend the insurance industry to the death and avoid the uncomfortable facts of the case.

No, I'm explaining reality to you. It's not my fault you don't want to hear it.

"What was your car actually worth, the minute before it got hit?
That's what they owe you. Not a penny more."

And that isn't defending the insurance industry?  I am out hundreds of pounds over and above the value of the car.  Just one of the uncomfortable facts you seem not to want to hear.  What you are 'explaining to me' is what LV would want you to explain to me.  By coincidence.  

Read HandsonaBush above:  "Whatever happened to the premise that a non fault claim should leave you in the position you were as if the accident never happened? You can't buy a replacement that easily without costs and certainly not at Glasses guide prices. Maybe you should invite LV to source you a replacement!".  I couldn't have put it better myself.

As already explained on your duplicate thread.... you are not their customer, you are not protected by their T&Cs.

You are suing their customer and they are stepping in to defend their customer.  If you want to have LV buy you a replacement car then go to court and get an injunction against the at fault driver and the insurer will step in to fulfill it.

When you are not a customer this isnt about "insurance" this is about the tort of negligence and common law, their duty is to their customer not you. If you want someone to blame then blame the courts that have previously ruled that when someone does wrong to another they are only due indemnification. Also remember that were you to ever damage someone else's property that you too would be held to the same standards but we've seen it all before here where someone complains about what they get from the third party and then comes back complaining about how much someone is trying to get off them. When your the claimant the world is unfair, when you are the defendant the claimant is totally unreasonable and in cloud cuckoo land

The advantage of being an innocent third party is that you are entitled to claim all reasonable financial losses from the third party/their insurers not just your insured losses. So if you are "out hundreds of pounds over and above the car value" then submit your claim for those additional losses and your evidence to support them (eg taxi receipts, phone bills etc).

RedditchResident

couriervanman said:

OP is that their first offer
Few years ago my van was written off and I bought a replacement straight away then I got a daft offer of £2500 (replacement van same spec £6000) turned that down a day later they upped it £4000.Told them to go away and check the 15 adverts I had emailed them for same van/spec/mileage etc and come back with sensible offer, 2 weeks later had a phone call off Mr Smarmy offering £4400 telling me it was a good offer and as self employed I must be needing the cash for next van. I informed him I had bought replacement van 3 weeks previously and was in no rush for money and if he phoned back with a stupid offer I would hang up. Ten minutes later answered the phone "hello Mr Couriervanman how does £4600" I hung up before he finished the sentence. Eventually he got the message and offered £6000 paid into my account within 30 minutes......OP just find as many adverts for your car with same spec/mileage/condition and don't budge 

I think you handled the whole thing better than I did.  I just let myself get walked over now that I look back on it.  Lots of helpful souls here are finding cars for me on eBay and Autotrader and so on. I appreciate that.   I have looked at a lot of those cars and travelled to see some of them.  That's how I eventually realised I had been stiffed.   I want a similar car to the one I had, or as near as dammit, and I want a credible warranty.  That is out there.  But not for the money LV gave me. 

RedditchResident

Sandtree said:

RedditchResident said:

AdrianC said:

RedditchResident said:

AdrianC said:

RedditchResident said:

It is very clear that you are not an impartial commentator here.

You are wrong, and you are shooting the messenger.

Good luck. You will need it.

You defend the insurance industry to the death and avoid the uncomfortable facts of the case.

No, I'm explaining reality to you. It's not my fault you don't want to hear it.

"What was your car actually worth, the minute before it got hit?
That's what they owe you. Not a penny more."

And that isn't defending the insurance industry?  I am out hundreds of pounds over and above the value of the car.  Just one of the uncomfortable facts you seem not to want to hear.  What you are 'explaining to me' is what LV would want you to explain to me.  By coincidence.  

Read HandsonaBush above:  "Whatever happened to the premise that a non fault claim should leave you in the position you were as if the accident never happened? You can't buy a replacement that easily without costs and certainly not at Glasses guide prices. Maybe you should invite LV to source you a replacement!".  I couldn't have put it better myself.

As already explained on your duplicate thread.... you are not their customer, you are not protected by their T&Cs.

You are suing their customer and they are stepping in to defend their customer.  If you want to have LV buy you a replacement car then go to court and get an injunction against the at fault driver and the insurer will step in to fulfill it.

When you are not a customer this isnt about "insurance" this is about the tort of negligence and common law, their duty is to their customer not you. If you want someone to blame then blame the courts that have previously ruled that when someone does wrong to another they are only due indemnification. Also remember that were you to ever damage someone else's property that you too would be held to the same standards but we've seen it all before here where someone complains about what they get from the third party and then comes back complaining about how much someone is trying to get off them. When your the claimant the world is unfair, when you are the defendant the claimant is totally unreasonable and in cloud cuckoo land

The advantage of being an innocent third party is that you are entitled to claim all reasonable financial losses from the third party/their insurers not just your insured losses. So if you are "out hundreds of pounds over and above the car value" then submit your claim for those additional losses and your evidence to support them (eg taxi receipts, phone bills etc).

I don't think I have a duplicate thread on the go.  I just looked and I only have two threads on my profile, this one and another from when I found out Ford Motor Company didn't pay NICs due and I am out of pocket on state pension.  

A lot of sense in the rest of what you say.  My flat once flooded my neighbour below and I paid like for like and made an ex gratia payment in cash for the inconvenience.  I had only just bought mine and it was being worked on.  I had no insurance.  I was happy to pay more than the insurance would have because I felt that was the right thing to do.  Strictly speaking you are of course right.  We are all likely to be on one side or the other at different times and our view of the world can change in mysterious ways to suit the circumstances.  C'est la vie.    

couriervanman

OP have you accepted their offer

ontheroad1970

RedditchResident said:

k3lvc said:

RedditchResident said:

AdrianC said:

RedditchResident said:

It is very clear that you are not an impartial commentator here.

You are wrong, and you are shooting the messenger.

Good luck. You will need it.

You defend the insurance industry to the death and avoid the uncomfortable facts of the case.  Its just a complete coincide that you are up to date on obscure parliamentary proceedings on the insurance industry.  I don't think so.  I am not entirely surprised.  There is not a lot of honesty in that industry from what I can see.

You can complain away with your conspiracy theories but at the moment you're expecting a dealer car with warranty to replace your privately owned, ageing car. I'm not going to the effort of @AdrianC whose efforts you're quick to dismiss but a quick look on Ebay/FB show plenty around your price bracket. Your choice in time/effort vs reward terms on how long you drag this on for. 
 

My "...price bracket...".  You really are out of your depth fella.  I think this subject might be a little too complicated for you.  By the way, my first response to AdrianC was to thank him and say that I appreciated his efforts.  "Quick to dismiss".  Actually, no.

You aren't going to get very far being rude to people who are telling you how things ARE not how they think they should be.  If you want the replacement value of a car covered in a write off, insurance policies exist for such a scenario - Agreed Valuation.  They will pay the agreed valuation in the event of a write off - you would have to claim through your insurer and they would recover what they can from the other side.  They wouldn't get back all they paid you, but you pay a large increase in premiums as a result which is in effect for the increased risk factor.  

You simply will not get this level of cover with a normal consumer policy.  

RedditchResident

couriervanman said:

OP have you accepted their offer

They rang me before eight in the morning and I'm afraid I got steamrolled.  I was given to believe that it was a done deal, that's what I was getting.  I contested it within days but to no avail. 

RedditchResident

ontheroad1970 said:

RedditchResident said:

k3lvc said:

RedditchResident said:

AdrianC said:

RedditchResident said:

It is very clear that you are not an impartial commentator here.

You are wrong, and you are shooting the messenger.

Good luck. You will need it.

You defend the insurance industry to the death and avoid the uncomfortable facts of the case.  Its just a complete coincide that you are up to date on obscure parliamentary proceedings on the insurance industry.  I don't think so.  I am not entirely surprised.  There is not a lot of honesty in that industry from what I can see.

You can complain away with your conspiracy theories but at the moment you're expecting a dealer car with warranty to replace your privately owned, ageing car. I'm not going to the effort of @AdrianC whose efforts you're quick to dismiss but a quick look on Ebay/FB show plenty around your price bracket. Your choice in time/effort vs reward terms on how long you drag this on for. 
 

My "...price bracket...".  You really are out of your depth fella.  I think this subject might be a little too complicated for you.  By the way, my first response to AdrianC was to thank him and say that I appreciated his efforts.  "Quick to dismiss".  Actually, no.

You aren't going to get very far being rude to people who are telling you how things ARE not how they think they should be.  If you want the replacement value of a car covered in a write off, insurance policies exist for such a scenario - Agreed Valuation.  They will pay the agreed valuation in the event of a write off - you would have to claim through your insurer and they would recover what they can from the other side.  They wouldn't get back all they paid you, but you pay a large increase in premiums as a result which is in effect for the increased risk factor.  

You simply will not get this level of cover with a normal consumer policy.  

I didn't find your original overly polite either but no matter.  You are trying to be helpful.  Yes, it is possible to increase the level of cover.  We'll be doing that for our other car, significantly more valuable.  My issue with LV is that even within the terms of what I should have been entitled to I got heavily short changed.  That is not including the costs incurred as a consequence of the demolition of my car.  My aspirations regarding what constitutes a fair replacement were reasonable.  LV on the other hand knew perfectly well that they were making a lousy offer, well below the guides.  Along the way I found out the guides they used and what the guides actually said as a monetary amount.  I never heard why I didn't get that amount.

ontheroad1970

You need to try and do what others have suggested.  Reject their offer and go through your own insurer.  Then if you are not happy with what they offer then you can go through FOS.  You will likely have to pay the excess, which should be refunded at the end.  

What have I said that isn't polite?  I'm just suggesting that if you speak to people in an offhand way then you will be limiting the number of people that will wish to give of their free time to try and assist you.  Just because you disagree with someone doesn't make them an employee or mean that they are defending the policy of the insurance company.  Insurance companies make money by paying out as little as possible.  

Rightly or wrongly, you have to fight for every penny you can get, while making sure that any claim will be considered a reasonable one.  Unreasonable ones will not get past a civil bench.

Take note of what Sandtree says - he/she used to work in claims, and gives out useful and accurate information.  Insurance companies will not just roll over and pay out.  You have to be organised.  I had no difficulty with claim for photographic gear stolen from my car recently, but my cover is specialised joint house and car cover from Chubb.  It isn't cheap.  You often get what you pay for.  If you shop for insurance on price alone, don't be surprised if they try and nickel and dime on claims.  

williamgriffin

RedditchResident said:

couriervanman said:

OP is that their first offer
Few years ago my van was written off and I bought a replacement straight away then I got a daft offer of £2500 (replacement van same spec £6000) turned that down a day later they upped it £4000.Told them to go away and check the 15 adverts I had emailed them for same van/spec/mileage etc and come back with sensible offer, 2 weeks later had a phone call off Mr Smarmy offering £4400 telling me it was a good offer and as self employed I must be needing the cash for next van. I informed him I had bought replacement van 3 weeks previously and was in no rush for money and if he phoned back with a stupid offer I would hang up. Ten minutes later answered the phone "hello Mr Couriervanman how does £4600" I hung up before he finished the sentence. Eventually he got the message and offered £6000 paid into my account within 30 minutes......OP just find as many adverts for your car with same spec/mileage/condition and don't budge 

I think you handled the whole thing better than I did.  I just let myself get walked over now that I look back on it.  Lots of helpful souls here are finding cars for me on eBay and Autotrader and so on. I appreciate that.   I have looked at a lot of those cars and travelled to see some of them.  That's how I eventually realised I had been stiffed.   I want a similar car to the one I had, or as near as dammit, and I want a credible warranty.  That is out there.  But not for the money LV gave me. 

Did you have a warranty on your car? Buy another 13 year old motor and I doubt any warranty will be worth the paper it's written on. 

Thats the trouble with running an old car and paying over the odds for a main dealer history. 

RedditchResident

williamgriffin said:

RedditchResident said:

couriervanman said:

OP is that their first offer
Few years ago my van was written off and I bought a replacement straight away then I got a daft offer of £2500 (replacement van same spec £6000) turned that down a day later they upped it £4000.Told them to go away and check the 15 adverts I had emailed them for same van/spec/mileage etc and come back with sensible offer, 2 weeks later had a phone call off Mr Smarmy offering £4400 telling me it was a good offer and as self employed I must be needing the cash for next van. I informed him I had bought replacement van 3 weeks previously and was in no rush for money and if he phoned back with a stupid offer I would hang up. Ten minutes later answered the phone "hello Mr Couriervanman how does £4600" I hung up before he finished the sentence. Eventually he got the message and offered £6000 paid into my account within 30 minutes......OP just find as many adverts for your car with same spec/mileage/condition and don't budge 

I think you handled the whole thing better than I did.  I just let myself get walked over now that I look back on it.  Lots of helpful souls here are finding cars for me on eBay and Autotrader and so on. I appreciate that.   I have looked at a lot of those cars and travelled to see some of them.  That's how I eventually realised I had been stiffed.   I want a similar car to the one I had, or as near as dammit, and I want a credible warranty.  That is out there.  But not for the money LV gave me. 

Did you have a warranty on your car? Buy another 13 year old motor and I doubt any warranty will be worth the paper it's written on. 

Thats the trouble with running an old car and paying over the odds for a main dealer history. 

If its a warranty from a junk yard I agree.  I didn't pay over the odds for a main dealer history.  Its not the history that matters, its the maintenance.  VW took good care of it.  The car ran perfectly.  Every year I had a budget of about 1000 pounds.  That covered service and occasional parts replacement.  Good economics I say.  If the car had not been written off that situation would have lasted indefinitely.  My neighbour has a fifty year old car.  My daughter has a Triumph Herald.   I liked the car and I liked not being so in thrall to a throw-away society.   Take the !!!!!! all you want.  I planned to grow old with that damn car.