Car Written Off - Lousy Deal from LV

RedditchResident

angrycrow said:

Just looked on auto trader 2006 to 2008 diesel Eos, ...

Both my cars are over 10 years old one over 15. Both have full service history one still main dealer. I am under no illusion that I would ever be able to replace either using the pay out from the insurer if they were written off. 

I think that's the point.  We are conditioned by the insurance industry to accept that we will not get what it would cost to source a car that is genuinely like for like.  Its all about Glasses Guides and average Autotrader.  And "well you would think that wouldn't you".  It doesn't matter how many times I type it out here, it doesn't sink in;  each time I looked closely at the stuff on Autotrader at great looking prices I soon discovered the flaws.  Usually no actual service history, just piles of receipts, crash damaged cars, dodgy roofs, no warranty.  I have already burned through plenty of the 1800 on those goose chases.  Apparently that's OK.  I am only owed what the car was worth "one minute before the crash, not a penny more".   The rest of the losses are for my account.  I shouldn't have been on the road that day.   And if I want to do anything about it I have to take out an injunction against the other driver and go to court and on and on and on.   How much do i have to risk to set off down that road.  And if I win I get the balance of what should have been offered in the first place.

The insurance industry want us to take that as our lot.  And be thankful  (Removed by Forum Team).  

 I didn't fact check my own comment earlier about Parliament having considered putting this right.  However my source was another thread on this forum along similar lines to this one.

RedditchResident

williamgriffin said:

RedditchResident said:

williamgriffin said:

RedditchResident said:

born_again said:

RedditchResident said:

 LV advised me to leave my insurer out of it to avoid impairment to my claims history.  

But you will still have to declare the claim as asked, when renewing your insurance...

"Have you had any claims in the last X years"...

To which the answer is yes... Say no and it is a road to a cancelled insurance policy & a lifetime of very expensive insurance policies on everything, not just motor....

 Might not affect you NCD with your current ins co. 

Yep, perfectly right.  I've been getting my head around that one too.  Technically I think I am already supposed to have told them.  I need to have that conversation PDQ.  The whole thing is a nightmare.  Sandtree is right about the fight.  I'm afraid I may not have the stomach for it.  A victory would be pyrrhic.  I used to go after those out of principle, regardless.  I haven't needed the car so much during the pandemic.  I'm getting used to it.  

You may only need to tell them on renewal, but then again if it's a total loss what have you been insuring since the accident?

What have I been insuring?  Nothing.  I am not particularly interested in buying what's out there for 1800 quid.  To replace mine from an outlet that I would feel comfortable with and a car with a plausible service history is going to take about 3500.  I haven't got round to that yet.

That's what I mean.

Sorry.  I'm being a bit thick here.  What do you mean? 

ontheroad1970

Insurance doesn't cover what a vehicle or any other item what it is worth to YOU.  Their cover covers loss at it's estimated valuation immediately before loss, theft, or total damage, or if insured on an agreed valuation basis, at the agreed valuation.  I think you are fighting a losing battle on getting what you think the car was worth.  Why? Because if you attempted to sell it at the moment before the accident, you would not have had anyone pay the figure you believe it was worth.  That's the basis of their valuation.  

The fact that you kept it tip top makes it worth a lot to you, and you were intending to run it for fifty years or whatever.  Unfortunately, it's not the type of vehicle that is showing as a possible classic car.  Keeping a car serviced up to date is a great thing to do and will usually give it more selling power at the time it comes to sell.  

The problem for you is that you never intended to sell it, so it appears you don't have a realistic intrinsic value for it.  The fact that you didn't want to sell it won't make it more valuable.  

Like I say you could try and withdraw the claim from the third party insurer, and go through your own insurer.  I'd check when they expect you to inform them of any incidents first so you don't put yourself in an awkward spot or else things could get more 'interesting'. For 'interesting' read expensive.  I'm not sire what you would achieve by restarting the claim.  You aren't going to get the 5k+ you are looking for.  You might get a little more on threatening FOS action on the basis that it will cost your insurers money win or lose (they have to pay the fee regardless of the result).  But you won't get what the car was worth to you.  

Sorry if this is not what you want to hear.

And no, I don't work for an insurance company or similar.

angrycrow

Your estimate of £3500 will be buying you a newer lower mileage car so is not the value of yours. 

The guides may have a higher price than offered but they are just guides and subject to validation up or down due to current market trends. 

If you disagree with the guides used by LV you need to provide evidence that like for like cars are Selling for the price you want. Like for like means other 07 57 or 08 plate cars with 150000 (say 125000 to 175000) miles with a diesel engine and the same transmission.

Autotrader has 1 at £2499 which is never going to sell and the rest are sub £2000 asking price. This means they will sell for less than this. This actually supports the valuation of £1800. 

Ebay completed items is normally a good guide on older cars but not this time. All the sold ones on ebay went sub £750 on spairs or repairs due to faulty roofs.

The Eos did not fare well due to their justified reputation for problematic roofs. The very similar Audi a4 cabriolet uses a simpler fabric folding top, it's just as quiet in the cabin as the Eos but less prone to issues and easier to fix. Same engine as your Eos but they hold their value better. Might be worth a look. Things to check on A4, rust on front wings (cosmetic only), check lower corners of hood glass have not come unbonded (£45 DIY fix), broken glove box hinges (£99 second hand replacement or £2 DIY repair). 

Car_54

RedditchResident said:

 And if I want to do anything about it I have to take out an injunction against the other driver and go to court and on and on and on.   How much do i have to risk to set off down that road.  And if I win I get the balance of what should have been offered in the first place.

You wouldn't take out an injunction, you would make a claim. But why do you imagine a court would value your car higher than the insurer has?

RedditchResident

ontheroad1970 said:

Insurance doesn't cover what a vehicle or any other item what it is worth to YOU.  Their cover covers loss at it's estimated valuation immediately before loss, theft, or total damage, or if insured on an agreed valuation basis, at the agreed valuation.  I think you are fighting a losing battle on getting what you think the car was worth.  Why? Because if you attempted to sell it at the moment before the accident, you would not have had anyone pay the figure you believe it was worth.  That's the basis of their valuation.  

The fact that you kept it tip top makes it worth a lot to you, and you were intending to run it for fifty years or whatever.  Unfortunately, it's not the type of vehicle that is showing as a possible classic car.  Keeping a car serviced up to date is a great thing to do and will usually give it more selling power at the time it comes to sell.  

The problem for you is that you never intended to sell it, so it appears you don't have a realistic intrinsic value for it.  The fact that you didn't want to sell it won't make it more valuable.  

Like I say you could try and withdraw the claim from the third party insurer, and go through your own insurer.  I'd check when they expect you to inform them of any incidents first so you don't put yourself in an awkward spot or else things could get more 'interesting'. For 'interesting' read expensive.  I'm not sire what you would achieve by restarting the claim.  You aren't going to get the 5k+ you are looking for.  You might get a little more on threatening FOS action on the basis that it will cost your insurers money win or lose (they have to pay the fee regardless of the result).  But you won't get what the car was worth to you.  

Sorry if this is not what you want to hear.

And no, I don't work for an insurance company or similar.

I don't think I said anywhere that I was looking for 5k+.  I said that VWEOS.com sells plausible replacements at those values.  The 2500 in the guides, denied to me, presumably reflects an average value.  I should have had a reasonable expectation of the upper end of the range and not average.  I have said elsewhere that I have seen credible replacements for 3500.  I suppose mileage might have brought mine back down to average per the guides but I didn't even get that.  

RedditchResident

Car_54 said:

RedditchResident said:

 And if I want to do anything about it I have to take out an injunction against the other driver and go to court and on and on and on.   How much do i have to risk to set off down that road.  And if I win I get the balance of what should have been offered in the first place.

You wouldn't take out an injunction, you would make a claim. But why do you imagine a court would value your car higher than the insurer has?

See elsewhere on the thread.  Its a lot to type again.

Car_54

RedditchResident said:

Car_54 said:

RedditchResident said:

 And if I want to do anything about it I have to take out an injunction against the other driver and go to court and on and on and on.   How much do i have to risk to set off down that road.  And if I win I get the balance of what should have been offered in the first place.

You wouldn't take out an injunction, you would make a claim. But why do you imagine a court would value your car higher than the insurer has?

See elsewhere on the thread.  Its a lot to type again.

Elsewhere on the thread, I see little support for your optimistic valuation.

You need to be aware that the court will apply the same logic as the insurer. And probably arrive at the same conclusion.

RedditchResident

The bottom line on this, and my probably my last comment, is that I was cheated by LV.  Everyone says 'prove your car was worth more'.  I can.  The records for the car testify to exceptionally high standards of maintenance.  The actual car testifies to the fact that pre collision it was perfect.  It therefore qualified as above average.  Allow for high mileage and maybe you can argue it comes back down to average per the guides used by LV.  That's still 2500 pounds.  I didn't get anywhere near that.  I was swindled.  That is all before you take into account any of the costs incurred as a consequence of being left without a car or the fact that no like for like replacement is available at even 2500.  Unless of course you are of the view that I am obliged to accept an unwarranted car with no service history.  Why?    

Thanks to all who took an interest.  I think that without exception folk were minded to be helpful.  There are experts on this forum as I have learned and it is heartening the extent to which they are willing to offer that expertise to those in need of it.  

RedditchResident

Car_54 said:

RedditchResident said:

Car_54 said:

RedditchResident said:

 And if I want to do anything about it I have to take out an injunction against the other driver and go to court and on and on and on.   How much do i have to risk to set off down that road.  And if I win I get the balance of what should have been offered in the first place.

You wouldn't take out an injunction, you would make a claim. But why do you imagine a court would value your car higher than the insurer has?

See elsewhere on the thread.  Its a lot to type again.

Elsewhere on the thread, I see little support for your optimistic valuation.

You need to be aware that the court will apply the same logic as the insurer. And probably arrive at the same conclusion.

Not according to the Ombudsman's website.