Car Written Off - Lousy Deal from LV

RedditchResident

williamgriffin said:

RedditchResident said:

williamgriffin said:

RedditchResident said:

williamgriffin said:

 

But you haven't exactly mitigated your loss by insuring a car that was a write off in August 2020. 

Now I'm really bewildered.  I said I insured nothing.  No insurance policy on anything.  

So you cancelled the policy without informing them of the accident. I'm sure they
l be bending over backwards to help you now. LV assessed the car at £1800 I can see your insurance company doing the same and deducting your excess. 

So now you have changed tack.  Now it isn't about mitigating anything its about finding some other grounds for slamming me.  Like I said, LV gave me the steer to not involve my insurance company.  So I called and cancelled the insurance.  I said it was no longer roadworthy.  I smell a lot of vested interests in the responses to this thread.  Remarkable knowledge of the insurance industry.  Outrageous attempts to justify it.  Why shouldn't I pick up some crap from a junkyard and be content with that?  Etcetera.  Except from the ordinary punters who have been through the same experience.  

I think I'm getting the hang of it.

So by not being honest with your insurance company you've created yourself another problem. Time to accept the £1800 and move on. 

I've created a problem.  Really?   Another insurance guy who reckons I should pay my premiums and stay off the roads I guess.   What are you guys anyway?  Retired from the insurance industry and making a few bob on social media or what?  How does it work?  I'm interested.  The ordinary punters who have contributed probably are too.   

Sandtree

RedditchResident said:

I did, go back over the thread.  57 plate, comfort pack, diesel, 150,000 miles.  I'll ignore the silly bit.  

So I assume you have no warranty on your car in which case the third party is not liable for providing a car with a warranty to you... when you deal with the tort of negligence its much more straight forward than when considering TCF etc as required when dealing with a policyholders claim against their own insurance.

Assuming its an "S" variant, imagine you'd have mentioned that it was a SE, Sport or Individual if it was one of these higher tiers then glass, cap and parkers all put the car below the settlement received on a private sale basis which is the highest figure you'd have gotten had you sold it that day (trade in is obviously much lower).

williamgriffin

RedditchResident said:

neilmcl said:

No, the bottom line is you feel cheated, which isn't the same thing and tbh you've failed to convince anyone here that you have enough evidence to show your car is considerably worth more than the valuation you were given. You clearly are not going to accept this so you should follow the advice given earlier and take it up with your own insurer to see if you can get a better payout.

"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. "

Nothing to do with what I feel.   Factual, not subjective.  So far none of you seems to want to contest that.  I understand your dilemma.

Have you looked at values? What would it be worth trade 900 to 1000.

RedditchResident

williamgriffin said:

RedditchResident said:

neilmcl said:

No, the bottom line is you feel cheated, which isn't the same thing and tbh you've failed to convince anyone here that you have enough evidence to show your car is considerably worth more than the valuation you were given. You clearly are not going to accept this so you should follow the advice given earlier and take it up with your own insurer to see if you can get a better payout.

"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. "

Nothing to do with what I feel.   Factual, not subjective.  So far none of you seems to want to contest that.  I understand your dilemma.

Have you looked at values? What would it be worth trade 900 to 1000.

 I am going on the guides used by LV.    

RedditchResident

Sandtree said:

RedditchResident said:

I did, go back over the thread.  57 plate, comfort pack, diesel, 150,000 miles.  I'll ignore the silly bit.  

So I assume you have no warranty on your car in which case the third party is not liable for providing a car with a warranty to you... when you deal with the tort of negligence its much more straight forward than when considering TCF etc as required when dealing with a policyholders claim against their own insurance.

Assuming its an "S" variant, imagine you'd have mentioned that it was a SE, Sport or Individual if it was one of these higher tiers then glass, cap and parkers all put the car below the settlement received on a private sale basis which is the highest figure you'd have gotten had you sold it that day (trade in is obviously much lower).

I'm going on what LV said based on the guides they use.

williamgriffin

RedditchResident said:

Sandtree said:

RedditchResident said:

I did, go back over the thread.  57 plate, comfort pack, diesel, 150,000 miles.  I'll ignore the silly bit.  

So I assume you have no warranty on your car in which case the third party is not liable for providing a car with a warranty to you... when you deal with the tort of negligence its much more straight forward than when considering TCF etc as required when dealing with a policyholders claim against their own insurance.

Assuming its an "S" variant, imagine you'd have mentioned that it was a SE, Sport or Individual if it was one of these higher tiers then glass, cap and parkers all put the car below the settlement received on a private sale basis which is the highest figure you'd have gotten had you sold it that day (trade in is obviously much lower).

I'm going on what LV said based on the guides they use.

So it's just you who over values the car. 

RedditchResident

Oh dear.  They cornered me into accepting 1800 with 'proof' that they had a perfect replacement and offers to extend the loaner long enough for me to get cleared funds and pick it up.  They rang before 8 in the morning.  You guys from the industry will know the tactics better than me.  Over the ensuing weeks I found out the hard way that the car couldn't be replaced for 1800 and so complained.  It was in the course of correspondence that I learned they actually had a valuation of 2500 from the guides.  

I think we are starting to go round in circles here.  I am answering the same questions repeatedly.  Its clear that I am also dealing with insurance industry representatives in the main.  

RedditchResident

williamgriffin said:

RedditchResident said:

Sandtree said:

RedditchResident said:

I did, go back over the thread.  57 plate, comfort pack, diesel, 150,000 miles.  I'll ignore the silly bit.  

So I assume you have no warranty on your car in which case the third party is not liable for providing a car with a warranty to you... when you deal with the tort of negligence its much more straight forward than when considering TCF etc as required when dealing with a policyholders claim against their own insurance.

Assuming its an "S" variant, imagine you'd have mentioned that it was a SE, Sport or Individual if it was one of these higher tiers then glass, cap and parkers all put the car below the settlement received on a private sale basis which is the highest figure you'd have gotten had you sold it that day (trade in is obviously much lower).

I'm going on what LV said based on the guides they use.

So it's just you who over values the car. 

Oh dear.  They cornered me into accepting 1800 with 'proof' that they had a perfect replacement and offers to extend the loaner long enough for me to get cleared funds and pick it up.  They rang before 8 in the morning.  You guys from the industry will know the tactics better than me.  Over the ensuing weeks I found out the hard way that the car couldn't be replaced for 1800 and so complained.  It was in the course of correspondence that I learned they actually had a valuation of 2500 from the guides.  

I think we are starting to go round in circles here.  I am answering the same questions repeatedly.  Its clear that I am also dealing with insurance industry representatives in the main.  

williamgriffin

RedditchResident said:

Oh dear.  They cornered me into accepting 1800 with 'proof' that they had a perfect replacement and offers to extend the loaner long enough for me to get cleared funds and pick it up.  They rang before 8 in the morning.  You guys from the industry will know the tactics better than me.  Over the ensuing weeks I found out the hard way that the car couldn't be replaced for 1800 and so complained.  It was in the course of correspondence that I learned they actually had a valuation of 2500 from the guides.  

I think we are starting to go round in circles here.  I am answering the same questions repeatedly.  Its clear that I am also dealing with insurance industry representatives in the main.  

So you accepted the £1800 and now you want to backtrack?

RedditchResident

williamgriffin said:

RedditchResident said:

Oh dear.  They cornered me into accepting 1800 with 'proof' that they had a perfect replacement and offers to extend the loaner long enough for me to get cleared funds and pick it up.  They rang before 8 in the morning.  You guys from the industry will know the tactics better than me.  Over the ensuing weeks I found out the hard way that the car couldn't be replaced for 1800 and so complained.  It was in the course of correspondence that I learned they actually had a valuation of 2500 from the guides.  

I think we are starting to go round in circles here.  I am answering the same questions repeatedly.  Its clear that I am also dealing with insurance industry representatives in the main.  

So you accepted the £1800 and now you want to backtrack?

Hard to figure out where you are coming from.  You hop from one accusation to another, ignoring each response while you cook up the next allegation.   I didn't mitigate.  I caused the problem in the first place.  I got turned over and raised a complaint when I discovered so now I am 'backtracking'.    You are not an impartial observer that's for sure.   I will not be replying to you further.