Car Accident

jack_tyler

Hello.

Approx 3 wks ago my son was involved in a car accident, at the moment liability is still being estabilished but unfortunately my sons car is a total loss. As such he was offered a valuation amount for his car, minus his excess, but the amount is much too low.  So he has asked them to reconsider and sent in all the paperwork like full service history etc, receipts for work done on the car, receipts showing genuine parts used etc etc along with photos of the car prior to the accident and adverts showing what it would cost to replace his car like for like. Today his insurance contacted him regarding the valuation, and have said that it has gone to the underwriters to make a decision as the car has modifications on that they were not aware of. My son had no idea what these modifications were, as he only got the car in February and was told when he bought it, that it was standard. The car is a Skoda Fabia VRS, he knows that they are more sporty than a normal Fabia, but he has no idea what these so called modifications are. His insurance have said that someone will be in touch with him to discuss things very soon.

However my son is now really worried about what is going to happen. He has tried to contact the previous owner of the car to ask them what they had done to the car, but he cant get hold of them.  Ive tried to reassure him and told him not to worry as there is nothing really he can do, but at the same time ive told him to prepare for the worst case scenario, which would be they cancel his insurance because of these modifications. If this happens, I know that my son will not got anything from his insurers for his car, but what about the third party? Will he be liable for their costs, if liability goes against him?  Any help or advice would be greatly appreciated.

Thank you

Aretnap

If his policy is cancelled due to non-disclosure of the modifications then yes, the insurer can potentially attempt to reclaim any costs they have to pay the third party from him. This would depend on him being to blame for the accident of course.

However, trading what you say at face value it is doubtful whether they have grounds to cancel the policy. The Financial Ombudsman had been fairly clear that if the customer has bought the car, innocently not realising that it has been modified, then the insurer cannot use the non-disclosure as grounds to cancel the policy - even if they would not have agreed to insure the car at all  had the modifications been declared.

The caveat is that the above only applies if the modifications would not have been obvious to the average motorist. So if the car had huge spoilers, skirting a millimeter off the grounds and blue LEDs everywhere your son might have a hard time convincing anyone that he thought it had come out of the factory like that. However if it just seemed like the slightlier sportier model that he thought it was then he should be on firm ground if he has to make a compliant. 

tacpot12

He should ask his insurance company to provide details of what modifications have been made. From the list, he should be able to see whether any were obvious or were difficult for the average motorist to spot.

jack_tyler

tacpot12 said:

He should ask his insurance company to provide details of what modifications have been made. From the list, he should be able to see whether any were obvious or were difficult for the average motorist to spot.

The alledged modifications are (according to the insurance engineer) suspension, exhaust, induction kit & decals. My son knows from talking to people who have these cars, prior to him buying his, that the VRS comes with slightly different suspension and a sportier exhaust. He has know idea what an induction kit is and as for decals, yes my son but 2 small stickers on each side of his rear quarter window.

NSG666

Didn't he/you get GAP insurance?

jack_tyler

NSG666 said:

Didn't he/you get GAP insurance?

No, the car isn't new enough

jack_tyler

Aretnap said:

If his policy is cancelled due to non-disclosure of the modifications then yes, the insurer can potentially attempt to reclaim any costs they have to pay the third party from him. This would depend on him being to blame for the accident of course.

However, trading what you say at face value it is doubtful whether they have grounds to cancel the policy. The Financial Ombudsman had been fairly clear that if the customer has bought the car, innocently not realising that it has been modified, then the insurer cannot use the non-disclosure as grounds to cancel the policy - even if they would not have agreed to insure the car at all  had the modifications been declared.

The caveat is that the above only applies if the modifications would not have been obvious to the average motorist. So if the car had huge spoilers, skirting a millimeter off the grounds and blue LEDs everywhere your son might have a hard time convincing anyone that he thought it had come out of the factory like that. However if it just seemed like the slightlier sportier model that he thought it was then he should be on firm ground if he has to make a compliant. 

The quote where you mention the Financial Ombudsman, please could you tell me where this is? As it may be useful if the worst happens, thanks

Grumpy_chap

jack_tyler said:

tacpot12 said:

He should ask his insurance company to provide details of what modifications have been made. From the list, he should be able to see whether any were obvious or were difficult for the average motorist to spot.

The alledged modifications are (according to the insurance engineer) suspension, exhaust, induction kit & decals. My son knows from talking to people who have these cars, prior to him buying his, that the VRS comes with slightly different suspension and a sportier exhaust. He has know idea what an induction kit is and as for decals, yes my son but 2 small stickers on each side of his rear quarter window.

This might be a daft question, but is the car actually the VRs model?  Is it possible that the car is a more mundane Fabia that has been blinged up to make it a VRs-lookalike?

This used to be a "thing" with the Fiesta XR2i and the Escort XR3i.  Not sure whether the same applies after all this passage of time.  I suspect it does.

jack_tyler

Grumpy_chap said:

jack_tyler said:

tacpot12 said:

He should ask his insurance company to provide details of what modifications have been made. From the list, he should be able to see whether any were obvious or were difficult for the average motorist to spot.

The alledged modifications are (according to the insurance engineer) suspension, exhaust, induction kit & decals. My son knows from talking to people who have these cars, prior to him buying his, that the VRS comes with slightly different suspension and a sportier exhaust. He has know idea what an induction kit is and as for decals, yes my son but 2 small stickers on each side of his rear quarter window.

This might be a daft question, but is the car actually the VRs model?  Is it possible that the car is a more mundane Fabia that has been blinged up to make it a VRs-lookalike?

This used to be a "thing" with the Fiesta XR2i and the Escort XR3i.  Not sure whether the same applies after all this passage of time.  I suspect it does.

Not a daft question as I understand what you mean. But yes it is a 'genuine' VRS model, as the vin number etc confirm this. Thanks

Arklight

jack_tyler said:

Aretnap said:

If his policy is cancelled due to non-disclosure of the modifications then yes, the insurer can potentially attempt to reclaim any costs they have to pay the third party from him. This would depend on him being to blame for the accident of course.

However, trading what you say at face value it is doubtful whether they have grounds to cancel the policy. The Financial Ombudsman had been fairly clear that if the customer has bought the car, innocently not realising that it has been modified, then the insurer cannot use the non-disclosure as grounds to cancel the policy - even if they would not have agreed to insure the car at all  had the modifications been declared.

The caveat is that the above only applies if the modifications would not have been obvious to the average motorist. So if the car had huge spoilers, skirting a millimeter off the grounds and blue LEDs everywhere your son might have a hard time convincing anyone that he thought it had come out of the factory like that. However if it just seemed like the slightlier sportier model that he thought it was then he should be on firm ground if he has to make a compliant. 

The quote where you mention the Financial Ombudsman, please could you tell me where this is? As it may be useful if the worst happens, thanks

I can't link to it but if you Google issue 79 of Ombudsman News, 2009, theres something quite relevant in page 22. The salient part is that the customer needs to have deliberately or recklessly misled the insurer about the modifications. 

Aretnap

jack_tyler said:

Aretnap said:

If his policy is cancelled due to non-disclosure of the modifications then yes, the insurer can potentially attempt to reclaim any costs they have to pay the third party from him. This would depend on him being to blame for the accident of course.

However, trading what you say at face value it is doubtful whether they have grounds to cancel the policy. The Financial Ombudsman had been fairly clear that if the customer has bought the car, innocently not realising that it has been modified, then the insurer cannot use the non-disclosure as grounds to cancel the policy - even if they would not have agreed to insure the car at all  had the modifications been declared.

The caveat is that the above only applies if the modifications would not have been obvious to the average motorist. So if the car had huge spoilers, skirting a millimeter off the grounds and blue LEDs everywhere your son might have a hard time convincing anyone that he thought it had come out of the factory like that. However if it just seemed like the slightlier sportier model that he thought it was then he should be on firm ground if he has to make a compliant. 

The quote where you mention the Financial Ombudsman, please could you tell me where this is? As it may be useful if the worst happens, thanks

For an example of a case where the FOS upheld a consumer's complaint on these grounds see

https://www.financial-ombudsman.org.uk/files/217184/DRN9184237.pdf

If you go here and search for something like "second hand modifications" under insurance you should find several more examples.

https://www.financial-ombudsman.org.uk/decisions-case-studies/ombudsman-decisions