Third party fault accident- My car written off

lemons21

Hello all,
I'm hoping some of you can advise as my mind is agog with info as this has never happened to me before. 

Over the weekend, another driver reversed quickly out of a customer car park (accessed via pavement) onto a main road and drove into me as I was travelling down this main road. I was only a few minutes from home, so it is immensely frustrating. We exchanged details and I contacted my insurer immediately to report the accident and my insurer confirmed that they would be pursuing the other driver as the party at fault for the incident. 

My insurer also confirmed that the damage to my vehicle would mean that it would be written off as it would not be economically viable to repair. There is damage and dents two both passenger side door panels and the rear wheel arch. The other driver's vehicle was damaged more minimally- no dents, paint work scuffed below the passenger side rear headlamp. 

I was given the option to accept for salvage to collect the vehicle to value it or to discuss my options more thoroughly with the salvage department (I think that was the wording used). They did not have a pre-incident value figure available at the time of the call as only this department can confirm this. I chose the latter and am expecting a call this week. At the time, I was put through to the accident management company in regards to a courtesy car via Auxillis. I have a reference number for my case with them and have been asked to call them once the relevant department has contacted me. 

I'm unclear whether the accident management company is acting on behalf of the other party's insurer or my own? I called immediately after I got home and was still full of adrenaline after the incident when I called so the details are fuzzy for me. 

As I understand it my options are either to accept that the car is to be written off and negotiate with the insurer regarding the pre-incident value of the car or discuss whether I might be able to pay for the car to be repaired privately and have some kind of payout. I'm really unclear how the second option works. Any idea anyone?

With regards to the first option, I have had a look on Parkers guides for an idea of value figures and there does seem to be some inconsistency there. Frustratingly when I look on autotrader etc for cars of the same age and mileage as my own the figure price being asked is significantly higher than the range estimate that Parkers proposes (even if I factor in being able to negotiate with any dealer/seller on price). This would see me significantly out of pocket for an accident that was not my fault. 

Has anyone had any success in negotiating with insurers on payout figures? Any advice? I've already made a document evidencing the price that cars like mine go for just in case I need it. 

Likewise, the law subsidiary company of my insurer is going to give me a complimentary call this week to discuss any financial losses due to the incident. Frustratingly my insurance policy does not include enhanced motor legal cover. As it stands, if I negotiate a fair price for my vehicle pre-incident, I stand to lose my excess (which would be deducted from the value of my vehicle payout) which would leave me with less money to get a replacement vehicle. I assume that my insurer will also want the outstanding payments for the policy which will leave me out of pocket to insure my replacement car. Does anyone have any guidance on whether in their view it is worth taking on the law subsidiary of their insurer to recover such losses. Is it worth it or more hassle than it is worth?

I know that you have had similar questions on the forum before (I have done a decent scan and read through already but still had some further doubts). 

Many thanks for any advice/pointers anyone has. 

Sandtree

Auxillis is the credit hire company that Admiral Group refer its customers to. Most would argue they work for themselves rather than anyone else but its certainly not working for the third party insurer. In theory they work for you, they give you a hire car on tick and recover the cost from the third party insurer... the only real downside is that you have to support their attempts to recover their outlay and sometimes this becomes fairly indefensible (£20k of hire against a £1k car written off) but as long as you do support them then there is no come back on you.

Your excess will be recoverable from the third party insurer, if you dont have LE cover is a simple letter/email with evidence that the excess has been deducted/paid and a payment a few weeks later.

If your insurers have declared your vehicle a total loss already then the only real question is if you want to keep the vehicle (in which case the settlement will have the salvage deducted) and use the settlement to return the car to the road or let them keep the car and use the settlement for a replacement vehicle. You should be able to transfer the remainder of your policy to a new vehicle and so the fact you've had to settle your loan for premiums doesn't put you in a worse position as ultimately you'd have had to pay it one way or the other.

Insurers tend to use more than just one guide, indeed the Financial Ombudsman recommends they do to be able to eliminate any outlier which can go in either direction.

lemons21

Sandtree said:

Auxillis is the credit hire company that Admiral Group refer its customers to. Most would argue they work for themselves rather than anyone else but its certainly not working for the third party insurer. In theory they work for you, they give you a hire car on tick and recover the cost from the third party insurer... the only real downside is that you have to support their attempts to recover their outlay and sometimes this becomes fairly indefensible (£20k of hire against a £1k car written off) but as long as you do support them then there is no come back on you.

Your excess will be recoverable from the third party insurer, if you dont have LE cover is a simple letter/email with evidence that the excess has been deducted/paid and a payment a few weeks later.

If your insurers have declared your vehicle a total loss already then the only real question is if you want to keep the vehicle (in which case the settlement will have the salvage deducted) and use the settlement to return the car to the road or let them keep the car and use the settlement for a replacement vehicle. You should be able to transfer the remainder of your policy to a new vehicle and so the fact you've had to settle your loan for premiums doesn't put you in a worse position as ultimately you'd have had to pay it one way or the other.

Insurers tend to use more than just one guide, indeed the Financial Ombudsman recommends they do to be able to eliminate any outlier which can go in either direction.

Thanks Sandtree! Really helpful! 
As it stands, I have been left with a reference number for my case with Auxillis because obviously I still have my vehicle currently. I understood that the insurer reckons it is driveable until it gets taken away to be valued. 

I suppose it all depends on what is most financially viable. I'm going to chase up my insurer with regards to the call that I was meant to receive re. settlement alone vs settlement and salvage. I'm guessing usually that the settlement alone option is usually the most financially viable option dependent on offers. 

Re. the excess Admiral states in their T&Cs that the excess is always deductible regardless of fault. I have just checked my policy etc and when I bought the insurance, I got free excess cover with Go Compare. Is it best to use this or just pursue it with the third party?  

Sandtree

lemons21 said:
I suppose it all depends on what is most financially viable. I'm going to chase up my insurer with regards to the call that I was meant to receive re. settlement alone vs settlement and salvage. I'm guessing usually that the settlement alone option is usually the most financially viable option dependent on offers. 

Re. the excess Admiral states in their T&Cs that the excess is always deductible regardless of fault. I have just checked my policy etc and when I bought the insurance, I got free excess cover with Go Compare. Is it best to use this or just pursue it with the third party?  

How much they will deduct for you retaining the salvage depends very much on the insurer... some have agreements with merchants that strongly discourages them from picking and choosing what salvage they send to them whereas others have more flexible arrangements with multiple providers and so typically are more happy for customers to retain salvage.

What is economical depends on if you have access to places that will do repairs for a good price, use secondhand parts, you're happy to live with some of the damage and/or can repair any of it yourself. Clearly if all you are going to do is to take the car to the nearest BMW dealership then repairs will not be economical on the salvage.

Excess is always deductible, its an uninsured loss, though some insurers will waive it as a gesture of goodwill. In a clear cut case with no disputes in liability etc its probably marginally easier to reclaim the excess from the third party insurer than any excess insurance. Just be aware that you cannot claim from both as that would be undue enrichment. 

lemons21

Sandtree said:

lemons21 said:
I suppose it all depends on what is most financially viable. I'm going to chase up my insurer with regards to the call that I was meant to receive re. settlement alone vs settlement and salvage. I'm guessing usually that the settlement alone option is usually the most financially viable option dependent on offers. 

Re. the excess Admiral states in their T&Cs that the excess is always deductible regardless of fault. I have just checked my policy etc and when I bought the insurance, I got free excess cover with Go Compare. Is it best to use this or just pursue it with the third party?  

How much they will deduct for you retaining the salvage depends very much on the insurer... some have agreements with merchants that strongly discourages them from picking and choosing what salvage they send to them whereas others have more flexible arrangements with multiple providers and so typically are more happy for customers to retain salvage.

What is economical depends on if you have access to places that will do repairs for a good price, use secondhand parts, you're happy to live with some of the damage and/or can repair any of it yourself. Clearly if all you are going to do is to take the car to the nearest BMW dealership then repairs will not be economical on the salvage.

Excess is always deductible, its an uninsured loss, though some insurers will waive it as a gesture of goodwill. In a clear cut case with no disputes in liability etc its probably marginally easier to reclaim the excess from the third party insurer than any excess insurance. Just be aware that you cannot claim from both as that would be undue enrichment. 

Thanks again Sandtree. Your replies have been mega helpful in helping me get things clear in my head. 

We do have a decent garage that we have used for a few years now and they are very fair in their pricing. Whether they use second hand parts is a question mark but they may even use them if I sourced and provided them myself from a big company that does auto recycled parts nearish us. 
I guess the downside is that a CAT D vehicle is going to be more of a pain to sell later on if I want to change my car.
 As you say, I suppose it all comes down to the figures my insurer presents me with. 

Considering the settlement only (with insurer retaining the vehicle) option, I had heard that many advise not accepting the first offer that the insurer puts forward. Is this sound?

One final point, if I may take the liberty of picking your brains once more... we are supposed to be going on holiday in a few weeks. Not had proper hols in years, so it is frustrating that this accident has come at this time. I'm sure it totally varies on case by case but any ideas how long to these things tend to take to wrap up in terms of getting offers etc?

I'd love to have a settlement sorted before we go but fearing that may not happen and sourcing a replacement vehicle or repair will have to wait until after. Would have to hope that prices don't go up after our return. 

Sandtree

lemons21 said:
I guess the downside is that a CAT D vehicle is going to be more of a pain to sell later on if I want to change my car.

 As you say, I suppose it all comes down to the figures my insurer presents me with. 

Considering the settlement only (with insurer retaining the vehicle) option, I had heard that many advise not accepting the first offer that the insurer puts forward. Is this sound?

One final point, if I may take the liberty of picking your brains once more... we are supposed to be going on holiday in a few weeks. Not had proper hols in years, so it is frustrating that this accident has come at this time. I'm sure it totally varies on case by case but any ideas how long to these things tend to take to wrap up in terms of getting offers etc?

I'd love to have a settlement sorted before we go but fearing that may not happen and sourcing a replacement vehicle or repair will have to wait until after. Would have to hope that prices don't go up after our return. 

Cat D has become Cat N (non-structural) these days and whilst it will devalue the vehicle it shouldn't make it that hard to sell on. 

It costs time and money to negotiate settlements and so it'd be a bit of a pointless dance for every insurer to lowball initially and every customer to reject the offer. At the end of the day if you aren't happy with it you can reject it via a complaint and the insurer will reconsider. Probably most times you get a small increase, sometimes they'll stick with what they offered and in a minority they'll decide they actually overvalued it and come back lower.

How long claims take is a question of how long a piece of string is. Clearly if you reject the offer it'll take longer than if you accept the first offer. Getting the paperwork ready to send off now also accelerates things (V5c, service history, spare keys etc). We used to target 10 calendar days and averaged about 8 days but some insurers are quicker and some are very much slower.

Bigphil1474

OP, in my experience, the salvage value is usually quite low, so if your car is driveable and fixable, you may end up with a small profit after you've fixed your car. This is then basically the difference between what your car was worth and what it is after being fixed. Been a while since I had a car written off, but when it last happened, the car was valued about 750, or £720 ish minus salvage value. I took the £720, ran the car a couple of weeks, and sold it for £100. 

Bigwheels1111

If you take a hire car watch out for the £1000 excess.
Might be less but check.

lemons21

Thanks for the comments so far folks. 

So far, my insurer has partially assessed the claim and I  have had confirmation from my insurance after I sent them the pictures of the damage to my vehicle that my car definitely would be a total loss on economic grounds.

They have also now advised me to not drive the car (just in case there is any damage beyond the cosmetic damage seen in the pictures). I was at work when my insurer called so my insurer stated that they would cancel the policy for the vehicle for after my return from work, on the understanding that my vehicle is now on my drive until it is to be collected. 

It is rather a pain, as due to being at work, I was unable to contact Auxillis about a hire vehicle and thus left without a way to get to work for tomorrow, so have had to purchase temporary insurance for my partner's vehicle so that I can get to work tomorrow (just fortunate that car is not needed tomorrow and is free for me to use). 

Typically they are unable to advise on a market value for my vehicle until I send further images and they cannot advise yet on the salvage value should I wish to purchase the vehicle after I receive the settlement. The person I spoke to said that this is often 25% of the market value but not always?
Likewise, once any work is done on the vehicle it will need a new MOT before it can be reinsured. It only recently had an MOT (3 months ago). They couldn't advise on any difference in premiums for a new policy due to it becoming a CAT car as they are unable to confirm which category it would fall under until further assessment is done. 

I spoke to a bodywork place that my garage recommended and they estimate that they could do the work for approx. £800. 
With the costs of the repairs, a new MOT, a 25% salvage fee, I wonder whether I would even be left with much. 

On the subject of Auxillis and hire vehicles, I have heard that if I approach the third party's insurer directly, they may offer me an enterprise vehicle as an alternative to avoid extortionate costs of other hire companies. I wonder too whether this would avoid the excess issues you speak of @Bigwheels1111 . Has anyone else any experience on this?

ontheroad1970

I suspect that going down the salvage route may still be best - you might not make money but you also might not have a shortfall which you are very likely to have whichever company you claim from.  Yes resale price will be hit, but should you be running the car until it expires, it won't make that much of a difference.  

Sandtree

lemons21 said:

The person I spoke to said that this is often 25% of the market value but not always?
Likewise, once any work is done on the vehicle it will need a new MOT before it can be reinsured. It only recently had an MOT (3 months ago). They couldn't advise on any difference in premiums for a new policy due to it becoming a CAT car as they are unable to confirm which category it would fall under until further assessment is done. 

I spoke to a bodywork place that my garage recommended and they estimate that they could do the work for approx. £800. 
With the costs of the repairs, a new MOT, a 25% salvage fee, I wonder whether I would even be left with much. 

On the subject of Auxillis and hire vehicles, I have heard that if I approach the third party's insurer directly, they may offer me an enterprise vehicle as an alternative to avoid extortionate costs of other hire companies. I wonder too whether this would avoid the excess issues you speak of @Bigwheels1111 . Has anyone else any experience on this?

25% would be high if they use a universal figure, if they use a sliding scale then it may be more reasonable as there is ultimately a floor that all vehicle salvage is worth even if the car was only worth £500 before the accident. 

Insurers dont ask if a vehicle has been written off in the past, in theory they could be getting the data from MIAFTR and using it but never known one to do so. As such if anything it should make the premium fractionally cheaper as the value of the vehicle has gone down but in practice its likely to be neutral. 

Assuming the third party has informed their insurers and they've accepted liability its likely they'd be keen to provide hire instead of you going down the credit hire route. If they use Enterprise or another company is neither here nor there. Back in my claims days you'd have the standard hire excess of whatever that may be however were you to have an accident in the hire car we'd reimburse you part of the excess so that it was inline with your normal vehicle excess.... so if the hire car had a £1,000 excess and your policy had a £250 excess we'd reimburse the £750. You did however have the choice of paying the hire car company a fee to reduce the excess to £0 but we wouldn't reimburse that because its betterment.