Admiral Car Insurance

dixdixon

19 SEPT 22  Took out a policy for my daughter paid £865.13 for whole year..
07 JAN 23     She  had accident total loss.
09 Jan  23     Refund £17.29

Car cost £1150 Sept 22  Car valued by Admiral at £502 less £475 excess Settlement offered £27.00. Settlement rejected. £27.00 Paid into daughters account. regardless

It seems to me she is being treated UNFAIRLY.

DullGreyGuy

What's unfair? 

You can attempt to dispute the £502 valuation but what evidence do you have that 1) she didn't overpay for the car and 2) that the price hasn't dropped like most secondhand cars? The settlement offered is the top number, not the amount net of excess, she chose a £475 excess

Remember that Admiral do not insure optional extras so if she paid more because it was a pretty metallic colour or had leather seats etc and they weren't base spec then Admiral wont uplift the settlement for them.

Is she buying a replacement vehicle? Getting any refund is odd after a total loss, the policy has fulfilled its purpose so normally no refund is given however you can transfer the remaining policy onto the replacement vehicle (potentially with an additional premium if you upgrade and because the car is newer to you etc)

cymruchris

dixdixon said:

19 SEPT 22  Took out a policy for my daughter paid £865.13 for whole year..
07 JAN 23     She  had accident total loss.
09 Jan  23     Refund £17.29

Car cost £1150 Sept 22  Car valued by Admiral at £502 less £475 excess Settlement offered £27.00. Settlement rejected. £27.00 Paid into daughters account. regardless

It seems to me she is being treated UNFAIRLY.

The £865 paid wasn't just to insure her car - it was to insure her against hitting other cars too - and paying the costs of a third party for any damage that was her fault (Not saying it was in this case - but it's what you get insured for). When you buy insurance there are many options - one of the things you can do to decrease the premium is to increase the excess. In this case your daughter chose to take the £475 excess. If she'd chosen a lower excess - the premium would have been higher.

Would you have preferred she spend £1300+ on the premium to get a lower excess? Insurance is very much swings and roundabouts. With the car purchased at £1150 - she was never going to get a major payout. The valuation they've given is usually their first offer - to which you have to prove the case as to why they should offer more. Did she do that? Or just accept their offer? If you can prove what equivalent models have sold for (in terms of similar age and mileage) you can usually get the offer nudged up. (Bearing in mind it's what they've sold for - not what they're for sale for).

If across Autotrader the same year/model/mileage were advertised for £1500 now - you could argue that the average selling price was likely higher then their offer. If the adverts have an average of £750 then (as asking prices) that's likely about right for the offer you received. Insurance is meant to put you in the position you were in before an accident - not make you better off. So if she can buy the same car now for £500 - then the offer is fair.

dixdixon

Thanks for your comments, some of which are helpful.

1.
I understand the principles behind the insurance premium and the effects of excesses. What I don't understand is that a car advertised at £1295. I paid £1150, and is valued at £502 3 months later by the insurance company. There was a compulsory excess of £225 and a voluntary excess £250.  502 - 475 = 27!!!!
The second hand car market values have rapidly risen in the last few years.
The settlement was paid into her account after it was rejected.

2.
£865 paid for the years insurance, With a pro rata rebate £17. I don't think so.

So do You think this has been fair?

dixdixon

BTW
She can't afford another car

SaverRate

She can still add another car to replace the written off car so technically not losing the £865 for the years insurance. 

You will have to pay an admin fee and any different in premium though 

cymruchris

As I mentioned earlier - the premium and excess reflect the risk. Many young first time drivers pay way in excess of their car's value just to get insured - so the premium is what it is - based on the risk of the person concerned - in this case your daughter.

In recent months used car values have been slipping back - so the question is - realistically - what would it cost to buy a car that was the same sort of mileage (give or take a couple of thousand miles) same condition same spec as the one she had today?

It doesn't matter what she paid for it when she paid for it - it's what it costs today that's key.

The insurance is to put you back in the same position you were in prior to the accident - not to pay you what you paid for the car a year ago (Or whenever). 

So if the same car today could be bought for an average of £800 (not advertised for - bought for - as you already experienced the previous car was advertised for £1295 and bought for £1150) - then that's the place you'd be arguing to get your valuation up to.You'd have to provide admiral with some proof that your valuation was more accurate than theirs. There's nothing to say that when your daughter bought the car advertised at £1295 for £1150 that everybody else was selling the same car for £900. She might have overpaid for it in the first place (She might not - but I'm trying to outline some of the reasons why you've received a lower offer).

Ultimately - if you can absolutely show that today the same car, year, mileage, condition is worth an average of £X sold - and that figure is higher than your settlement - you have the right to reject the initial offer and negotiate. The excess will still be the excess. So if they did up their offer to say £700, by the time they've taken it off - there still won't be enough money to buy a new car.

You said she'd rejected the first offer - has she followed up on this? Again it's not unheard of for an insurance company to pay out an initial settlement whilst negotiations continue.

We don't know the details of the incident - but sometimes it's not worth claiming - and better off (cheaper) sorting it out yourself.

It's also normal that when a claim is made on a policy for a total loss - the policy ends - even though there may be several months left to go. Some insurers will cover a new vehicle for the remainder of the policy - but it's normal not to get the money back. You paid for cover for a year - and having an incident that meant you made claim means that you've used your policy, and so no refund is due.

SaverRate

I have never come across a car insurance policy where the policy ends if there is a total loss? They have always just insured another car for the remainder of the term?

cymruchris

SaverRate said:

I have never come across a car insurance policy where the policy ends if there is a total loss? They have always just insured another car for the remainder of the term?

Comes to an end if you don't put another car on cover... As in once you've made a claim on any given insurance year, you're not going to get a refund pro-rata for the remainder of the year... If as most people do, they get another car, usually the policy continues as long as any relevant payments are made for any change of risk (bigger engine higher insurance group etc)..

SaverRate

cymruchris said:

SaverRate said:

I have never come across a car insurance policy where the policy ends if there is a total loss? They have always just insured another car for the remainder of the term?

Comes to an end if you don't put another car on cover... As in once you've made a claim on any given insurance year, you're not going to get a refund pro-rata for the remainder of the year... If as most people do, they get another car, usually the policy continues as long as any relevant payments are made for any change of risk (bigger engine higher insurance group etc)..

Yes I understand you dont get any money back if you make a claim. Your post just read as if the policy ends when a payout is made. Which isnt true if you insure another car on it. 

cymruchris

SaverRate said:

cymruchris said:

SaverRate said:

I have never come across a car insurance policy where the policy ends if there is a total loss? They have always just insured another car for the remainder of the term?

Comes to an end if you don't put another car on cover... As in once you've made a claim on any given insurance year, you're not going to get a refund pro-rata for the remainder of the year... If as most people do, they get another car, usually the policy continues as long as any relevant payments are made for any change of risk (bigger engine higher insurance group etc)..

Yes I understand you dont get any money back if you make a claim. Your post just read as if the policy ends when a payout is made. Which isnt true if you insure another car on it. 

You're right - it's good to clarify it - the OP said they haven't replaced the car, and currently they aren't in a position to - so effectively for them the policy is finished - with no refund due - although not technically 'ended'. (If they do happen to get another car - I'm sure Admiral will continue to cover it subject to them paying additional premiums if the car is of higher risk/grouping).