Reduced car value after non-fault accident

DullGreyGuy

Desmond_Hume said:

Not sure what planet the majority of posters are on in here. Nobody is paying top dollar for a damaged repair car, be it done to perfection or not. 

Is it a CAT N now? Did it go through insurance?

I agree it sucks for you but expecting a buyer to pay the same for a damage repaired car as they would a straight one is nuts. 

Why do you think it's a total loss? From the OP's initial post it was a straightforward repair job, as the majority of insurance claims are. 

Agree, if a buyer knows its had accident repair, or if its had running issues etc, then inevitably they'll pay less. Whilst I dont believe the 33% claimed, but many people buy brand new cars with repaired damage that they're never aware it had. If thats the proportion of brand new cars what do you think the percentage of not brand new cars are going to be? It's not like there is a database that someone can query to see if repairs have been done, unless it's been a total loss. 

Aretnap

Desmond_Hume said:

Not sure what planet the majority of posters are on in here. Nobody is paying top dollar for a damaged repair car, be it done to perfection or not. 

Is it a CAT N now? Did it go through insurance?

I agree it sucks for you but expecting a buyer to pay the same for a damage repaired car as they would a straight one is nuts. 

It may well be the case that a potent buyer would pay less, or more likely not buy the car at all, if they knew it had been repaired but the bottom line is that in most cases they won't know, won't ask, won't be told and won't find out. Cars change hands every day for perfectly normal prices where both buyer and seller are blissfully unaware of some long forgotten accident that happened two changes of owner ago.

You can be pretty sure that the dealer who is offering the OP £4K less for his car isn't planning to put "accident repaired" on the advert in big letters when he comes to sell it, so for him the £4K represents pure profit.

(It's obviously different in the case of write-offs which do get recorded and can affect the market value. But in that case the OP should have got the full value of the car as the original settlement - if he chooses to repair it and sell it on the third party is not responsible for the price he gets.)

Mildly_Miffed

Desmond_Hume said:

Not sure what planet the majority of posters are on in here. Nobody is paying top dollar for a damaged repair car, be it done to perfection or not. 

How do you even know, if it's been "repaired to perfection"?

Anyway, a couple of things I've just noticed in the OP.

It was booked in for sale the day after the collision, and a value had been given.
So how long between that and the date it was then taken in for sale, when the -£4k value was given?
Could some of that £4k be further depreciation during that period?
What proportion of the car's value is £4k, anyway? 50% or 5%?

Also - the initial value was given sight-unseen, while the -£4k value was on inspection. What pre-existing defects did they knock some off for? Was this somebody like WBAC, renowned for chiselling down the initial figure?

A court claim for "£4k diminution in value" is going to fail instantly on those two questions alone, plus "did you try to mitigate your losses by taking it elsewhere?"

Aretnap

Mildly_Miffed said:

A court claim for "£4k diminution in value" is going to fail instantly on those two questions alone, plus "did you try to mitigate your losses by taking it elsewhere?"

It's not a case of mitigating losses. The courts have ruled that what you are actually claiming for is the diminution in the market value of your car. In other words, the difference between what your car would have sold for five minutes before the accident, and what it would sell for five minutes after the accident. This occurs immediately, and can't be mitigated after the fact, eg by shopping around for a cheaper repair quote.

The price of repair is relevant though because, as much for the sake of making life simpler as anything else,  the courts will take the view that the cost of repairs is a reasonable measure of that diminution of value - making the assumption that a £5000 car that needs £1000 of repairs would sell for about £4000. Whether that assumption is always correct is debatable, but it certainly makes claiming for damage to your car simpler than it would be if you had to assess the actual market value of the damaged car .

Given that you are presenting the repair cost as the measure of diminution of value it follows that you don't get two bits of that cherry - you can't claim the repair cost AND extra for diminution, even there was residual diminution. 

The alternative if you don't fancy that approach would be to forget about the repair cost entirely, try to claim for the actual reduction in market value of the damaged car, and then perhaps try to sell the damaged car unrepaired. (Or maybe get it repaired yourself and take pot luck on what it will sell for once repaired.) But assessing the value of a car with substantial damage is not simple - it would probably require a professional assessment, but just evidence of what one particular dealer on one particular day will offer you for it. And if you've already had the car repaired it's probably a bit late to go down that route anyway.

Spirit16

Desmond_Hume said:

Not sure what planet the majority of posters are on in here. Nobody is paying top dollar for a damaged repair car, be it done to perfection or not. 

Is it a CAT N now? Did it go through insurance?

I agree it sucks for you but expecting a buyer to pay the same for a damage repaired car as they would a straight one is nuts. 

I know its not right. That's why I told the truth and now question how i would get back the thousands of pounds I lost . I shouldn't be a penny out of pocket when someone crashed into my car when parked at home.  not Cat N and all through insurance 

born_again

Was the £4K P/X difference against exactly the same car? 
Given that you must have given cancelled the previous purchase at the last minute?

ThorOdinson

A new car has a warranty and rejection rights.

How can you ever know what the repair shop did a good job and got all the damage on a used one?

Hunter v National Specialist Steeplejacks established that it may be possible to claim diminished value, but it's an uphill battle.

DullGreyGuy

Spirit16 said:

Desmond_Hume said:

Not sure what planet the majority of posters are on in here. Nobody is paying top dollar for a damaged repair car, be it done to perfection or not. 

Is it a CAT N now? Did it go through insurance?

I agree it sucks for you but expecting a buyer to pay the same for a damage repaired car as they would a straight one is nuts. 

I know its not right. That's why I told the truth and now question how i would get back the thousands of pounds I lost . I shouldn't be a penny out of pocket when someone crashed into my car when parked at home.  not Cat N and all through insurance 

Common law, which is what matters like this are dealt under, says you should be indemnified, ie you should be in the same financial position as before the accident. It doesn't say you shouldn't be a penny out of pocket. If you went out and hired a ferrai whilst your corsa was in for repairs they would would only be liable to pay you the cost of hiring a corsa and thus leave you out of pocket. 

The courts also accept life is a bit cråp sometimes and hence dont award thousands for "inconvenience" or non-clinical "stress". 

You wouldn't lose the thousands of pounds, you would sell your car to someone who isn't taking advantage of you. 

caprikid1

Unfortunately Insurance companies want to do the cheapest low quality repairs even if it compromises the structure of the car, structure being straightened as opposed to being replaced. Ironic that having instructed substandard repairs they won't want to acknowledge the car is now depreciated.

If you ever think you will ever end up in acceptable position post an insurance claim , think again !.

Car_54

caprikid1 said:

Unfortunately Insurance companies want to do the cheapest low quality repairs even if it compromises the structure of the car, structure being straightened as opposed to being replaced. Ironic that having instructed substandard repairs they won't want to acknowledge the car is now depreciated.

If you ever think you will ever end up in acceptable position post an insurance claim , think again !.

The OP said "We had the car repaired back to perfect condition".. What makes you think otherwise?

Also, he hasn't asked the insurer to acknowledge anything - his beef is with a dealer.