How is it a write-off if only a tail light is smashed....?

Sally_Davies

Hello.  I've had a good browse around the car insurance threads but haven't found an answer to our problem, so can I ask for some advice?  Yesterday my daughter's parked car was hit very gently by a Local Authority van (long story, huge amounts of rain and a slippery tram track, driver sensibly trying not to run into the occupied vehicle in front of him in the traffic queue).  Being a good citizen she contacted her own insurer straight away as it says on her policy.  Damage to her car is minimal - tail light is totalled and there's a bit of a dent to the adjacent side panel, no evidence of bent chassis.  Daughter provided lots of images to the insurer as requested.  They then came back saying it was a write-off, and that they would remove it straight away.  To which daughter has said no, I will check with my own repairer that there is no structural damage and if all is OK I will get the car repaired.  Our expectation is that the other side's insurer will pay for this.  Daughter really needs her car, which is old but well suited to her (she has mobility issues due to a chronic health condition).   Have we done the right thing?  Any advice or suggestions much appreciated...

Emmia

Sally_Davies said:

Hello.  I've had a good browse around the car insurance threads but haven't found an answer to our problem, so can I ask for some advice?  Yesterday my daughter's parked car was hit very gently by a Local Authority van (long story, huge amounts of rain and a slippery tram track, driver sensibly trying not to run into the occupied vehicle in front of him in the traffic queue).  Being a good citizen she contacted her own insurer straight away as it says on her policy.  Damage to her car is minimal - tail light is totalled and there's a bit of a dent to the adjacent side panel, no evidence of bent chassis.  Daughter provided lots of images to the insurer as requested.  They then came back saying it was a write-off, and that they would remove it straight away.  To which daughter has said no, I will check with my own repairer that there is no structural damage and if all is OK I will get the car repaired.  Our expectation is that the other side's insurer will pay for this.  Daughter really needs her car, which is old but well suited to her (she has mobility issues due to a chronic health condition).   Have we done the right thing?  Any advice or suggestions much appreciated...

How much is the car worth?  And how old is it?

It is possible the age makes the cost of the repair more than the value of the vehicle, so from an insurance perspective not worth repairing.

paul_c123

Depending on age and parts availability (or bodyshops in her area), hire car costs can tip it over the edge.

MX5huggy

The panel damage will be relatively expensive to fix properly, new panel (can you get them for that car?) paint to match etc, probably not much change from £1000. Plus the car hire to cover the time off the road. 

Talk to the fleet management department in the local authority they don’t have conventional car insurance the one I work for self insures for claims up to £250k. They maybe happy for you to get a quote to get the light fixed and pay you a bit for the panel damage.

Bigphil1474

You could ask to buy it back from the insurers if you are happy that the repairs at a local garage will be less than the residual value. They basically give you the cash minus the scrap value, and you get it repaired. The third party insurer would no doubt be happy with that as well. I've always avoided the hire car option.

daveyjp

Get your own quote.  A £250 job can quickly become £3k once insurance get involved.

Mildly_Miffed

Sally_Davies said:

Hello.  I've had a good browse around the car insurance threads but haven't found an answer to our problem, so can I ask for some advice?  Yesterday my daughter's parked car was hit very gently by a Local Authority van (long story, huge amounts of rain and a slippery tram track, driver sensibly trying not to run into the occupied vehicle in front of him in the traffic queue).  Being a good citizen she contacted her own insurer straight away as it says on her policy.  Damage to her car is minimal - tail light is totalled and there's a bit of a dent to the adjacent side panel, no evidence of bent chassis.  Daughter provided lots of images to the insurer as requested.  They then came back saying it was a write-off, and that they would remove it straight away.  To which daughter has said no, I will check with my own repairer that there is no structural damage and if all is OK I will get the car repaired.  Our expectation is that the other side's insurer will pay for this.  Daughter really needs her car, which is old but well suited to her (she has mobility issues due to a chronic health condition).   Have we done the right thing?  Any advice or suggestions much appreciated...

It's all about cost to repair versus value.

Is it cheaper for the insurance to pay her the value and call it quits (and don't forget they sell it and take the income from that into account) or to pay for the repair including a hire car while her car's fixed.

Also, they don't use second-hand parts.

Repair:
New tail light at dealer price.
Remove that dent in the side panel, including paint.
Hire car for a week.
Let's call it £2,500 cost.

Write-off:
£1,500 to pay her for the car.

-£250 from the salvage auction.

£1,250 cost.

It's half the price to them to write it off.

On the other hand, you can say "How about you pay us in lieu of repair/write-off?" and they give you £1k? You spend £50 on a used tail light and ten minutes on changing it? For £950 in your pocket, you can live with a dent, right?

Or they don't agree that, but they will allow you to retain the car in return for a proportion of the payout. You accept the £1,500, pay them the £250 and retain the salvage. Again, £50 and ten minutes, and live with the dent.

DullGreyGuy

MX5huggy said:

The panel damage will be relatively expensive to fix properly, new panel (can you get them for that car?) paint to match etc, probably not much change from £1000. Plus the car hire to cover the time off the road. 

Talk to the fleet management department in the local authority they don’t have conventional car insurance the one I work for self insures for claims up to £250k. They maybe happy for you to get a quote to get the light fixed and pay you a bit for the panel damage.

Which local authority? They legally must have insurance from the ground up for third party liability so "self insurance" would mean they actually need to have established an insurance company thats been accepted by the FCA etc. Its possible to do, there are companies offering turn key insurers in BOT locations but haven't come across any council thats taken on that cost. 

Most councils I've dealt with are legally fully insured with a recognised insurer however its often a loss sensitive policy which is a ground up policy but with an aggregate reimbursement from the client to the insurer. 

Sally_Davies said:

Hello.  I've had a good browse around the car insurance threads but haven't found an answer to our problem, so can I ask for some advice?  Yesterday my daughter's parked car was hit very gently by a Local Authority van (long story, huge amounts of rain and a slippery tram track, driver sensibly trying not to run into the occupied vehicle in front of him in the traffic queue).  Being a good citizen she contacted her own insurer straight away as it says on her policy.  Damage to her car is minimal - tail light is totalled and there's a bit of a dent to the adjacent side panel, no evidence of bent chassis.  Daughter provided lots of images to the insurer as requested.  They then came back saying it was a write-off, and that they would remove it straight away.  To which daughter has said no, I will check with my own repairer that there is no structural damage and if all is OK I will get the car repaired.  Our expectation is that the other side's insurer will pay for this.  Daughter really needs her car, which is old but well suited to her (she has mobility issues due to a chronic health condition).   Have we done the right thing?  Any advice or suggestions much appreciated...

The third party insurer will only pay out up to the value of the vehicle, as such if repairs were authorised and they exceeded the value of the vehicle then your insurer wouldnt get all the money back and it would be considered a fault claim. As such, insurers leave some headroom incase the bill exceeds the estimate.

The cost of repairs in total often are a lot more than people anticipate, they often consider the cash in hand price from a back street garage that will do some basic touchup painting etc whereas an insurer clearly can't do cash in hand and will pay for proper respraying which often means a whole panel and blending in to the neighbouring 2-3 panels. 

Ultimately you could allow them to total loss the vehicle but ask to retain the salvage, this will reduce the cash you get but you keep the car and can return it to the road once you get the light fixed. Alternatively you could get a quote from a garage of your choosing and approach the third party/their insurers and see if they will authorise the repairs or settle it on a cash in lieu basis. 

Sally_Davies

Thank you very much all!  This was pretty much what we were thinking, and it is so reassuring to hear that we haven't done a mad thing.  It is true that from the point of view of the insurer, it is not worth repairing - it's an elderly Peugeot Partner Combi.  However, from my daughter's point of view it's perfect - large tailgate and spaciousness means that if in future she needs to be a wheelchair user, she's set up.  Good point MX5huggy about the fleet effectively self-insuring, I'd wondered about that myself.  The boss's boss of the bloke who did the damage is due to contact us today and we'll see what he's suggesting, meanwhile we will be in touch with our brilliant local motor man, primarily to ask him to check the chassis, but then to do the small repairs.  I could certainly replace the tail lights myself, have done so before, but we probably need something doing that comes with a receipt.  Many thanks once again x

TooManyPoints

Which local authority? They legally must have insurance from the ground up for third party liability....

Section 144 of the Road Traffic Act exempts many public bodies, including local authorities, fire and police departments, NHS services, etc. from the requirements of s143 (which makes the requirement for compulsory Third Party insurance).

Of course some of those might have it, but they are not required to.

Mildly_Miffed

I suspect they aren't actually fully self-insured, but simply have an excess so high that for a claim like this, they are.

VERY few organisations are actually fully self-insured, with a sizeable deposit lodged with the government - and the government stopped any new ones from doing so in 2019.

https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/motor-insurance-alternatives-removal-of-deposit-and-security-options/outcome/summary-of-responses-to-the-consultation-and-the-department-for-transport-response