Car witten off (not my fault) Being told I have to sell the scrap!!

Adam_K

Hi I'm new to the forum and hoping very much someone can help me

I was recently involved in a nasty car accident which another driver has admited liability for. Royal & Sun alliance acting as the other drivers insurers have sent an engineer to inspect the car and are awaiting the report.

In the mean time I recived a letter from the company that removed my car from the accident, in which they citie the road traffic regulations act 1984 giving me 7 days to remove the remains of the vehicle or the 'chief constable' will direct the veichle to be sold and proceeds will be remitted to the 'police fund'

When I phoned Royal & Sun allience to inform them of this, I was told that they will be making an assesment as to how much the car is worth and also an assesment as to the scrap value of the car. They would then deduct the scrap value and pay me the differnce leaving me with a wrecked car to somehow find a a way to sell on and recover the outstanding ammount. They also assure me this is quite normal.

This leaves me in a potentialy difficult position where I end up with a residual value for my car from Royal & Sun Allience and the garage/poice fund take ownership of the scrap to sell leaving me significantly out of pocket.

This can't be right can someone please advise!

greyster

Surely they should be "buying" the car off you and giving you the price for it. Check your policy.

My first car was written off, the insurer made me transfer the car to them and I recieved a cheque for the value of the car. Case closed.

I got a letter from the council saying there was mess left at the scene and that they will be approaching me for the cost to clear it up. I phoned them and told them it was the other drivers fault, never heard from them again.

Adam_K

I don't think my policy comes into play as this is the other drivers insurance company I'm dealing with.

I've said to them that it is my understnading that the norm is for the inurance company to settle the value of the car then in effect take ownership of the remains of the vehicle to sell for what they can.

This was met with a response of 'we are not reposible for the disposal of your car'

I just can't belive this is right!

mattymoo

That is only ever done for policyholders vehicle. With third party claims like yours, the vehicle always remains your property to dispose of.

Salvage values have taken a huge nosedive so check what they offer. If they say car worth £1k pre accident, salvage = £100 so you get £900 from us, make sure you can get £100 for it.

Recovery and reasonable storage charges can be claimed as a separate item.

Pagan98

Legally, the other party should be putting you back in the position you were in prior to the accident occuring. This is typically interpreted as refunding the purchase price of an equivalent vehicle (normally based on book value, discounted for condition). If you retain ownership of the scrap then they are entitled to deduct the scrap value from the payout.

I suggest you tell them that you are not prepared to act as their agent in this respect and, if they don't wish to play ball, you will pass the claim over to a third party claim managment company to settle on your behalf (whose bill will be payable by the other party's insurer).

Pagan98

mattymoo wrote: »

That is only ever done for policyholders vehicle. With third party claims like yours, the vehicle always remains your property to dispose of.

No disrespect to the poster, but this is why people get so frustrated with insurers. Why should the innocent party be inconvenienced in this manner? Just because it is the normal arrangement doesn't mean it is acceptable or justifiable.

V_tricky

In this instance the insurer has no contract with the third party in the way that they do with the policyholder, and therefore R&SA will not dispose of the salvage for the OP, no matter how much the OP tries to persuade them.

The third party claims unit at R&SA don't even have access to salvage agents (because they don't need to) in the way that their own damage people do.

If a deduction is made (and depending on the value of the car, and salvage category there might not be) and the OP either has to pay for the vehicle to be disposed of or receives a lesser amount than they have deducted, all he would need to do is send in a copy of the receipt he receives from the salvage agent and he would be reimbursed any shortfall.

In England, general inconvenience is not considered (by the Courts) to be a valid head of claim.

Of course if the OP's own insurer would dispose of it for him if he had claimed through them.

dunstonh

Pagan98 wrote: »

No disrespect to the poster, but this is why people get so frustrated with insurers. Why should the innocent party be inconvenienced in this manner? Just because it is the normal arrangement doesn't mean it is acceptable or justifiable.

With respect its because he hasnt involved his own insurer.

patchy987

i actually used to work for RSA and we always advised people in a situation like yours to claim through your own insurer and that way you would get your vehicle disposed of and RSA would deal with your claim through your own insurer. is there any particular reason you dont want to go through your own insurer ??

Adam_K

no there is no reason not to go through my insurer.

When I phoned and told my insurer that I had been involved in the accident and royal and sun alliance had taken liability, they sort of shrugged their shoulders and said 'thanks for letting us know good luck with the cliam'.

When I asked about legal cover I was told it may affect my no claims bonus if they were not able to recover the costs of the legal fees

As Royal and Sun allience were at the time being so proactive I thought I'd wait and see how far the line I got with them then decide as to if I need to apiont my own solicitor.

Pagan98

dunstonh wrote: »

With respect its because he hasnt involved his own insurer.

But why should he have to involve his own insurer, or what if he is only insured TPFT? It would seem to me that it is entirely reasonable to expect the party who caused the accident (or their insurer) to do all the legwork to put things right, including disposing of the scrap vehicle once valuation has been agreed. But maybe that's just me!

Obviously it is a different situation if the not at fault party wants to retain title to the scrap vehicle, perhaps to repair it privately.

At the very least, surely it would be reasonable to be reimbursed a nominal amount for the administration effort involved.