Scottish Elises

Just wondered if any of you guys have had any experience dealing with Insurance companies....

I was rear-ended by a taxi a couple of weeks back - slow speed collision - but enough to split the rear clam on my Elise S1. Taxi admited full liability .

So- put the car into the 'approved Admiral bodyshop' - which is also the bodyshop that Murray Motors (Edinburgh) use - so they are Lotus approved.

Bill comes to 3900 - and the garage get the go-ahed to repair. Things get a bit strange when I call the garage however. They have offered a 'cash settlement' as they do not want to provide a warranty (presume its a crash repair warranty). Then they go on about deducting VAT & my excess ? They say its part of my T&C that I have to take a settlement ?

1. I'm not claiming against my policy - the other party accepted liability so its his insurance I'd be claiming off - right ?
2. Its not my excess - its the other partys surely. So why try to deduct my excess ?

It all went a bit strange when I asked about paint matching - as I dont want a shiny new looking back half of a car.

I am not claiming for a full respray - but I think my car will devalued accordingly - due to the obvious shiny new rear section.

Am i entiteld to the repair without the VAT or Excess deducting ?
Any advice regarding the paint matching - and the Insurance Company not wanting to provide a warranty. (Presumably a cash settlement would stop me complaining about paint matching / which would be a warranty claim?)

Its not my policy I'm claiming against - my T&C dont apply - surely !! My solicitor is phoning tomorrow - just wondering if there is any advice out there !

Excess is straightforward, you do not pay it as long as both Insurance Companies agree that it was the other drivers fault.
Your car should be returned to you without you paying a penny in the condition it was in before the accident. This would happen with a reputable Company, if not you will have to fight it.

tut

Are you talking with the garage or Admiral?

Im talking to Admiral. The problem surfaced when I asked about paint matching. Then they suddenly don't want to give a warranty and are talking about a cash settlement. My T&C mention they can offer a cash settlement, but I'm not claiming against my policy.

Stick to your guns, if there are paint matching issues don't accept the repair. Your insurance company should be working for you (but as usual they protect their own interests and not that of their customer).

Is the other party also insured with Admiral by any chance?

Which garage is it?
Are you also insured by admiral? Things can get a bit difficult when both parties are insured by the same company.

I wonder if that is the case too Duggie

I suspect the other guy is also insured by Admiral - but they haven't confirmed that.

Sure - If they respray the front of the car as well - they cannot improve my car or give me an 'improved car' - they only fix the damage. However if they respray the rear of the car it will look out of place and the front will stick out like a sore thumb.
So I would like the front reprayed as otherwise I would have suffered the loss of devaluation. Think this is why they want a cash settlement - as if they repair and give a warranty, I could say it doesn't match and refuse the repair.

Your excess is payable until such time as the claim is settled with the 3rd party _UNLESS_ you claim directly off the other party (which is what you should have done, IMHO). Having involved your insurance company it is now pretty typical that they will withhold your excess and mark the claim against you until such time as it is settled.

You will need to press them to tell you who the other party is insured with (unless you already know), then ask them at what stage they are at with the other party - i.e. have they agreed who's at fault between them - there is often nothing in it for them to push for full-fault and so they may simply do a knock-for-knock on the basis that both parties are insured with the same insurer (they get two excess payments, two sets of lost NCB, two policies to load with claims next renewal, etc.).

Make sure that they end up agreeing a full-fault on the other policy and no-fault on yours - then they should refund the excess.

I don't understand the cash settlement at all - is this in lieu of the warranty or in lieu of the whole claim? If it's in lieu of warranty you might consider it ... after all it's free cash to use to spend on beer (or on tarting up the paint work before you sell it). If it's in lieu of the whole claim then you don't want to do it ... the risk that the costs to repair the damage exceed the estimate would then be yours.

Cheers,
Robin

P.S. If the car is being done at Willowbrae then you could ask them what they think the chances of blending the paint is to make the difference between front and back to "not stick out". They've sprayed enough Elises to know ...

Cheers,
Robin

The other party has accepted full responsibility. The cash settlement offer is in lieu of the whole claim. Think they want to avoid the issue of paint matching so don't want to offer the usual warranty. The car is currently with JM Accudent Repair in Bonnyrigg, which is where Murray Motirs (lotus) advised me to go. I've made it clear I'm not satisfied with the offer.

Thanks for the replies, I'll update tomorrow once I've spoken to the Insurance people again.

Any body shop should blend in the paint as not to have a contrast between old and new. Would check that is being done.

Glasgow_S1 wrote:I suspect the other guy is also insured by Admiral - but they haven't confirmed that.

Sure - If they respray the front of the car as well - they cannot improve my car or give me an 'improved car' - they only fix the damage. However if they respray the rear of the car it will look out of place and the front will stick out like a sore thumb.
So I would like the front reprayed as otherwise I would have suffered the loss of devaluation. Think this is why they want a cash settlement - as if they repair and give a warranty, I could say it doesn't match and refuse the repair.

it's a long time ago but I once had a run in with an insurer following a theft which included threats of "betterment" ie if they repaired my car I would be in a better position than I was before the theft as the parts would be new etc.

I lawyered up (via a free helpline) and got the following advice. Betterment is something that leaves you financially better off, insurance companies often try to use it to wriggle out of fixing cars, or to squeeze money from the insured. Your car won't be worth more fixed (the lawyer told me) thus it isn't betterment. Tell them to GTF (I'm parahrasing but that is the gist of what she said). Which I duly did and they paid up. (Actually got a constructive write off in the end which suited me).

Them repairing your car with a full respray leaves you (arguably) in the position you were before the crash. Your car isn't "improved", it's fixed and it's their (or the tax driver's) job to fix it. B.llocks to matching the paint, that's their job.

I can see why if they offer cash it won't include the VAT as that would be betterment but you are going to want to use the money to fix it!

Maybe ask them about a constructive write off? If it's an S1 you might be running close to that.

I'd lawyer up and tell them I wanted my car fixed. (You'll get free legal advice from someone (AA/RAC et al).)

Finally remember the insurance company is not (necessarily) on your side. A neighbour got his car nicked years ago, the initial offer was under 500 quid. The final payout was nearly 3k.