Depending on the value of the car and the 'reasonableness' of the claim, the thing to do is immediately get competitive quotes for the repair then sue the other driver directly, giving notice to both your insurer and his insurer that this is what you intend to do. Do not use any kind of 'accident management company'. They are mostly trying to rope you into an expensive hire car (one reader got a bill of £29,000 for 3 months hire). If the driver refuses to pay, take the matter to the Small Claims track of the County Court and get a judgement against him. Then he (or ultimately his insurer) will be forced to pay. Now obviously this will not work of the damaged car was worth £500 and the repairs will cost £5,000. The claim for repairing the damage has to be reasonable. Everyone damaged is entitled to be put back into the position they were in immediately before the damage, whether that is financially or by replacing the damaged car or by repairing it.

Clark v/s Ardington (Appeal Court 19-4-2002) determined that in such cases, paying the injured party the pre-crash value of their car would put them back into the position they were in immediately before the crash. So in a situation where the insurer wants to write off the car, the injured party has to prove the true cost of a like for like replacement by means of advertisements on websites like www.autotrader.co.uk. The insurance calculation is always quoted cost of repair v/s settlement price minus salvage value of the car. So if the insurer has been quoted £3,000 to repair the car, but can get £1,000 salvage for it, then it would prefer to pay a settlement of £3,750 than to repair the car. The injured party would therefore have to prove that he could not get an equivalent car for £3,750.

There is one further option. Having obtained details of the other driver's insurers (via the Motor Insurers' Database www.askmid.co.uk) you obtain a pro-forma invoice (one that has been fully coasted, including VAT) and write to the other driver's insurer. If they say that they cannot obtain any response from their policyholder, or that he/she doesn't want them to act on her behalf, then the little-known but very useful Fourth EC Motor Directive can be used. This enables a claimant to pursue their claim directly against the other insurer - as opposed to their policyholder - even to the point of issuing a summons in the small claims court against the insurer, thus bypassing their policyholder altogether. Under this Directive it is no longer the case that the other insurer can stand back and refuse to act, just because their policyholder can't or won't co-operate with them; this will be of no effect. If they insured the person and the vehicle involved in the accident then that is sufficient - and in certain circumstances they are also involved even if there is a complication with the cover. All you have to do is demonstrate negligence on the part of the other driver - as is always the case in a motor claim - and the other insurer will be obliged to pay up.