Finally getting my Pug back today from the repairers after my pre-Xmas rear-end shunt. Despite appearances there was a significant amount of damage (approx £3k). My ins co will recover their costs from the third party who hit me - and I am putting together a list of my own expenses (incurred as a direct result of the accident) which I want to recover.
My question is this - am I justified in seeking compensation for loss if value (if any) of my now crash-repaired Pug? If so, how can I quantify this loss. This car was bought as a short term fix to handle commute until we can relocate - I would have hoped to sell it on over the summer. When I come to sell, I will not advertise the car as crash-repaired but also I could not lie if I was specifically asked. Second hand cars is a buyers market, so personally I would walk away from a "damaged" car.
BTW - although pleased to get my Pug back, I am more than a little disappointed to have to hand back the new Mondeo TDCi hire car - it has impressed me tremendously.
|
Although I cannot back this up, I would say yes you are justified and give it a go. Please let us know if you eventually get anywhere. As far as I'm concerned, if the accident was not your fault then you should not be out of pocket in any way. Simple as that. Although I'm not sure how to quantify it, it should be easier to quantify then compensation for a sore neck which is claimed regularly I believe.
This is something I have occasionally wondered about - along with what I will do if/when the kids in my street decide to crash their bikes into my car.
|
|
|
Possibly a bit out of date??
Insurance ombudsman:-
www.theiob.org.uk/digest/v/valuation_of_motor_vehi...l
|
I doubt if the insurance company will accept that your car is worth less simply because it has been involved in an accident, even though we all know that in practice such cars are less appealing to buyers. I have, however, been successful in recovering lost value when an apparently reasonable repair has later been shown to be substandard, ie. paint faults, corrosion etc. Even 3 years after the repair and following the sale of the car for bottom book price, the insurers were prepared to compensate me for the estimated cost of re-repairing the car. See what kind of guarantee your insurer gives over and above your legal rights (Sale of Goods and Services Act 1982) on the quality of the repair.
In your case, I would firstly ensure that accident repairs are done to a standard commensurate with the original condition - get an independent inspection if necessary. My own experience and that of others on this site would suggest that returning a car to the repairer several times before you are satisfied is not uncommon. Many body shops have a fair idea of the lousy workmanship most people will not notice / settle for and seem to work accordingly...
|
Yes, you are entitled to claim for any loss in value that the car might suffer, but only if you can show that this loss is likely to happen, and the extent of the loss.
The other side's insurers will claim that this loss is zero or at best unquantifiable; your insurers probably won't see it as in their interest to litigate on the point.
Therefore, unless the amount you claim is so small that the costs of chasing it will be greater than the payout to you, it is hard to see how you can get anything back beyond making sure that the quality of the repair is of satisfactory original standard.
|
Not quite the same thing, but about 20 years ago a car went through my father-in-law's garden wall. The insurance company agreed to pay for the wall to be rebuilt and my F-i-L accepted their offer.
When I asked him about the damage to a tree, shrubs, lawn, etc., F-i-L couldn't be convinced that he could claim for those so I acted on his behalf (sort of as his agent). The insurance company took another look and agreed to fully compensate for the damage to the garden, even paying the full retail value of two full-grown shrubs that were very expensive at that size. It came to quite a tidy sum and F-i-L gave it all to me!
The insurance company said that a claimant shouldn't end up out of pocket in any way, which was very honourable of them. Unfortunately I cannot remember their name, otherwise I'd give them plenty of free publicity.
|
Adrian,
The answer to your question is technically 'Yes' - but you will need to come up with a report from a specialist in that field (a qualified Motor Engineer would be a good start) who is in a position to demonstrate that the vehicle has suffered a loss of value directly as a result of the accident, even though it was repaired by a reputable bodyshop who followed the manufacturer's advice/recommendations. In simple terms the test is - if I try to sell this vehicle will the knowledge that it has been (quite severely in your case) rear-ended result in a lower offer? The chances are it will, especially if your are trying to sell it to the trade. All of that said, however, a claim for 'diminution of value' is more likely to succeed in the case of an up-market vehicle with a relatively high value - the idea being that the higher up the scale you go the fussier the prospective purchaser. Your chances of success with the bog-standard cars that most of us drive would be limited. There was a case on this point about 3-4 years ago - and I'm now trying to think of it (without much success).
CG
|
There seems to be some double standards here. It would seem that a previous crash repair definitely impacts the value of a vehicle if it is subsequently written-off/stolen and the ins co has to pay out for its market value (see ins ombudsman link - thanks Martin). However, the loss adjusters say that there is no loss of value if a car has been properly repaired and you are seeking compensation for that loss. If you had a choice of two identical cars, same price but one crash repaired - which would you pick?
I don't hold out much hope, but I will pursue this.
Should have gone for the stiff neck option!!!
|
A quick update on this thread from January.
I sought advice from independant loss-adjusters who told me that I had no case for loss of value unless the car had suffered "severe mechanical damage" (and mentioning steering/suspension). The repairs (from rear-end shunt) seemed fine to my inexperienced eye so I didn't pursue this any further.
This weekend I took my car to a dealer seeking part exchange value against another car. He immediately saw that there was something amiss with car, (spotting that it had been resprayed) and so could only offer me approx £750 less than book price for trade-in (ie from £4250 to £3500)!!!
So how does that compute with "no loss of value"?
|
So you have suffered from loss of value then - can you get this dealer to confirm in writing that he offered you the figure he did, but would have offered the higher figure if the car had not been damaged and re-sprayed? You could then use this as evidence/leverage with the insurers of the car that hit you - do you have free legal advice cover with your own insurers? If so, check and see if they will assist you. Could try Citizens Advice Bureau too.
Good luck - once again, please let us know how you get on.
|
|
|
This weekend I took my car to a dealer seeking part exchange value against another car. He immediately saw that there was something amiss with car, (spotting that it had been resprayed) and so could only offer me approx £750 less than book price for trade-in (ie from £4250 to £3500)!!!
So how does that compute with "no loss of value"?
adrian:
the link you should read is
www.theiob.org.uk/digest/a/accident_depreciation.h...l
but remember that deals only with claims against your own insurance.
whereas your claim is against the third party, not your insurance company.
you are fully entitled to claim for your consequential loss from the third party.
write to him/her by recorded delivery and submit your claim.
|
|
|
|
|
