What kind of chemistry do you have with your car? Love it? Loathe it? Let us know and you could win a £300 John Lewis voucher | No thanks

INSURANCE: When is an Insurance Damage 'Write Off' not written off? How do a get a fair payment if my car is written off? What is Credit Hire?


FAQ last updated 29-09-2017:

From 1-10-2017 there are four new, more specific categories of insurance damage write off:

A = must be crushed.

B = can be broken for salvage of parts; cannot be put back on the road.

S = structurally damaged but can be repaired.

N = non-structurally damaged and repairable, or recoverd intact after insurance payout.

Obviously, though the categories changes in October 2017, there are hundreds of thousands of cars out there to which the original categories A, B, C and D applied, so that is why we cover them together.

From 26-10-2015 the rules for Category C and Category D vehicles changed and owners returning a written off car to the road no longer needed to apply for a Vehicle Identity Check (VIC) to prove their vehicle matches the registration details. More details at www.gov/uk/scrapping-checks

VCAR was the old name for an Insurance Damage Write-off.

A 'write off' is a colloquial term for a vehicle that has been declared a total loss by an insurer, either following accident damage or theft. There are some 450,000 accident-related write-offs every year and another 150,000 insurance thefts, many of which are subsequently recovered damaged and re-classified. Many write-offs are legitimately allowed back on the roads following a repair; the safest ones to buy are those that have passed an independent vehicle inspection by Autolign (www.autolign-inspections.co.uk). and then go onto HPI's Condition Inspected register. However, almost half of all write-offs are so badly damaged that qualified insurance inspectors determine that they should never go back on the road. To assist the industry and the used car buyer, the Association of British Insurers (ABI) has since 1997 provided the following classification of damage to vehicles that have been deemed an insurance write-off: 

o Category A:

Scrap only - this vehicle should be crushed. It should never reappear on the road and there are no economically salvageable parts. It is of value only for scrap metal - e.g. a totally burnt-out vehicle.

o Category B:

The bodyshell should be crushed. The vehicle should never reappear on the road, but it can be broken for spare parts plus any residual scrap metal.

o Category S (formerly Category C):

Vehicle extensively damaged and insurer has decided not to repair. May be repaired and put back on the road. Before 26-10-2015 had to pass an VIC inspection costing £36 (2007 price) to be re-registered as damaged repaired. From 26-10-2015 VIC checks no longer necessary. Still advised to get the structure checked by www.autolign.co.uk The new Category S means the vehicle has suffered structural damage. This could include a bent or twisted chassis, or a crumple zone that has collapsed in a crash. Category S damage is more than just cosmetic, therefore, and the vehicle will need to be professionally repaired. Also, it won’t be safe to drive until then.

o Category N (formerly category D):

Vehicle damaged and insurer has decided not to repair. When fixed can be re-registered as damaged repaired. Alternatively, vehicle stolen and not recovered until after the insurer had paid out. VIC check not necessary. Still advised to get the structure checked by www.autolign.co.uk

Vehicles graded accordingly haven’t sustained structural damage, so the issue may be cosmetic, or a problem with the electrics that isn’t economical to repair.

Don’t assume such vehicles are drivable, however; non-structural faults may include brakes, steering or other safety-related parts.

Think of Cat D / Cat N like this example:

A car is worth £6,000, but sustains some minor cosmetic damage.

The damage will cost £2,500 for an insurance repair that includes the cost of a courtesy car for the owner while the repair takes place. Repairers have network agreements in place based on "average repair cost" where they will inflate repairs needed to avoid repairing and make it a constructive total loss.

The insurer can sell the car off as it is for £4,000.

So the insurer 'writes it off' as a Cat D "constructive total loss", saving itself £500, even though the car may be perfectly drivable and suffers only cosmetic damage.

o Category F: 

Vehicle damaged by fire and insurer has decided not to repair. When fixed can be re-registered as damaged repaired.

It was not illegal to repair and return Cat B and Cat C written-off for salvage vehicles back to the road as long as they have passed a Vehicle Identity Check (VIC) with the Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency (DVLA). From 26-10-2015 VIC were no longer required for Cat Cs. Insurers notify the DVLA of all cars 'written- off' within salvage categories A, B or C. Les Elliott, Chairman of MIAFTR and a representative of the ABI Salvage Code of Practice adds: "The ABI Salvage Code specifically states that where an Insurer takes control of total loss salvage, such as a Category B, it is broken for spares and the body shell crushed. However, where a person retains the salvage it can be returned to the road, but is subject to a VIC if the V5 is surrendered to DVLA." Until the VIC marker is removed, the DVLA won't issue a registration certificate V5C. However, the VIC test alone is not a safety test and anyone looking to buy a car that has passed a VIC should seek to have it independently inspected by Autolign or Thatcham.

Check if the car you are looking at is on one of these registers by visiting 





Categorisation of 'Write Off' vehicles changed. It it is no longer be A,B,C,D

ABI Thatcham has delivered a draft CoP to the DfT which proposes the following changes:

Four salvage categories reduced to three: Break (B), Structural (S) and Non-Structural (N)

ALL V5C registration documentation to be marked in the case of salvage

The reduction in categories will see Category A & B vehicles condensed to the category Break (B). Vehicles in this category will have been deemed unsuitable for repair by a qualified assessor and must be destroyed.

Category C and Category D vehicles will be reclassified as either Structural (S) or Non-Structural (N) under the proposed new CoP. Vehicles will have been inspected by an appropriately qualified person and declared suitable for repair. As the wording suggests the vehicle will be categorised depending upon whether it has achieved structural damage, or not.

Moving forward, every salvage vehicle will have its V5C marked. We see this as a significant development and something that brings about enhanced transparency, provided that the V5C can be obtained cheaply and in a timely manner.

Vehicle repairable: 

Where insurance repairs becomes ridiculous and open to serious abuse is when, for example, a car worth £10,000 is in a crash which is not the owner's fault and sustains some repairable damage. 

The damage will cost £3,000 to repair. But the owner gets involved with an accident management company that claims on his behalf 'Diminution in value' due to the car having been damaged and repaired. So they claim £500. That is then added to the claim and the owner thinks they are doing him a favour. But, instead of being provided with the repairer's courtesy car, he is put into a 'Credit Hire' car at a daily rate of, for example, £250 until his car is repaired.

There is then a 20 day delay (for whatever reason)  in obtaining some of the parts to repair the car, escalating the period it will be under repair to 25 days, so the driver is in the £250 a day credit hire car for a total of 25 days at an accumulated cost of £6,250. 

The stupidity is that an insurer never factors in the cost of the Credit Hire car. So, though the cost of repairing the damage is only £3,000, the actual amount of the claim could amount to £9,750, at which point the insufrer meeting the claim may question both the necessity and the cost of the credit hire car at £250 a day. 


Insurance specialist solicitor:

Robin Torrr, Senior Partner Pilgrim Hope Solicitors, Suite 102, The Standish Centre, Cross Street, Standish WN6 0HQ. Tel: 01257 422500. Website: www.phsols.co.uk


DAMAGE TO YOUR CAR: What are your rights if someone damages your car in an accident and their insurer attempts to write it off, compensating you with a derisory amount and refusing to keep you on the road in the meantime?

If the other party is judged to be wholly and negligently responsible for the damage than you are entitled to be put back where you were immediately before they did you the damage.

That means for your car to be repaired or replaced so it is of exactly the same quality as it was before the other party did you the damage. Or you are financially compensated to the replacement 'market value' of your car before it was damaged.

It also means you are entitled to an equivalent temporary replacement car either until your car is repaired or you receive a settlement figure allowing you to purchase a direct replacement.

The relevant case law is Clarke v/s Ardington in the Appeal Court, 19th April 2002, in which their Lordships said:

Sect 127 "A defendant who damages another's car should not be surprised to find that he will have to pay for a replacement car if it is needed by the claimant. A wrongdoer must take his victim as he finds him."

Sect. 148 "the fundamental principle is that a person whose car has been damaged is entitled to compensation for the loss caused. In a case where such loss includes loss of use and he establishes a need for a replacement, he is entitled to the cost of hiring a replacement car"

Recent Appeal Court Ruling: Coles v Hetherington 2013

Just before Christmas 2013, the Court of Appeal delivered the long-awaited judgment in the case of Coles v Hetherton [2013] EWCA Civ 1704. Its conclusions have wide-reaching implications for the insurance industry and may impact on every level of case, from modest county court claims that were the subject matter of Coles itself, to multi-million pound disputes.

The case comprised 13 subrogated claims brought by policyholders who had taken out motor insurance with Royal Sun Alliance (‘RSA’). Although the claims were brought in the names of the policyholders, the real dispute was between RSA, and Allianz and Provident as insurers for the defendants. In each, a road traffic accident had occurred for which liability was admitted. However, the way in which RSA arranged for their insureds’ damaged vehicles to be repaired led to a significant dispute on quantum. The repairs were carried out by a garage for a certain amount, usually not exceeding a few hundred pounds. The work was then invoiced to RSA by a wholly owned subsidiary from within the RSA group acting, in effect, as a middleman between insurer and repairing garage. The invoice it produced was invariably higher than the amount charged by the repairing garage. RSA contended that it was entitled to recover the higher figure, because it was still a reasonably priced repair. Allianz and Provident opposed in strong terms. They said that the policyholders who claimed for sums in excess of the actual amount charged by the garage had failed to mitigate their loss.

Three issues were considered, namely:

1. What is the proper measure of loss for damage to a chattel?
2. Does it make a difference if the repair is organized by an insurer, as opposed to the Claimant himself?
3. If an insurer indemnifies an insured in respect of repairs (which, as in this case, may include sundry incidental or administrative expenses) is the total amount recoverable, provided it is still reasonable?

RSA succeeded on all three points. On the first, and main, issue, the Court of Appeal found that the proper measure of loss was the diminution in the value of the damaged chattel. That loss occurred immediately at the time of the accident so could not be mitigated by having the chattel repaired at a lower cost. Provided the claimed cost of repair was not unreasonable therefore, it was recoverable. Further, it made no difference that the Claimants were backed by insurers. The reasonable cost of repair was the cost the Claimant could have obtained on the open market: it did not matter that his insurer might have been able to obtain a better rate through its industry connections. Equally, provided the final amount claimed was reasonable, it could be recovered even if it did include sundry additional expenses.

Practical Implications

The foreboding with which these conclusions have been met by insurers highlight the advantages they offer to policyholders who find themselves in the position of having to make a claim. As long as they can show the sums sought are reasonable (or perhaps, not unreasonable), they will be recoverable. There appears to be no obligation on the policyholder – even if he is backed by an insurer – to obtain the cheapest quote. That would seem to pull the rug out from under insurers who might otherwise have sought to argue that a lower quotation ought to be preferred. It would seem to apply regardless of whether the chattel has been repaired.

Assessing the ‘reasonable’ may create its own complexities. It should be noted that in Coles the RSA invoices were, for the most part, only around 25% higher than those provided by the repairing garages. Claims which are obviously excessive will still be cut down. The Courts will no doubt be alive to the advantages offered to Claimants by Coles and may react adversely if they feel that the judgment is being used to justify overinflated claims. For that reason, it will remain important for loss adjusters who have conduct of repairs – particularly in high value claims where expenditure will be closely managed – to be mindful of the need to ensure that the final bill is kept within reasonable limits.
The Future?

It remains to be seen how long Coles will remain good law. Defendant insurers are likely to challenge it at the earliest opportunity. However, for the time being, it would appear to be a forceful friend to policyholders pursuing a recovery.


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 costed, 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.


As of 15-8-2014, The CMA is currently investigating the Private Motor Insurance Business


For help with motor clains, contact Tim Kelly: www.motorclaimguru.co.uk


For Financial Conduct Authority Rules


General Rules Regarding Valuation by the Financial Obudsman


Disputes about the valuation of 'written off' motor vehicles arbitrated by The Financial Ombudsman:

From www.financial-ombudsman.org.uk/publications/ombudsman.htm

"We regularly deal with complaints from people who believe that their insurer has not properly valued their car or motorbike. The problem usually arises after a vehicle has been so badly damaged in an accident that the insurer decides it is a ‘total loss’ (popularly known as a ‘write-off’) and not worth repairing."

"In these circumstances, the policyholder is entitled to receive an amount equal to the vehicle’s market value immediately before it was damaged – and the insurer should offer this amount straightaway."

"These case studies are based on disputes we have dealt with recently. They illustrate some of the issues that can arise after a vehicle has been declared a total loss – as well as showing how we assess whether or not a disputed valuation was correct."

motor vehicle insurance – dispute over insurer’s valuation

After Mr W’s 1989 Saab saloon was badly damaged in a road traffic accident, the insurer offered him £700, which it said was the car’s pre-accident value. The insurer had calculated that repairing the car would cost considerably more than the car’s market value.

Mr W was far from happy with the insurer’s offer. He thought it was based on an inaccurate valuation and failed to take the car’s particular features into account. He sent the insurer details of these features and suggested that £2,600 was a more realistic figure.

The insurer subsequently increased its offer to £1,040. Mr W still thought this was inadequate. He complained to us about both the valuation and the poor service he felt he had received from the insurer. To support his view of the car’s value he sent us copies of a number of newspaper and magazine advertisements for the sale of similar vehicles.

complaint upheld
The advertisements Mr W had sent us were not particularly persuasive. Apart from anything else, they featured many different models – including convertible and turbo Saabs. We pointed out to Mr W that a number of apparently minor details – for example in the model type or mileage – can significantly affect value. And sellers usually inflate the price they state in such advertisements, to allow for a degree of negotiation. So advertisements rarely provide sufficient detail for an accurate ‘like for like’ comparison, such as that needed to provide a proper valuation.

We explained to Mr W that our usual approach when assessing the value of vehicles is to consult the major motor-vehicle trade-guides. These guides are published regularly and provide detailed information on the market valuation of most makes and models.

In this particular instance, we noted that the trade guides showed a value that was significantly higher than the £1,040 that the insurer had offered Mr W. However it was less than the £2,600 Mr W felt the vehicle was worth.

We had been surprised by the amounts the insurer had originally offered Mr W, as we could not see that they had any reasonable basis.

We told the insurer to offer what we considered to be a fair amount, based on the trade guides we had used. We said it should also pay Mr W £150 to compensate him for the distress and inconvenience it had caused him.

motor vehicle insurance – dispute over insurer’s valuation

Mrs B paid £7,995 for a second-hand 2006 Vauxhall Corsa which had a specialist sports body. Ten days after she bought the car, it was badly damaged in an accident. The insurer declared the car to be a total loss, as the estimated cost of repairs exceeded £7,000. So it offered Mrs B £6,900, which it said was the fair pre-accident retail value of the car.

After Mrs B rejected this offer, insisting that the insurer had not taken the car’s special features into account, the insurer offered her £7,175. Mrs B felt this was still not a fair offer, so she brought her complaint to us.

complaint upheld.
Because Mrs B’s car had fairly unusual features, it was not as quick and easy as is usually the case with more standard models to just check in the trade guides for a guide retail price.

However, we told the insurer that if it had contacted the compilers of these guides and made some further enquiries, it should have been able to obtain an accurate guide price for Mrs B’s exact model.

The insurer then made the enquiries we said it should have undertaken when Mrs B first made her claim. As a result, it established that the guide price was higher than either of the amounts it had offered Mrs B. We said it should settle the complaint by paying Mrs B the correct guide price.

motor vehicle insurance – dispute over insurer’s valuation and its sale of car for salvage

Mr G’s 1999 Daewoo was damaged in an accident in July 2006. When he contacted the insurer to make a claim, he stressed that even though the car was badly damaged, he wanted the insurer to return it to him in due course, so he could get it repaired.

However, after deciding that the car was a total loss, the insurer immediately sold it on for salvage. The insurer then offered Mr G £2,125 – representing what it said was the car’s pre-accident market value.

Mr G was extremely unhappy to discover that the insurer had disposed of his car, even though he had specifically asked it not to do this. He also complained that the amount he was offered did not accurately reflect the car’s value.

The insurer refused to comment on its sale of the car, and it would not reconsider its offer, so Mr G referred the complaint to us.

complaint upheld
Mr G pointed out that the car had benefited from the liquid petroleum gas (LPG) conversion he had carried out just over two years earlier, at a cost of £2,000. He was firmly of the view that the car could have been repaired, allowing him to retain the benefit of the LPG conversion. He said that the insurer had not only prevented him from attempting a repair, it had also failed to take the LPG conversion into account when it valued the car.

We agreed with Mr G that the insurer had not valued the car correctly. And the insurer did not dispute that Mr G had made it very clear, when he reported the accident, that he wished to have the car repaired.

The car had been regarded as a Category ‘C’ in the ‘Code of Practice for the disposal of motor vehicle Salvage’. This meant that although it was uneconomical for the insurer to repair the car, the car was repairable.

We said that the insurer had clearly acted incorrectly. Mr G was still the owner of the car at the time the insurer disposed of it. And he had asked the insurer to return the car to him, so that he could arrange a repair.

We told the insurer it should pay Mr G £4,125. This was £2,000 more than the amount it had offered him, and would enable him to buy a car with LPG conversion, to replace the vehicle the insurer had disposed of. We said the insurer should also pay Mr G £400 for the distress and inconvenience it had caused him.

motor vehicle insurance – dispute over insurer’s valuation – classic car insured on ‘agreed value’ basis

When Mr H bought a classic car, he took out a motor insurance policy on an ‘agreed value’ basis rather than on the more usual ‘market value’ basis.

Such policies are generally taken out only by owners of classic or particularly valuable cars, where the value is unlikely to depreciate substantially – if at all.

The value of the vehicle is agreed in advance and insurer is then obliged to pay that amount if the car is lost or damaged beyond reasonable repair. However, the insurer is not obliged to pay for the replacement cost of the vehicle.

Mr H agreed the value of his classic car under this policy was £2,500. Unfortunately, the car was badly damaged when Mr H was involved in an accident. The insurer took the view that it would cost more than £2,500 to remedy the damage, so it offered him £2,500, in settlement of the claim.

Mr H thought that this figure was far too low. He told the insurer that, bearing in mind the good condition of the car before the accident, it would cost between £4,000 and £5,000 to replace. He therefore wanted the insurer to pay that amount.

complaint not upheld
We noted that Mr H had renewed his annual policy twice – on the 'agreed value' basis – before the claim in question. The policy terms, which had been clearly stated in the policy documents, said that Mr H was entitled to receive the ‘agreed value’ of the car – not the cost of replacing it. So we told him we could not uphold his complaint.


These are the people who fix you up with a car to keep you on the road while your car is being fixed, which can take 6 months or more if some parts are not available.

Link to The Credit Hire Organisation

WARNING: The proliferation of aftercrash Credit Hire is costing insurers vast amounts of money and this is one of the main reasons for significant rises in Insurance Premiums. Nothing is for Nothing.

Link to FAQ about Credit Hire Written by the Credit Hire Organisation for the benefit of its members


21-8-2014: Latest Basic Hire Rates

GTA agreed maximum settlement rates (excluding vat) for all car hire claims on or after 01.06.08

Warning: If an 'accident management company' furnishes you withn a hire car while yours is being repaired, the following are the maximum rates a UK insurer will pay for that hire. You will persaonally be liable for any costs over these figures.

GroupsRate (£s)Sample Vehicles excl VAT


S128.02Vauxhall Agila (1.0) / Citroen C1 (1.0) / Peugeot 107 (1.0) / Nissan Micra (1.0) / Toyota Yaris (1.0), Fiat Sceicento (889cc), Microcar Virgo 1.0,
S231.77VW Polo (1.2) / Renault Clio (1.2) / Vauxhall Corsa (1.2) / Ford Fiesta (1.2), Smart ForFour (1.1), Smart Pulse Coupe 600cc,
Suzuki Wagon 1229cc,
S333.90Vauxhall Astra (1.4) / Ford Focus (1.4) / Peugeot 307 (1.4) / Toyota Corolla (1.4) / VW Polo (1.4) / Honda Civic (1.4), Smart ForFour (1.3), Citroen Berlingo Multispace X 1.4, Hyundai Getz D GRTD/GSI 1.5, Peugeot 207 1.4, Honda Jazz 1.5, Vauxhall Meriva Life 1.4, Vauxhall Corsa 1.4,
S436.33Peugeot 307 (1.6) / Renault Megane (1.6) / Vauxhall Astra (1.6) / Ford Focus (1.6), Smart ForFour (1.5), V W Beetle 1.4, Ford Street ka 1.6, Mini One 1.6, Vauxhall Meriva 1.6, Peugeot, 206 Allure Coupe 1587cc, Citroen C3 Pluriel Convertible 1360, Renault Modus 1.6, Citroen C4 Picasso VTR plus HDI 1560cc, VW Golf GT TSI 1.4,
S538.42Peugeot 407 (1.8) / Vauxhall Vectra (1.8) / Ford Mondeo (1.8) / Renault Laguna (1.8), V W Beetle 1.4 convertible, Ford Street ka 1.6 convertible, Mitsubishi Colt CZC cabriolet 1.5, , Vauxhall Tigra coupe cabriolet 1.8, Volkswagen Passat SE 20v Turbo1791 (petrol), Toyota Avensis 1.8, Volkswagon Golf SE 2 door Cabriolet 1595cc, Peugeot 206 1.6 sport convertible, Volkswagon Golf Hatch 5 door1.6 FSI,
S640.95Vauxhall Vectra (2.0) / Ford Mondeo (2.0) / Peugeot 407 (2.0) / Renault Laguna (2.0), MG XT 2.0 diesel, Rover 75 2.0, Honda Civic 2.2i Sport, Nissan Primera 2.2 turbo diesel, VW Golf (excl GTi) 2.0, VW Passant 2.0, Subaru Impreza Sportwagon 2.0, Volkswagen Passat 1.9 diesel, Chrysler Neon 2.0, Toyota Avensis 2.0, Volkswagen Golf 1.9 TDI SE (moved from S5 12.2.07), Honda Accord VTEC SE Exec Auto, Volkswagen Golf GT Tdi 1.9, Peugeot 206 2.0, VW Beetle 2.0, Vauxhall Astra VXR 2.0,
S757.44Vauxhall Signum (2.8) / Peugeot 607 (2.2) / Skoda Superb (2.5), Chrysler PT Cruiser 2.4 Touring Cabriolet 2.4, Vauxhall Astra Convertible Linea Rossa 2198, Renault Megan Coupe Cabriolet 1870/ Megane Cabrio 2.0, Honda Accord I-CDTI Sport 2.2, VW EOS FSI 1984cc, Volkswagen GT TDi Sport 170 2.0,


M1 51.75Citroen Picasso (1.8) / Ford Focus C-Max (1.6/1.8), Renault Scenic (1.6) / Vauxhall Zafira (1.8), Citroen Picasso 1.6, Mazda Premacy 1.8, Renault GR SCENIC EX-ION DCI106E4 1461cc, Nissan Qashqai Acenta 1.6,
M2 59.00Citroen Picasso (2.0) / Ford Focus C-Max (2.0) / Renault Scenic (1.9) / Vauxhall Zafira (2.0/2.2), Honda FR-V 2.0, VE Golf Plus S TDI 1.9, Vauxhall Zafira SRI 2.0,
M3 69.35Ford Galaxy (1.9) / Toyota Previa (2.0) / VW Sharan (1.8), VW Touran 2.0 TD 7 seats, Volkswagon Touran 7 seats 1.9tdi, KIA Sedona 2.9, Seat Alhambra Stylance TDI 130 1.9, Renault Espace 1998cc, Citroen C8 lx hdi 120a 2.0, Toyota Verso Estate 2.2,
M4 87.98Chrysler Voyager (2.8) / Mercedes-Benz Viano (2.0) / Mitsubishi Grandis (2.4) / Renault Grand Espace (2.0), Ford Galaxy 2.3, Toyota Previa 2.4,
M5 131.96Mercedes-Benz Viano (2.2) / Renault Grand Espace (3.0)
M6167.15Mercedes-Benz Viano (3.5), Chrysler Grand Voyager 3.3,

4 x 4

F186.94Land Rover Freelander (1.8) / Mitsubishi Outlander (2.4) / Toyota RAV4 (2.0) / Nissan Terrano (2.7), Kia Sportage 2.0, Mitsubishi Shogun Pinin 1.8, Suzuki Grand Vitara 1.6, Suzuki Grand Hard Top 2.0,
F293.15Land Rover Freelander (2.0)/Td4 / Kia Sorrento (2.5), , Mitsubishi Shogun Sport 2.5, Honda CRV CDTI SE 2.2, Subaru Forester 2.0, Nissan x-trail 4x2 2.2, Honda CRV Vtec sport 2.0, Hyundai Santa Fe gsi crtd 2.2, Hyundai Santa Fe CRTD CDX Estate 2.2,
F3100.40BMW X3 (2.0) / Land Rover Discovery (2.5), , Mitsubishi Warrior L200 2.5, Nissan x-trail SVE Auto 2.4, Honda CRV VTEC Exec 2.0,
F4123.17Mitsubishi Shogun (3.5), Jeep Grand Cherokee (3.0), Lexus RX300 (3.0), BMW X3 (2.5), VW Touareg (2.5), Volkswagen Touareg 2.5 Tdi SE, Land Rover Discovery 2.7SE, Shogun Warrior DI-D 3200,
F5165.60Mercedes-Benz ML270 (2.7) / BMW X5 (3.0) / Land Rover Discovery (4.4)/ 2.7TD V6 SE/ TD V6 HSE, Stationwagon 5d auto, VW Touareg 3.0, Toyota Land Cruiser 3.0 LC4, BMW X3 3.0i/3.0d, Volvo XC70 2.5T/D5, Jeep Grand Cherokee 4.7, Landrover Discovery 2.7TD V6 SE, X6 X Drive 5DR Step Auto 3.0,
F6186.30Mercedes-Benz ML350 (3.5), Porsche Cayenne (3.2), Lexus RX400, Volvo XC90 2.9SE, Audi Q7 Tdi Quattro 3.0 (7 seats), Volvo XC90 SE D5 2.4,
F7217.35Porsche Cayenne S (4.5) / BMW X5 V8 (4.4) / Mercedes-Benz ML500 (5.0) / Range Rover (3.0), Audi Q7 Fsi Quattro 4.2 (7 seats),
F8232.88Range Rover V8 (4.4) / Range Rover Sport Supercharged (4.2), BMW X5 4.8 Sport 5 door auto, VW Touareg 5.0, BMW X5 (4.8is), Land Rover / Range Rover Sport Diesel Estate TDV8 HSE 5 door Auto,
F9284.63Porsche Cayenne Turbo (4.5) / Range Rover Vogue Supercharged (4.2)


P172.45Mercedes-Benz A150 (1.5) / Audi A3 (1.6) / BMW 116 (1.6), Alfa Romeo 147 Lusso 1.6, Mercedes A140 1.4,
P280.73BMW 118 (1.8) / Audi A3 (1.8) / Mercedes-Benz A170 (1.7), Volvo S40 1.6SE, Mercedes A160, Alfa Romeo 147 2.0, Volvo C30 SE 1596,
P385.91BMW 120 (2.0), Mercedes-Benz B180 (1.8) / Audi A4 (1.8) / Mercedes-Benz C180 (1.8), Saab 9-3 1.8t, Audi A3 1.9SE, Volvo S40/V50 1.8SE, BMW 316 (1.8), Saab 9-3 2.2t, Saab 9-3 2.0, Audi A3 Sports 1.6, Alfa Romeo 156 2.4l,
P4104.54BMW 320 (2.0) / Audi A4 (2.0) / Mercedes-Benz C200 (2.0), Jaguar X type 2.2, BMW 318 (2.0), Jaguar X type, Saab 9-5 saloon (2.0), Volvo S40 (2.5), Audi Avant 2.0 SE (Rate should be uplifted from P4 rate by £5 as the Avant is the estate version of the A4 saloon), Saab 9-3 2.0T, Saab 9-3 Convertible 1.8t, Saab 9-3 Convertible 2.0, Saab 9-3 vector 150BHP 2.0, Audi A3 CABRIOLET 2.0 TDI,
P5130.41BMW 325 (2.5) / BMW 520 (2.0) / Audi A4 (2.5) / Audi A6 (2.0) / Mercedes-Benz C230 (2.3) / E200 (2.0)/ C280 3.0, Jaguar X-type 2.5 petrol, Volvo S60/V50 2.4/2.5, Lexus IS 220/IS 250, Jaguar S type, Volvo V70 (2.0t), BMW 130 (3.0) , Mercedes C270, Honda Legend 3474cc, Audi A4 diesel Avant 2.5, Mercedes C220 CDI/ sport edition, Audi A6 2 litre SE TDI, Audi A6 2 litre SE TDI,
P6155.25BMW 330 (3.0) BMW 525 (2.5) Audi A4 (3.2) Audi A6 (2.5) /Mercedes-Benz C320 (3.2) Audi All Road (2.5) Mercedes-Benz E280 (2.8), Mercedes E220/E240/C350, Volvo V70 2.4, Jaguar S type 2.7td, Alfa Romeo 159 3.2 v6, Audi Quattro A4 TDI 3.0, Volvo S80 SE LUX 140 2.4 Executive, Mercedes E280 CDI 3.0, Chrysler 300 crd 2987cc,
P7181.13BMW 530 (3.0 ) / Audi A6 (3.2 - 3.5) / Mercedes E350 (3.5) / BMW 535 (3.5), Audi A4 Cabriolet 1.8t, Lexus GS300 SE 3.0, Mercedes E320, Caddilac CTS 3.6,
P8207.00BMW 540 (4.0) BMW 550 (5.0) BMW 730 (3.0)/ Audi A6 (4.2), Audi A8 (3.0), Mercedes CLS320/R320/E500 (5.0)/S280 (2.8), Jaguar XJ6 2.7/3.0, Jaguar S type (4.2), Mercedes CLS350, Lexus GS 450H 3456cc,
P9238.05Mercedes-Benz S350 (3.5), Audi A8 (3.7 - 4.2), BMW 735/ 740 (3.5 - 4.0) / Mercedes-Benz E55 AMG, Audi RS6 Avant, Audi RS saloon 4.2, Lexus LS430 4.3, BMW M5 (5.0), Lexus LS400, Mercedes-Benz S Class S320 CDi 4dr Auto,
P10292.91BMW 750 (5.0) / Mercedes-Benz S500 (5.0) / Audi A8 (6.0), Maserati Quattroporte 4.2,
P11411.41Mercedes-Benz S600 (6.0) / Bentley Continental (6.0),
P12615.83Bentley Arnage (6.0), Rolls Royce Phantom (6.75), Bentley Flying Spur,


SP169.74MINI Cooper (1.6),
SP281.51Renault Clio RS182 (2.0) / MINI Cooper S (1.6) / MINI Cooper Cabriolet (1.6), Ford Focus ST 2521cc, Mazda MX5 1.8/2.0 (moved from SP1 5.3.07), Hyundai 1.6 Coupe,
SP391.08Toyota MR2 (1.8)/ Celia 1.8, Mazda RX8 (192ps), Audi A3 Sportsback 1.6, Hyundai coupe 2LSE,
SP4111.78Audi TT Coupe 1.8T (180), Golf GTI (2.0), Audi A3 Sportsback 2.0, Audi A3 Diesel Sportback 2.0 TDi Sport 5dr, Audi A3 S3 1.8ltr, Honda Civic type R 2.0,
SP5122.13Audi TT Roadster 1.8T (180) / BMW Z4 (2.0) / Lotus Elise (1.8) / Audi TT Coupe 1.8T Quattro (225), VW Golf V6 R32 4 Motion (3189cc), BMW 318 Ci Coupe 2.0, Audi TTC-2 2.0T FSI, BMW 124D coupe M sport, Mercedes CLC 220 sport,
SP6170.78BMW Z4 (2.5) / Mercedes-Benz SLK200 (1.8) / Mercedes-Benz CLK200 Coupe (2.0) / Mitsubishi Evo III (2.0) / Audi TT Coupe 3.2T Quattro (3.2) / Audi TT Roadster 1.8T Quattro (225), BMW 320Ci Coupe 2.0/2.2/2.5, Volvo C70 2.0t, Chrysler Crossfire 3.2, Audit S3 Quattro 1.8T, Honda S2000 (2.0),
SP7191.48BMW Z4 (3.0) / Audi TT Roadster 3.2T Quattro (3.2) / Mercedes-Benz CLK200 Cabriolet (2.0) / Porsche Boxster (2.7) / Mercedes-Benz CLK280 Coupe (2.8), BMW 330 Ci Sport Coupe 3.3, Mercedes CLK240 2597cc, Mercedes CLK270, Nissan Sports 350z 3.5, Afla Romeo GT 3.2 V6, Alfa Romeo Brera 3.2 V6, Audi A5 TDI Quattro 2967, Audi A4 Cabriolet 2.0,
SP8212.18Mercedes-Benz SLK350 (3.5) / Mercedes-Benz CLK350 Coupe (3.5) / Mercedes-Benz CLK280 Cabriolet (2.8)
SP9232.88TVR Tuscan Targa (4.0) / Porsche Boxster S (3.2) / BMW Z4M (3.2) / Mercedes-Benz CLK350 Cabriolet (3.5) / BMW M3 (3.2) / Mercedes-Benz CLK500 Coupe (5.0) / BMW 630 (3.0) / Mercedes-Benz CLK500 Cabriolet (5.0) / Mercedes-Benz SLK 55 AMG Jaguar XK8, Porsche Cayman S, Audi S4 Cabriolet Quattro 4163 cc,
SP10266.51BMW 650 (5.0) / Audi S6 Quattro (4.2) / Lexus SC430 (4.3) / Maserati Coupe (4.2) / Porsche 911 Carrera (3.6) / Mercedes-Benz SL350 (3.5) / Maserati Spyder (4.2) / BMW M5 (5.0), Jaguar XKR (4.2)
SP11320.85Porsche 911 Carrera S (3.8)/911 Cab/ 911S Cab, Mercedes-Benz SL500 (5.0) / Aston Martin Vantage (6.0) / BMW M6 (5.0), Mercedes-Benz CL500 5.0, Mercedes-Benz CLS 55 AMG,
SP12421.76Mercedes-Benz SL55 AMG / Mercedes-Benz SL600 (6.0) / Porsche 911 Turbo (3.8), Aston Martin DB9 (6.0), Mercedes-Benz CL600 6.0, Aston Martin DB7 coupe, Porsche 911 Turbo Tiptronic S 3600,
SP13615.83Bentley Continental GT (6.0), Ferrari F430/360, Lamborghini Gallardo, Ferrari 575, Bentley GTC Cab, Aston Martin DB9 Volante,

1.All daily settlement rates are excluding vat.
2.An additional £5 a day can be added for automatics (where this matches the customer’s vehicle) unless the model listed is an automatic.
3.Vehicles with semi-shift gearboxes/ direct shift gearboxes where you can change gears either manually (eg by using paddles behind the steering wheel) or automatically, qualify for the £5 per day uplift for automatics.
4.An additional £5 a day can be added for estate vehicles (where this matches the customer’s vehicle) unless the model listed is already an estate.
5.An additional £5 a day can be added for necessary extras such as tow bars and baby seats which reflect the customer’s damaged vehicle type/fitments.
6.An additional £12 per day add-on to the agreed daily settlement rate for dual control vehicles (£7 per day add-on if insurance cover not provided).
7.For customers with a convertible, unless the model listed is already a convertible, convertibles are treated by placing them into the group higher than the hard top version e.g. BMW M3 is in SP9. The convertible equivalent would be in SP10.
8.Disabled driver vehicles - reasonable direct costs van be recovered plus an administration charge of £10 is acceptable in most instances. For any special adaptations then the CHO should discuss these with the insurer, preferably at the time the hire commences.
9.No charge can be included for additional drivers unless they are a non-standard driver. An additional insurance premium may only be charged where either the hirer/driver or additional driver is considered to be a non-standard risk and would therefore normally attract a loading of insurance premium by insurers. Examples of a non-standard risk driver would be under 25 years of age or over 70 years of age, lack of driving experience (held a full driving licence for less than 12 months), occupation (e.g. Professional sportsperson, members of the Acting or Entertainment professions, Journalist, Publicans etc), convictions resulting in an unspent ban or greater than 7 points outstanding on their licence.

Updated for vehicle examples 22 October 2008

VIC (Vehicle Identity Check). Prior to re-taxing a Cat C Car

Details at www.vosa.gov.uk

But here are most of them:-

One aspect of vehicle crime is car ‘ringing’. This is a practice which involves passing off stolen cars as repaired, accident damaged cars.

The Vehicle Identity Check (VIC) scheme has been introduced as a deterrent to ringing. Since 7 April 2003, insurers must notify Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency (DVLA) of all cars ‘written off’ within salvage categories A, B or C. This notification will set a ‘VIC marker’ against the DVLA vehicle record. Whilst a VIC marker remains set, DVLA will not issue a registration certificate V5C, or vehicle licence reminder V11. The VIC marker will only be removed, when the car passes a VIC.

The VIC, is carried out by the Vehicle and Operator Services Agency (VOSA). It is designed to confirm the car’s identity and helps ensure that the genuine car is returned to the road. It takes around 20 minutes to complete and involves comparing the details on the DVLA vehicle record, against the car presented. The VIC is a check of identity, it does not formally assess the quality of the repair or confirm roadworthiness. If you have any concerns regarding these aspects, you should seek the opinion of an independent expert.

Once a car has passed a VIC the V5C issued will be annotated to show "substantially repaired and or accident damaged; identity checked on dd/mm/ccyy".
Confirming if a VIC marker is set

* to check if a VIC marker is set contact VOSA on 08706 060 440
* VOSA can only conduct a VIC on a car which has a VIC marker set against the DVLA vehicle record

Applying for a VIC

* a VIC is available at 56 VOSA locations
* complete a VIC1 application form and submit it to VOSA, together with the correct fee
* full instructions and the ‘Terms and Conditions’ are provided on the VIC1 application form
* you will be notified of an appointment once VOSA has processed your application

* VOSA Vehicle Identity Check test stations (VIC)
* Apply for a VIC test (VIC1 form) (opens new window)

Test Type Normal Out of Hours
Vehicle Identity Check £36.00 £43.50
Appeals £36.00 £43.50
Taking the car for a VIC

* repairs must be conducted and the car must be roadworthy and capable of being driven under its own power
* if over 3 years old, the car must be covered by a valid MOT if it is to be driven to the VIC
* the person driving the car must be insured to do so
* the car must display front and rear number plates if it is to be driven to the VIC. For assistance in obtaining number plates, contact VOSA on 08706 060 440
* a car can be driven directly to and from a pre-arranged VIC without road tax

Vehicle history checking services:






Ask Honest John

Value my car