insurance conundrum

[Malc]

thinking now about this phenomenon of the insurer just not allowing you to buy the likely write-off nor indeed leaving insurance in place while you're mobile with a slightly, but roadworthy , damaged car but they decide you shouldn't be using it.....  as in their book it would be a write-off

for many of us that would mean even a very slight knock

so how about the thought to just insure third part fire and theft ?  seems to me we would only be losing the glass cover maybe and personal cover ( but we might have that with other insurances anyway i guess )  and the excess we have with fully comp cover would leave us with almost a zero payout anyway and no " wreck " to repair at possibly minimal cost

just a thought

yours too please guys

 

Malc

[Chasdad]

Ive found most insurers either wont or dont want to insure third party. Sometimes even dearer for it.  I suppose there thinking it your wanting to do a scam youll be more likely to take the cheapest quote as you can

[ambermarine]

Hi Malcolm

I tried this last time I changed insurers they insisted that the policy was more expensive and did'nt cover for such as legal cover and other miscellany their reluctance bordered on refusal to take me on if I pursued that route.

Like John I think they are more about covering their *rse than yours.

[keithls430]

In my experience rip off insurance companies wont allow third party fire and witchcraft ,or the cost is on par with fully comp . It certainly pays to shop around and adjust excess or really consider what the company is offering . i had a multi car policy with Admiral who insisted on auto renewing the policy  even after i told them not to , i moved to LV and halved the price

[Chasdad]

Its bad enough when your fully comp. I had someone hit me last april. Ive got a witness and photos of the car with a time date and location on the pic and still the 3rd parties insurer is refusing to pay out. My companies been bloody useless too

[inflames]

I see your point, i had my previous written off after a small bump that wasn't my fault and was left out of pocket!   But for me i will always go fully comp, as the legal protection does come in handy if you a not at fault in serous incident like i was many years ago.  Plus the last time i checked the difference its not a huge saving going third party, fire and theft.  I renewed my policy this weekend and the price difference was only £20 between FC and TPFT. 

[Malc]

I think my concern is from a recent post here somewhere, where the guy was left stranded many miles working from home, had a slight knock, claimed on his fully comp insce and they wrote the car off ( £2500, but only slight,damage on a Mk4 DHP ) and left him carlesss with a clearly safe and driveable car other than they have taken it off the road coz they have written it off !....  and his payout could be say £300 after his excess 

working away from home with a relatively sound Mk4 DHP that sits staring him in the face knowing it's not now insured, not his to insure, otherwise driveable and repairable but not from his insce company.

had he been 3rd party etc then at least he would have the car to repair at minimal cost, certainly not £2500 .............  more like £500 maybe AND he would keep his Mk4 DHP and his decision whether to claim on anyone's insurance at all.

Seems a good case to me to think twice about fully comp insce on " old " cars where you might want to keep the " wreck " and put it back on the road ..............  I know my Mk3 is worth more to me than the probable zero payout i would get from insures after the @£350 excess !

Malc

[harrylime]

Definitely no savings on third party cover as there used to be . My car is insured on a classic car policy, and being "specialist" classic car insurers, perhaps a settlement that is nearer the true value of the car might be achieved (other than agreed value policies, in which case it should be a given), I also wonder whether they would be more flexible, and more open to an owner buying the car back. Limited mileage classic policies make sense for many owners, but as I understand it you must have another car on a a "mainstream" policy

[harrylime]

I intended to add, is it possible to pay for gap insurance, just as people do with new cars, to cover any shortfall? 

[Britprius]

20 minutes ago, harrylime said:

I intended to add, is it possible to pay for gap insurance, just as people do with new cars, to cover any shortfall? 

I have just finished looking at the Adrian Flux insurance site, and they do such insurance that you question. Up to £10,000 extra payout on top of the payout from your normal insurers.

John.

[Britprius]

I think you can if you wish tell your insurance company that you do not wish to claim for the damage to your car. In this instance you also do not have to pay out any excess.

I did this about 8 years ago when my wife scraped a car door on the car next to where she was parking. The insurance paid out for the third party damage, but I told them I did not want my car repaired because the damage was so small. "scratched paint on the corner of the front bumper". I did not have to pay the excess.

John

[Tinonline]

The extra legal cover is worth having under the fully comp. If you are injured or have to take time off work or worse.

If another vehicle is not involved or other circumstances the step is to consider the cost, obligations first. You don't have to make a claim against your policy. 

You have to notify them according to the t's and c's and even the other party may have the claim. I've had that. It was fine.

If inspected and repaired how that look?

 

[Britprius]

8 hours ago, Chasdad said:

Its bad enough when your fully comp. I had someone hit me last april. Ive got a witness and photos of the car with a time date and location on the pic and still the 3rd parties insurer is refusing to pay out. My companies been bloody useless too

I had my car damaged while outside my local shop. My car being parked in a purpose built parking bay for the shop. The other driver "delivering to the shop admitted liability in writing" the damage to my car was fixed within 14 days with a loan car "a tin can on wheels even though I paid extra on my insurance for an equivalent car".    

 It then took over three years to get back my insurance excess from Churchill, and then only after to many phone calls to count. It finally was revealed that the claim had all been settled, and closed by Churchill two and a half years earlier, but they did not tell me at that stage or return my excess.

John. 

[Chasdad]

Funny enough the 3rd partys insurer is churchill. Been lying through their teeth the whole time. Ive now got a personal injury solicitor and a solicitor for the claim and neither are in communication with each other 

[Haylands]

If the vehicle is over 10 years old why not go for a classics policy, they give agreed value and the option to buy the salvage and some even pay for repairs with second hand parts so you get to keep your pride and joy...

Try Adrian Flux or other specialist Ins companies...

[Malc]

the problem I would have on Classic insce is that i do maybe 12,000 miles a year and i know from my 1932 Triumph classic insce mileage is very very limited.

I also have fully comprehensive the 56 plate Honda Legend and the 1994 Mazda 323f

I wouldn't want to irretrievably lose my Mk3 Ls400 for the sake of a very slight knock that would write it off .........  £600/1000 buys you nothing in the way of repairs on an insurance claim  .  it hardly pays the storage ! ...................  ah, maybe that's the rub with insurers, the storage costs, so they just write it off immediately...... those costs are totally disproportionate to the car's damage 

Malc

[Mark G]

In the event of "a slight knock" maybe look at paying for the repair yourself if you are only looking at a few hundred pounds and save yourself a load of grief, plus the car wont be recorded as having a claim against it.

[Chasdad]

My accident involved someone just touching my bumper and a tiny mark on the rear quarter. The car was worth 1800. I asked for a new bumper think what with hire car costs for the week theyd write it off. 

Couldnt believe when they agreed the repair.  Garage took 3 attempts to get it right and 10 months later the claim is still on going and my insurance has gone up on my car and van . 

[ambermarine]

There are other factors to consider with these insurers that insist you take it to their designated repairer.

Many years ago I back ended a fiat uno and it was just a 5mph touch.

The fiat driver would not let me pay for the damage and insisted on a insurance claim I found out later the motive for that was whiplash injury which they lost.

I decided because it was an insurance claim I would get the Mark 1 repaired also on the insurance.

The damage was a bruise on the bumper and a misalinement of the whole bumper which required its removal.The repair outfit I was sent to had cars coming out of its doors waiting for repairs and I realized after asking the camera weilding techy what he intended to do that this was not going to be an happy ending.

He said a quick respray was all Norwich union would allow and that was it ,a £100 touch up.

After a very hot debate with their claims manager who's" We are not putting your 8 year old banger in mint condition" cost her job when it was later played to a senior director and he had listened to the tape and seen the photo's of my Mint Mark1.

The car was eventually put right at my insistence at a Lexus body shop in Swinton  Manchester and cost £2000 back in 98 co-incidently the year  my present Mark 4 was born.

The point of this post is to make it crystal that even when you get the car to the repairer you are not out of the woods.

[RgrWynne]

I am told by a classic car owner friend that after an accident it is very important you retain custody of the vehicle, which at all times remains your property. Once the insurance company authorise removal and storage, you have a fight on your hands and a weakened negotiating position, towage charges and storage, all probably considerably inflated by said insurance company. I know this sounds probably unrealistic in some circumstances, but if you can I am told makes good sense.

cheers, Roger

[Rusty Crobar]

Hi malc, came across your post while browsing. I work in the industry so thought you'd like my thoughts.

After the insurer declares a write off it will either take ownership of the car (and dispose of it via a salvage company), cancel the policy and pay you the full value minus deductions OR it will let you keep the car if safe to do so, and take the salvage value off the settlement amount. The car will be registered as a write off but you'll be able to continue to drive it on the road if you buy a new insurance policy, although you might need to prove you've repaired it.

If your car is worth less than your excess and other deductions then it would be a 'non viable' claim so you wouldn't be able to claim and it wouldn't be recorded as a write off. 

For small repairs on low value cars it's worth just paying for it yourself. 

I would always go comprehensive for the extra benefits, even if you have to put a higher excess on to get the price of tpf&t. I would also recommend gap cover especially for rare cars that are usually worth more than the book prices suggest.

Hope this helps but let me know if you have any questions 😊

[Tinonline]

Yes this is where I am on this.

however...can you explain/direct us on gap cover: where and how can we find this and what would we expect to pay?

[sorcerer]

One thing to bear in mind is that if you're a member of a union, you probably have legal cover by means of your membership so you don't need to pay for it in with your car insurance. I was a telephone engineer on BT until a back injury at work forced me into medical retirement, but I stayed in the Communication Workers Union as a retired member and have full access to the union's solicitors and full legal cover for any situation that would require it.

Ok, it may only be a small saving when compared with the extortionate cost of car insurance, but I refuse to give the blood-sucking parasites even just one penny more than I absolutely have to!

[sorcerer]

42 minutes ago, Tinonline said:

Yes this is where I am on this.

however...can you explain/direct us on gap cover: where and how can we find this and what would we expect to pay?

Google is your friend Simon

Also, according to this explanation, it would seem that GAP insurance is only available for cars up to seven years old:

One advantage of buying car GAP insurance is that you can usually pay your premiums in monthly instalments, spreading the cost over up to 36 months, although this varies depending on the individual provider.

At the end of the 36 months, you can take out cover once again, provided your car does not exceed the seven-year age limit.

 

[Rusty Crobar]

Like most insurance products there are variations in the acceptance criteria for gap so shop around, a few of the main comparison websites will allow you to check prices from multiple companies.

I recently bought gap for my 8 year old 100k mile ISF so there are companies who cover older cars. I paid about £200 for a 5 year policy from the pistonheads website.

@sorcerer it's always good to consider other cover you might already have but check that your union cover can be used in a total loss situation. Motor legal protection is very specific cover in that it just helps recover uninsured losses from the at fault driver such as your excess and loss of earnings. Some general legal cover won't do this for you as there is no money to be made from it! It also helps you to claim personal injury compensation, if you don't have motor legal protection then a personal injury lawyer will take up to 25% of your compensation as their fee.