Unfortunately, was involved in an accident and my vehicle has been
deemed a total loss by the insurance company.

I've only had the car two months and the insurance company have
offered a fair bit less in settlement than I paid for it.

What happens now? Can I insist that the insurance company improve
their offer? Or is it a case of like it or lump it?

paulfoel wrote:
> Unfortunately, was involved in an accident and my vehicle has been
> deemed a total loss by the insurance company.
>
> I've only had the car two months and the insurance company have
> offered a fair bit less in settlement than I paid for it.
>
> What happens now? Can I insist that the insurance company improve
> their offer? Or is it a case of like it or lump it?

show them present adverts for a similar condition vehicle, if you can show 
that you need more to put yourself in the same position then they should pay 
it.  Usually the first offer is a try it on low amount, many people take it, 
ins. co. is better off.

On Jul 14, 2:25 pm, "Mrcheerful"  wrote:
> paulfoel wrote:
> > Unfortunately, was involved in an accident and my vehicle has been
> > deemed a total loss by the insurance company.
>
> > I've only had the car two months and the insurance company have
> > offered a fair bit less in settlement than I paid for it.
>
> > What happens now? Can I insist that the insurance company improve
> > their offer? Or is it a case of like it or lump it?
>
> show them present adverts for a similar condition vehicle, if you can show
> that you need more to put yourself in the same position then they should pay
> it.  Usually the first offer is a try it on low amount, many people take it,
> ins. co. is better off.

Go to the daily telegraph site.
Click on "Motoring" tab
Click on Honest John link
click on latest link at the top for 11th or 12th July.
About one third of the way down, read one guys way of dealing with
isurance companies
after a van drove into the side of his wifes car.

"goodolpete"  wrote in message 
news:06d8f893-a667-4c15-8214-58bbe8955b22@y21g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
On Jul 14, 2:25 pm, "Mrcheerful"  wrote:
> paulfoel wrote:
> > Unfortunately, was involved in an accident and my vehicle has been
> > deemed a total loss by the insurance company.
>
> > I've only had the car two months and the insurance company have
> > offered a fair bit less in settlement than I paid for it.
>
> > What happens now? Can I insist that the insurance company improve
> > their offer? Or is it a case of like it or lump it?
>
> show them present adverts for a similar condition vehicle, if you can show
> that you need more to put yourself in the same position then they should 
> pay
> it. Usually the first offer is a try it on low amount, many people take 
> it,
> ins. co. is better off.

Go to the daily telegraph site.
Click on "Motoring" tab
Click on Honest John link
click on latest link at the top for 11th or 12th July.
About one third of the way down, read one guys way of dealing with
isurance companies
after a van drove into the side of his wifes car.

Hmmm. That's quite a fascinating tale, but I admit it confuses me a bit. It 
looks as though the insurer eventually paid just because he was a pain in 
the arse and it was easier, rather than that he had a genuine actionable 
grievance. After all, your insurer agrees to indemnify you in respect of 
such matters, and unless I'm looking at it wrong then surely all the van 
company had to do was sit back and say that his insurer is in control of it, 
so you'll have to deal with them? Like all insurers, they just say that the 
value of your vehicle is X, and thats all you're gonna get.

On Jul 14, 2:25 pm, "Mrcheerful"  wrote:
> paulfoel wrote:
> > Unfortunately, was involved in an accident and my vehicle has been
> > deemed a total loss by the insurance company.
>
> > I've only had the car two months and the insurance company have
> > offered a fair bit less in settlement than I paid for it.
>
> > What happens now? Can I insist that the insurance company improve
> > their offer? Or is it a case of like it or lump it?
>
> show them present adverts for a similar condition vehicle, if you can show
> that you need more to put yourself in the same position then they should pay
> it.  Usually the first offer is a try it on low amount, many people take it,
> ins. co. is better off.

to be honest, their first offer isnt that bad just not great....

nully wrote:
> all the van 
> company had to do was sit back and say that his insurer is in control of it, 
> so you'll have to deal with them? 

Why? The driver is the one to sue. If he passes the bill onto his 
insurers that is between him and them.

"nully" <nully@nully.nully> wrote in message 
news:voKek.136355$AH5.131613@newsfe09.ams2...
>
> "goodolpete"  wrote in message 
> news:06d8f893-a667-4c15-8214-58bbe8955b22@y21g2000hsf.googlegroups.com...
> On Jul 14, 2:25 pm, "Mrcheerful"  wrote:
>> paulfoel wrote:
>> > Unfortunately, was involved in an accident and my vehicle has been
>> > deemed a total loss by the insurance company.
>>
>> > I've only had the car two months and the insurance company have
>> > offered a fair bit less in settlement than I paid for it.
>>
>> > What happens now? Can I insist that the insurance company improve
>> > their offer? Or is it a case of like it or lump it?
>>
>> show them present adverts for a similar condition vehicle, if you can 
>> show
>> that you need more to put yourself in the same position then they should 
>> pay
>> it. Usually the first offer is a try it on low amount, many people take 
>> it,
>> ins. co. is better off.
>
> Go to the daily telegraph site.
> Click on "Motoring" tab
> Click on Honest John link
> click on latest link at the top for 11th or 12th July.
> About one third of the way down, read one guys way of dealing with
> isurance companies
> after a van drove into the side of his wifes car.
>
> Hmmm. That's quite a fascinating tale, but I admit it confuses me a bit. 
> It looks as though the insurer eventually paid just because he was a pain 
> in the arse and it was easier, rather than that he had a genuine 
> actionable grievance. After all, your insurer agrees to indemnify you in 
> respect of such matters, and unless I'm looking at it wrong then surely 
> all the van company had to do was sit back and say that his insurer is in 
> control of it, so you'll have to deal with them? Like all insurers, they 
> just say that the value of your vehicle is X, and thats all you're gonna 
> get.

The other driver is the one who is liable, not the insurer. The insurer has 
a contract with the other driver which says it will accept the costs, but 
you are not involved in that contract. Where the other driver's insurer 
fails to make a reasonable offer which comes reasonably close to restoring 
the status quo ante it is your right to sue the DRIVER (not the insurer). 
The insurer will then provide legal representatives to support the driver in 
court, and these representatives will have to explain why they believe that 
either (a) the car has depreciated by 80% in the forty seconds since you 
bought it, or (b) what it was about the car that makes them feel you paid 
over the odds for it, despite the fact that every car of similar description 
in this thursday's Auto Trader is being offered for at least 20% more than 
you paid for yours. Where they are unable to prove either they will lose, 
which they daren't risk doing, so they will usually settle before it gets to 
that point.

But they will always start with an offer that is at least 25% lower than it 
should be (and often 50%) essentially because if they weren't crooks they 
wouldn't have gone into the motor insurance business in the first place.

PDR

Mrcheerful wrote:
> paulfoel wrote:
>> Unfortunately, was involved in an accident and my vehicle has been
>> deemed a total loss by the insurance company.
>>
>> I've only had the car two months and the insurance company have
>> offered a fair bit less in settlement than I paid for it.
>>
>> What happens now? Can I insist that the insurance company improve
>> their offer? Or is it a case of like it or lump it?
>
> show them present adverts for a similar condition vehicle, if you can
> show that you need more to put yourself in the same position then
> they should pay it.  Usually the first offer is a try it on low
> amount, many people take it, ins. co. is better off.

If you bought it from a dealer, go to the dealer, and find as close as you 
can to the vehicle you got, and insist that is what they pay (minus two 
months wear and tear). They are supposed to put you back in the position 
before the accident.

Gaz

On Mon, 14 Jul 2008 18:56:13 +0100, "Gaz"  wrote:

>Mrcheerful wrote:
>> paulfoel wrote:
>>> Unfortunately, was involved in an accident and my vehicle has been
>>> deemed a total loss by the insurance company.
>>>
>>> I've only had the car two months and the insurance company have
>>> offered a fair bit less in settlement than I paid for it.
>>>
>>> What happens now? Can I insist that the insurance company improve
>>> their offer? Or is it a case of like it or lump it?
>>
>> show them present adverts for a similar condition vehicle, if you can
>> show that you need more to put yourself in the same position then
>> they should pay it.  Usually the first offer is a try it on low
>> amount, many people take it, ins. co. is better off.
>
>If you bought it from a dealer, go to the dealer, and find as close as you 
>can to the vehicle you got, and insist that is what they pay (minus two 
>months wear and tear). They are supposed to put you back in the position 
>before the accident.

Depreciation on a new car is very large.  Therefore after 2 months it
is likely that the offer of "a fair bit less" that what he paid for it
is correct.

--
Alan "Ferrit" Ferris

 ()'.'.'()
 ( (T) )
 ( ) . ( )
 (")_(")

In message , Alan Ferris 
 writes
>On Mon, 14 Jul 2008 18:56:13 +0100, "Gaz"  wrote:
>
>>If you bought it from a dealer, go to the dealer, and find as close as you
>>can to the vehicle you got, and insist that is what they pay (minus two
>>months wear and tear). They are supposed to put you back in the position
>>before the accident.
>
>Depreciation on a new car is very large.  Therefore after 2 months it
>is likely that the offer of "a fair bit less" that what he paid for it
>is correct.
>
Except that the car is not being sold it is being replaced on a like for 
like basis so the payment should be sufficient to purchase a similar 
vehicle of similar age.
-- 
Paul Harris

On Jul 14, 6:56 pm, "Gaz"  wrote:
> Mrcheerful wrote:
> > paulfoel wrote:
> >> Unfortunately, was involved in an accident and my vehicle has been
> >> deemed a total loss by the insurance company.
>
> >> I've only had the car two months and the insurance company have
> >> offered a fair bit less in settlement than I paid for it.
>
> >> What happens now? Can I insist that the insurance company improve
> >> their offer? Or is it a case of like it or lump it?
>
> > show them present adverts for a similar condition vehicle, if you can
> > show that you need more to put yourself in the same position then
> > they should pay it.  Usually the first offer is a try it on low
> > amount, many people take it, ins. co. is better off.
>
> If you bought it from a dealer, go to the dealer, and find as close as you
> can to the vehicle you got, and insist that is what they pay (minus two
> months wear and tear). They are supposed to put you back in the position
> before the accident.
>
> Gaz

I still have the receipt showing the purchase price of the vehicle
from 2 months ago.

Its doubtful that I'd find the same vehicle to compare with at the
dealer though. It was a used Fiat Punto bought from a Ford dealer.

What sort of figure would you put on 2 months wear and tear?

On Jul 15, 8:04 am, Alan Ferris  wrote:
> On Mon, 14 Jul 2008 18:56:13 퍝, "Gaz"  wrote:
> >Mrcheerful wrote:
> >> paulfoel wrote:
> >>> Unfortunately, was involved in an accident and my vehicle has been
> >>> deemed a total loss by the insurance company.
>
> >>> I've only had the car two months and the insurance company have
> >>> offered a fair bit less in settlement than I paid for it.
>
> >>> What happens now? Can I insist that the insurance company improve
> >>> their offer? Or is it a case of like it or lump it?
>
> >> show them present adverts for a similar condition vehicle, if you can
> >> show that you need more to put yourself in the same position then
> >> they should pay it.  Usually the first offer is a try it on low
> >> amount, many people take it, ins. co. is better off.
>
> >If you bought it from a dealer, go to the dealer, and find as close as you
> >can to the vehicle you got, and insist that is what they pay (minus two
> >months wear and tear). They are supposed to put you back in the position
> >before the accident.
>
> Depreciation on a new car is very large.  Therefore after 2 months it
> is likely that the offer of "a fair bit less" that what he paid for it
> is correct.
>
> --
> Alan "Ferrit" Ferris
>
>  ()'.'.'()
>  ( (T) )
>  ( ) . ( )
>  (")_(")- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

Used car. In fact, its 7 years old.

"paulfoel"  wrote in message 
news:2c1ef9db-e323-423c-8d83-6a23204f774b@m44g2000hsc.googlegroups.com...
> Unfortunately, was involved in an accident and my vehicle has been
> deemed a total loss by the insurance company.
>
> I've only had the car two months and the insurance company have
> offered a fair bit less in settlement than I paid for it.
>
> What happens now? Can I insist that the insurance company improve
> their offer? Or is it a case of like it or lump it?

The insurance company are required to pay you the current market value of 
your vehicle in the condition it was before the accident.  That market value 
is the price that it would be sold for by a dealer with a warranty. 
Insurance companies are always out to save money and will try almost 
anything to avoid paying what they owe.  The first offer following a write 
off is invariably a joke offer and should be refused on principle.  The 
second offer is seldom much better.  The insurance company will try to tell 
you that they have adverts that suggest that their price is fair.  I have 
known them tell people that they never get the market value.

If the insurance company won't offer you what you can find the car for as 
stated above, then you can insist that the case is refered to the insurance 
hombudsman.  This costs you nothing (but your insurance company have to pay 
for it).

"paulfoel"  wrote in message
news:d2521a5b-f257-4fcb-ad63-bc2cf9e27007@34g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
On Jul 14, 6:56 pm, "Gaz"  wrote:
> Mrcheerful wrote:
> > paulfoel wrote:
> >> Unfortunately, was involved in an accident and my vehicle has been
> >> deemed a total loss by the insurance company.
>
> >> I've only had the car two months and the insurance company have
> >> offered a fair bit less in settlement than I paid for it.
>
> >> What happens now? Can I insist that the insurance company improve
> >> their offer? Or is it a case of like it or lump it?
>
> > show them present adverts for a similar condition vehicle, if you can
> > show that you need more to put yourself in the same position then
> > they should pay it. Usually the first offer is a try it on low
> > amount, many people take it, ins. co. is better off.
>
> If you bought it from a dealer, go to the dealer, and find as close as you
> can to the vehicle you got, and insist that is what they pay (minus two
> months wear and tear). They are supposed to put you back in the position
> before the accident.
>
> Gaz

I still have the receipt showing the purchase price of the vehicle
from 2 months ago.

Its doubtful that I'd find the same vehicle to compare with at the
dealer though. It was a used Fiat Punto bought from a Ford dealer.

What sort of figure would you put on 2 months wear and tear?

---------------

I reckon it'll be losing a good 30% pa at that age (unless you got a real
bargain), so 2/12ths of 30% of whatever you paid for it would seem
reasonable.

-- 
Martin

On Jul 15, 10:57 am, "Martin"  wrote:
> "paulfoel"  wrote in message
>
> news:d2521a5b-f257-4fcb-ad63-bc2cf9e27007@34g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
> On Jul 14, 6:56 pm, "Gaz"  wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > Mrcheerful wrote:
> > > paulfoel wrote:
> > >> Unfortunately, was involved in an accident and my vehicle has been
> > >> deemed a total loss by the insurance company.
>
> > >> I've only had the car two months and the insurance company have
> > >> offered a fair bit less in settlement than I paid for it.
>
> > >> What happens now? Can I insist that the insurance company improve
> > >> their offer? Or is it a case of like it or lump it?
>
> > > show them present adverts for a similar condition vehicle, if you can
> > > show that you need more to put yourself in the same position then
> > > they should pay it. Usually the first offer is a try it on low
> > > amount, many people take it, ins. co. is better off.
>
> > If you bought it from a dealer, go to the dealer, and find as close as you
> > can to the vehicle you got, and insist that is what they pay (minus two
> > months wear and tear). They are supposed to put you back in the position
> > before the accident.
>
> > Gaz
>
> I still have the receipt showing the purchase price of the vehicle
> from 2 months ago.
>
> Its doubtful that I'd find the same vehicle to compare with at the
> dealer though. It was a used Fiat Punto bought from a Ford dealer.
>
> What sort of figure would you put on 2 months wear and tear?
>
> ---------------
>
> I reckon it'll be losing a good 30% pa at that age (unless you got a real
> bargain), so 2/12ths of 30% of whatever you paid for it would seem
> reasonable.
>
> --
> Martin- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

OK. So 30% of £3000 is £900 x 2/12 = £150.

30% pa seems a bit high. OK, so you're saying a car costing £3000
would be worth about £2100 after one year, £1470 after 2, £1020ish
after 3 etc.

Not sure if £900 depreciation in a year is a bit much. I was thinking
more of £500-£600.

>On Jul 14, 2:25 pm, "Mrcheerful"  wrote:
>> paulfoel wrote:
>>
>> show them present adverts for a similar condition vehicle, if you can show
>> that you need more to put yourself in the same position then they should pay
>> it.  Usually the first offer is a try it on low amount, many people take it,
>> ins. co. is better off.
>
>to be honest, their first offer isnt that bad just not great....
It worked for my wife.  Don't thinkt they improved the offer much, but
it was a bit.  

Tiddy Ogg.
http://www.tiddyogg.co.uk

Martin wrote:
> "paulfoel"  wrote in message
> news:d2521a5b-f257-4fcb-ad63-bc2cf9e27007@34g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
> On Jul 14, 6:56 pm, "Gaz"  wrote:
>> Mrcheerful wrote:
>>> paulfoel wrote:
>>>> Unfortunately, was involved in an accident and my vehicle has been
>>>> deemed a total loss by the insurance company.
>>
>>>> I've only had the car two months and the insurance company have
>>>> offered a fair bit less in settlement than I paid for it.
>>
>>>> What happens now? Can I insist that the insurance company improve
>>>> their offer? Or is it a case of like it or lump it?
>>
>>> show them present adverts for a similar condition vehicle, if you
>>> can show that you need more to put yourself in the same position
>>> then they should pay it. Usually the first offer is a try it on low
>>> amount, many people take it, ins. co. is better off.
>>
>> If you bought it from a dealer, go to the dealer, and find as close
>> as you can to the vehicle you got, and insist that is what they pay
>> (minus two months wear and tear). They are supposed to put you back
>> in the position before the accident.
>>
>> Gaz
>
> I still have the receipt showing the purchase price of the vehicle
> from 2 months ago.
>
> Its doubtful that I'd find the same vehicle to compare with at the
> dealer though. It was a used Fiat Punto bought from a Ford dealer.
>
> What sort of figure would you put on 2 months wear and tear?
>
> ---------------
>
> I reckon it'll be losing a good 30% pa at that age (unless you got a
> real bargain), so 2/12ths of 30% of whatever you paid for it would
> seem reasonable.

And remember, the dealer price is higher because it incorporates some sort 
of warranty built in, make sure the insurance company take this into 
account.

Gaz

"paulfoel"  wrote in message 
news:1963be2f-bc33-4240-9dc0-fc22786cf378@k13g2000hse.googlegroups.com...
On Jul 15, 10:57 am, "Martin"  wrote:
> "paulfoel"  wrote in message
>
> news:d2521a5b-f257-4fcb-ad63-bc2cf9e27007@34g2000hsh.googlegroups.com...
> On Jul 14, 6:56 pm, "Gaz"  wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > Mrcheerful wrote:
> > > paulfoel wrote:
> > >> Unfortunately, was involved in an accident and my vehicle has been
> > >> deemed a total loss by the insurance company.
>
> > >> I've only had the car two months and the insurance company have
> > >> offered a fair bit less in settlement than I paid for it.
>
> > >> What happens now? Can I insist that the insurance company improve
> > >> their offer? Or is it a case of like it or lump it?
>
> > > show them present adverts for a similar condition vehicle, if you can
> > > show that you need more to put yourself in the same position then
> > > they should pay it. Usually the first offer is a try it on low
> > > amount, many people take it, ins. co. is better off.
>
> > If you bought it from a dealer, go to the dealer, and find as close as 
> > you
> > can to the vehicle you got, and insist that is what they pay (minus two
> > months wear and tear). They are supposed to put you back in the position
> > before the accident.
>
> > Gaz
>
> I still have the receipt showing the purchase price of the vehicle
> from 2 months ago.
>
> Its doubtful that I'd find the same vehicle to compare with at the
> dealer though. It was a used Fiat Punto bought from a Ford dealer.
>
> What sort of figure would you put on 2 months wear and tear?
>
> ---------------
>
> I reckon it'll be losing a good 30% pa at that age (unless you got a real
> bargain), so 2/12ths of 30% of whatever you paid for it would seem
> reasonable.
>
> --
> Martin- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

OK. So 30% of £3000 is £900 x 2/12 = £150.

30% pa seems a bit high. OK, so you're saying a car costing £3000
would be worth about £2100 after one year, £1470 after 2, £1020ish
after 3 etc.

Not sure if £900 depreciation in a year is a bit much. I was thinking
more of £500-£600.

-----------------------------

Obviously I don't know with any certainty, and Parkers etc don't go that old 
(but glass's may).  But my instinct is that you'd be lucky to get more than 
£500 for a 12 year-old punto.  And that's about 30% pa from £3k at age 7. 
It's depressing, but that's no reason for not going head-to-head with your 
insurers.  The only debate should be the cost of 2 months depreciation, and 
there can't be much between you both on that.  Any "silly" offers they make 
should be readily shown as just that.  And when you're within, say, £100 of 
each other, they may realise it's not worth their cost and time to continue 
to battle it out.  Good luck and please keep us posted.


-- 
Martin

Paul Harris wrote:
> Except that the car is not being sold it is being replaced on a like for 
> like basis so the payment should be sufficient to purchase a similar 
> vehicle of similar age.

Indeed. Therefore, if it were 2 months from new then it would be replaced a vehicle
with a minimum of 20% taken off the show room price not just 2 months wear & tear.

If you drive a new car off the forecourt & try & sell it straight away you'd loose 20%.

Dave F.

Dave F. wrote:

> Indeed. Therefore, if it were 2 months from new then it would be replaced
> a vehicle with a minimum of 20% taken off the show room price not just 2
> months wear & tear.
> 
> If you drive a new car off the forecourt & try & sell it straight away
> you'd loose 20%.

But try and buy a two month old car.  You probably won't find one anywhere. 
The reason for the huge drop is that people assume there must be something
wrong with the car if you want to sell it so quickly.

The FOS is available to settle the dispute if the insurer is unreasonable.


-- 
FERGUS O'ROURKE
www.irish-lawyer.com
(Not just law stuff)

On Jul 16, 12:20 pm, "Fergus O'Rourke" 
wrote:
> The FOS is available to settle the dispute if the insurer is unreasonable> FERGUS O'ROURKEwww.irish-lawyer.com
> (Not just law stuff)

Hmmm. Big gap between reasonable but a bit low and unreasonable
though, isnt there?

"paulfoel"  wrote in message 
news:2ebf2228-7f30-4eb1-bf33-7893358ef878@d77g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
On Jul 16, 12:20 pm, "Fergus O'Rourke" 
wrote:
>> The FOS is available to settle the dispute if the insurer is 
>> unreasonable.
>>
>> --
>> FERGUS O'ROURKEwww.irish-lawyer.com
>> (Not just law stuff)
>
>Hmmm. Big gap between reasonable but a bit low and unreasonable
>though, isnt there?

That's a matter for yourself.

On Jul 16, 6:56 pm, "Fergus O'Rourke" 
wrote:
> "paulfoel"  wrote in message
>
> news:2ebf2228-7f30-4eb1-bf33-7893358ef878@d77g2000hsb.googlegroups.com...
> On Jul 16, 12:20 pm, "Fergus O'Rourke" 
> wrote:
>
> >> The FOS is available to settle the dispute if the insurer is
> >> unreasonable.
>
> >> --
> >> FERGUS O'ROURKEwww.irish-lawyer.com
> >> (Not just law stuff)
>
> >Hmmm. Big gap between reasonable but a bit low and unreasonable
> >though, isnt there?
>
> That's a matter for yourself.

What I'm saying is that it seems that the insurance company can get
away with a low offer and theres nothing you can do about it unless
their really taking the p*ss.

My recent dealings with insurance companies have left me with less
than a good impression about them...

In message 
, 
paulfoel  writes
>
>What I'm saying is that it seems that the insurance company can get
>away with a low offer and theres nothing you can do about it unless
>their really taking the p*ss.
>
>My recent dealings with insurance companies have left me with less
>than a good impression about them...

When I wrote my Cavalier off in 2000, I received what I reckon was the 
market value for it at the time.   It was 5 years old, but in good 
condition, just dealer serviced, and with two new front tyres.
Daft time to crash it, really.      :-)

Zurich paid out around £4300, plus a repair to 4 yards of dry stone 
wall, £3000 to my lady passenger and 6 weeks physiotherapy for slight 
whip-lash injury.      My NCB was protected.

They are not the cheapest, but I had a new car within two weeks . . .
-- 
Gordon H

Gordon H wrote:
> In message 
> , 
> paulfoel  writes
>>
>> What I'm saying is that it seems that the insurance company can get
>> away with a low offer and theres nothing you can do about it unless
>> their really taking the p*ss.
>>
>> My recent dealings with insurance companies have left me with less
>> than a good impression about them...
> 
> When I wrote my Cavalier off in 2000, I received what I reckon was the 
> market value for it at the time.   It was 5 years old, but in good 
> condition, just dealer serviced, and with two new front tyres.
> Daft time to crash it, really.      :-)
> 
> Zurich paid out around £4300, plus a repair to 4 yards of dry stone 
> wall, £3000 to my lady passenger and 6 weeks physiotherapy for slight 
> whip-lash injury.      My NCB was protected.

That's because everyone else ends up paying for your shitty driving.

In message <g5nml3$74d$1@aioe.org>, "Timothy Dalton (PHD)" 
 writes
>Gordon H wrote:
>> In message 
>>, 
>>paulfoel  writes
>>>
>>> What I'm saying is that it seems that the insurance company can get
>>> away with a low offer and theres nothing you can do about it unless
>>> their really taking the p*ss.
>>>
>>> My recent dealings with insurance companies have left me with less
>>> than a good impression about them...
>>  When I wrote my Cavalier off in 2000, I received what I reckon was 
>>the  market value for it at the time.   It was 5 years old, but in 
>>good condition, just dealer serviced, and with two new front tyres.
>> Daft time to crash it, really.      :-)
>>  Zurich paid out around £4300, plus a repair to 4 yards of dry stone 
>>wall, £3000 to my lady passenger and 6 weeks physiotherapy for slight 
>>whip-lash injury.      My NCB was protected.
>
>That's because everyone else ends up paying for your shitty driving.

Excellent!
I'll buy you all a drink.
My last claim was when I was driving ENB***D.
I can't remember how long ago that was.    1960's  ?
-- 
Gordon H

On Jul 17, 3:57 pm, "Timothy Dalton (PHD)"  wrote:
> Gordon H wrote:
> > In message
> > ,
> > paulfoel  writes
>
> >> What I'm saying is that it seems that the insurance company can get
> >> away with a low offer and theres nothing you can do about it unless
> >> their really taking the p*ss.
>
> >> My recent dealings with insurance companies have left me with less
> >> than a good impression about them...
>
> > When I wrote my Cavalier off in 2000, I received what I reckon was the
> > market value for it at the time.   It was 5 years old, but in good
> > condition, just dealer serviced, and with two new front tyres.
> > Daft time to crash it, really.      :-)
>
> > Zurich paid out around £4300, plus a repair to 4 yards of dry stone
> > wall, £3000 to my lady passenger and 6 weeks physiotherapy for slight
> > whip-lash injury.      My NCB was protected.
>
> That's because everyone else ends up paying for your shitty driving.- Hide quoted text -
>

Perfect driver alert.... :-)