Disco 1: Ambulance 0 - Page 2

Hightower · 20 January 2016, 09:23

Now it looks like a real off roader and gives your Disco character!

All I can say is that you must make sure you get the right deal when negotiating the insurance deal. I doubt that will be Cat A or B in which the insurance hands are tied and have to totally write it off.

My missus had two NFaultA's in two days last year. Her Picanto was written off and we took the payment for the whole car. Someone has bought this and it's now showing it's been repaired and back on the road.

Someone went in the back of the truck two days later in the same fashion as the Ambulance in in the rear of your Disco and with similar results (except he hit the towbar lol). I didn't even deal with my insurance as it was clear who was at fault and was admitted by the 3rd party insurers. They sent an assessor around my house, we came to an agreement and I'm best part of a £1000 better off. Much more civilised that being told it's being scrapped!

John Kennett · 20 January 2016, 09:45

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hightower

I didn't even deal with my insurance as it was clear who was at fault and was admitted by the 3rd party insurers.

Did you inform your insurer? They will expect you to.

Hightower · 20 January 2016, 12:21

Quote:

Originally Posted by John Kennett

Did you inform your insurer? They will expect you to.

Yes of course I did, it's in the contact. But you don't have to go though them. Just advise them to stand by until you've struck a deal with the 3rd party insurance. You can always go though them if you're not satisfied with the settlement. But 3rd parties insurer's are very keen on dealing directly when they know they have to make a payout. You are more likely to get better compensation payouts by going direct and be less likely to scrap your vehicle off. The value of my 1998 Trooper is about £700. The payout was just under £1000 which I pocketed because the damage was all superficial.

John Kennett · 20 January 2016, 16:45

Xk59D · 20 January 2016, 17:43

I've had a couple of non fault bumps, has always put my premium up. Shouldn't be allowed but insurance seem to do what they like.

Hightower · 21 January 2016, 09:41

Quote:

Originally Posted by Xk59D

I've had a couple of non fault bumps, has always put my premium up. Shouldn't be allowed but insurance seem to do what they like.

As you're probably aware an insurance company works it's premiums out on risk factor. Simply put, being involved in a motor accident even if not at fault will put you in a higher category. Same as a modified car, doesn't matter what the modification is and could be a pair of extra spotlights on the front, or slightly different Tyre profiles, it makes you go in to a higher cat and is their get out clause if they aren't declared.

Xk59D · 21 January 2016, 16:36

Modified car is perhaps a poor comparison although I understand your point. I have the choice to put a cherry bomb on my car, not when someone shunts it though.

The fact is they do it because they can, it shouldn't be legal in my eyes.

ShinyShoe · 21 January 2016, 17:23

You don't choose to be male and that increases your risk.

Pikey Dave · 21 January 2016, 17:51

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hightower

Simply put, being involved in a motor accident even if not at fault will put you in a higher category

You could flip that on its head & say that statistics will dictate that we will be involved in "X" number of accidents in our lifetime, it would follow that each accident reduces your chances of having another by X-1. Therefore each accident should lower your chances of having another.
IMHO etc.😄

ShinyShoe · 21 January 2016, 18:23

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pikey Dave

You could flip that on its head & say that statistics will dictate that we will be involved in "X" number of accidents in our lifetime, it would follow that each accident reduces your chances of having another by X-1. Therefore each accident should lower your chances of having another.
IMHO etc.😄

But Lets say that the stats say on average each person has 3 accidents in a lifetime. Your arguement is you've had 1 which means you are only due 2 more. Thats a straightfoward relationship, but you are assuming your risk of accident is dispersed along the time line evenly or randomly. But what if the statistics say if you have an accident this year you are more likely to have another next year than if you hadn't had an accident. Next year is what your insurer cares about thats what you are paying for. So even if your lifetime risk of accident doesn't increase (which it may), your risk of accident in the next 12 months has.

Pikey Dave · 21 January 2016, 18:33

Quote:

Originally Posted by ShinyShoe

But Lets say that the stats say on average each person has 3 accidents in a lifetime. Your arguement is you've had 1 which means you are only due 2 more. Thats a straightfoward relationship, but you are assuming your risk of accident is dispersed along the time line evenly or randomly. But what if the statistics say if you have an accident this year you are more likely to have another next year than if you hadn't had an accident. Next year is what your insurer cares about thats what you are paying for. So even if your lifetime risk of accident doesn't increase (which it may), your risk of accident in the next 12 months has.

So if I've never had an accident, I must be overdue. Therefore next years premium should go up 😏

Poly · 21 January 2016, 18:37

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pikey Dave

You could flip that on its head & say that statistics will dictate that we will be involved in "X" number of accidents in our lifetime, it would follow that each accident reduces your chances of having another by X-1. Therefore each accident should lower your chances of having another.
IMHO etc.😄

Probably just as well you're not an actuary!

I suspect what the stats show is that there are two types of people in the world (lets say lucky and unlucky or accident prone or not). If you've had one accident then that might point to you being in the accident prone / unlucky group.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Xk59D

I have the choice to put a cherry bomb on my car, not when someone shunts it though.

The fact is they do it because they can, it shouldn't be legal in my eyes.

The actuaries presumably disagree (if it was just a pricing thing then competitors would ignore it and quote you better). Whilst there are accidents where you are completely 100% blameless (e.g. sitting stationary at traffic lights when someone hits you from behind) there are many cases when "no fault" is found but a more attentive or cautious driver might have avoided the accident that wasn't their fault.

Poly · 21 January 2016, 18:38

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pikey Dave

So if I've never had an accident, I must be overdue. Therefore next years premium should go up 😏

That explains the letter I've just had from Esure!

Pikey Dave · 21 January 2016, 18:40

Quote:

Originally Posted by Poly

That explains the letter I've just had from Esure!

😄 get your hand in your pocket!

Xk59D · 21 January 2016, 23:00

Quote:

Originally Posted by ShinyShoe

You don't choose to be male and that increases your risk.

Wonder if that is against some EU law for equality...........

Poly · 21 January 2016, 23:34

Quote:

Originally Posted by Xk59D

Wonder if that is against some EU law for equality...........

It is, and is no longer allowed (well directly at least: Men are still charged more than women for car insurance, despite EU rule change - Telegraph)

Xk59D · 22 January 2016, 05:45

Sneaky sneaky. Yet another thing they can get away with then.

E petition time!

mick · 27 January 2016, 15:27

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nasher

Thanks for all the kind words guys.

I really don't want it written off as I've just spent £1400 on it having a Torque Converter fitted, I know it's mechanically good, and of course what they'd give me for it will only cover the cost of a similar age one that I could spend thousands getting to the same mechanical condition.

Update as of this morning.

The body shop can’t see it until tomorrow morning.

Privilege Have confirmed that:

If the car is written off as a Cat C or D, I will get the opportunity to purchase it back.

The claim is already in the hands of their recovery team as it looks like the complete cost will be recovered from the other insurers.

This may take a couple of weeks to confirm though.

My renewal premium will not be affected at all if it is agreed that it was not my fault.

The cost of a hire car will not be considered as part of the repair cost when considering if the car is economical to repair.

As I have the receipt for the Torque Converter being fitted so recently I can submit it as evidence if I want to dispute the value of the car.

So, wait and see really.

Nasher

Good news about the D3 Nasher glad there sorting it wouldn't want you getting to familiar with that Jap crap 😉

SteveHall · 27 January 2016, 15:57

Oh how I miss my D3 now ive moved to that Jap Crap...

Nasher · 28 January 2016, 20:15

Well it looks like I'll be without the D3 for a couple more weeks as Landrover have the rear quarter panel on back order

I really couldn't bear the thought of driving the Shogun I'd been hired for that time, and burning so much Diesel, so swapped it today at the Hire Car Company for a Golf.

I don't want to upset anyone, but having the choice I couldn't put up with the Shogun.
It was a terrible drive compared to the D3 and was averaging @18MPG on the same routes the D3 does @24.

Nasher