CL500 2008

[Jockcl500]

My insurance company wants to write it off as a cat N, they value the car at just under £7700 and say fixing it will cost £6100 which is strange as unless I have been dreaming, the bodyshop told me about £4280 +vat
So my question is can you insist the car is repaired by the insurance so it doesn't get a catN write off?
and also has anyone seen a 2008 CL500 for sale at £7700

 

[markjay]

You can easily argue the value with them if you can finds private-sale (not dealer) ads of similar cars in similar condition in Autotrader. They will have to concede.

But you can't refuse a write-off and insist that they repair it for you - if they offer you the value of your car then legally you have been fully compensated.

You can however reach a deal with them where they pay you the cost of repair and you keep the car (then repair it yourself). I am not sure if it will still be listed as Cat N though.

Also, if you are claiming off the other-party insurer (and not against your own policy) because it is a no-fault accident, then you are in a much better bargaining position than if you claim off your own policy.

 

[Jockcl500]

Bit of an update.
My insurance company wants to write it off as a cat N, they value the car at just under £7700 and say fixing it will cost £6100 which is strange as unless I have been dreaming, the bodyshop told me about £4280 +vat
So my question is can you insist the car is repaired by the insurance so it doesn't get a catN write off?
and also has anyone seen a 2008 CL500 for sale at £7700

You can easily argue the value with them if you can finds private-sale (not dealer) ads of similar cars in similar condition in Autotrader. They will have to concede.

But you can't refuse a write-off and insist that they repair it for you - if they offer you the value of your car then legally you have been fully compensated.

You can however reach a deal with them where they pay you the cost of repair and you keep the car (then repair it yourself). I am not sure if it will still be listed as Cat N though.

Also, if you are claiming off the other-party insurer (and not against your own policy) because it is a no-fault accident, then you are in a much better bargaining position than if you claim off your own policy.

I looked on autotrader for 2008 cl500 only 7 results 5 of are dealer £9500-£11000 2 private £8500 & £15000
My insurance set a criteria of same year/spec within 100 miles of me(none that near) and within 5000 +/- of mileage on my car so between 90000-100000(none over 76000miles)
So their criteria limits the comparison to zero, so does that mean it's a fair valuation or a stich up, I thought the offer was to reflect what you could buy a similar replacement.

 

[markjay]

This depends on whether you are claiming off your own policy, or other party policy.

If the latter, you can stick to your guns. The insurer will be very keen to resolve it asap.

If the former, then they will bide their time.

 

[Jockcl500]

This depends on whether you are claiming off your own policy, or other party policy.

If the latter, you can stick to your guns. The insurer will be very keen to resolve it asap.

If the former, then they will bide their time.

My insurance company are claiming all costs from the at faults insurer, which is why I don't understand my insurer wanting to scrap the vehicle.

 

[MikeInWimbledon]

It's a mistake to think that "values' are advertised prices on Autotrader. Prices gradually sink until they're either realistic, or within 5 or 10% of actual negotiated sale.

Especially for large engined Mercedes - look on AT and you'll see CL's that have been advertised for six months and more which are still unsold.

I'm pondering a CL or SL in the Autumn and there are loads of cars around which have failed to sell since last Winter.

 

[Jockcl500]

It's a mistake to think that "values' are advertised prices on Autotrader. Prices gradually sink until they're either realistic, or within 5 or 10% of actual negotiated sale.

Especially for large engined Mercedes - look on AT and you'll see CL's that have been advertised for six months and more which are still unsold.

I'm pondering a CL or SL in the Autumn and there are loads of cars around which have failed to sell since last Winter.

I only looked at if they gave me £7700 what could I buy....answer not a CL500

 

[markjay]

It's a mistake to think that "values' are advertised prices on Autotrader. Prices gradually sink until they're either realistic, or within 5 or 10% of actual negotiated sale.

Especially for large engined Mercedes - look on AT and you'll see CL's that have been advertised for six months and more which are still unsold.

I'm pondering a CL or SL in the Autumn and there are loads of cars around which have failed to sell since last Winter.

I agree in principle with your comment regarding the value of cars, especially regarding the discrepancy between asking price and sale price, but my experience is that for the purpose of insurance valuations, the asking price on private ads in Autotrader are accepted as 'value' by insurers.

 

[markjay]

This is not the best way to go about it, ideally you should have claimed directly off the other party's insurer and not involve your own insurer (other than notifying them of the accident).

Said that, since it's a no-fault accident, you can stick to your guns as long as you have a convincing argument. By 'convincing' I mean an argument that want not be considered unreasonable if it gets to court (it want get that far - the insurer WILL settle - but this is how the insurer would look at your arguments).

Also, you would have received a loan car from the other-party's insurer, which is 'similar' to your own car, while the claim is being settled (what's the closest available rental to a CL500 - a Mustang?). They will know that they stand to lose more by perpetuating the settlement than by agreeing to your terms.

Additionally, you are entitled for a refund of any reasonable expenses incurred as result of the insured incident. This includes travel costs, unpaid time off work, costs of stamps when writing letters, etc. I am not suggesting that you should claim for all of the above (aka 'claim inflation'), but if you did incur any additional significant and genuine expenses resulting from the accident and from having to deal with the insurers, then you are entitled to add these to the claim.

Said that, the above usually works better if you can talk directly to the other party's insurer. But the principle is the same even when you go through your own insurer.

 

[Jockcl500]

This is not the best way to go about it, ideally you should have claimed directly off the other party's insurer and not involve your own insurer (other than notifying them of the accident).

Said that, since it's a no-fault accident, you can stick to your guns as long as you have a convincing argument. By 'convincing' I mean an argument that want not be considered unreasonable if it gets to court (it want get that far - the insurer WILL settle - but this is how the insurer would look at your arguments).

Also, you would have received a loan car from the other-party's insurer, which is 'similar' to your own car, while the claim is being settled (what's the closest available rental to a CL500 - a Mustang?). They will know that they stand to lose more by perpetuating the settlement than by agreeing to your terms.

Additionally, you are entitled for a refund of any reasonable expenses incurred as result of the insured incident. This includes travel costs, unpaid time off work, costs of stamps when writing letters, etc. I am not suggesting that you should claim for all of the above (aka 'claim inflation'), but if you did incur any additional significant and genuine expenses resulting from the accident and from having to deal with the insurers, then you are entitled to add these to the claim.

Said that, the above usually works better if you can talk directly to the other party's insurer. But the principle is the same even when you go through your own insurer.

My wife had a similar experience the othersides insurer contacted her quick directly and said we will fix everything, then wanted to write it off but eventually agree to the repair cost.
I would probably have went the same route but they said go though your own insurance company to claim us.
My insurer was quick to get a company to supply me a car similar to my own and get my car taken away for the repair estimate, and then nothing for 2weeks, maybe I should have been chasing them rather than thinking everything is getting sorted.

 

[DSM10000]

Starting a second thread about this and not including the fact (until several posts in) that it was a third pary to blame who has accepted laibility has not made it easy to follow.

Perhaps Admin can merge?

 

[markjay]

..I would probably have went the same route but they said go though your own insurance company to claim us...

I don't think that the other party's insurer can stop you from claiming directly off them.

Unless the other party did not accept liability in the first instance, in which case they are correct and the two insurers should agree the liability between them first.

At any rate, my advice is: stick to your guns regarding valuation - as long as you can reasonably justify it.

 

[markjay]

PS - re repair costs:

Firstly. the insurer will need to provide you with a similar loan vehicle for the duration of the repair, which can take a couple of weeks or more, so they also take this cost into account.

Then, when you start dismantling a car for repairs, you rarely find that parts you thought needed replacing are actually OK, buy you do often find that there are additional parts that were damaged and need replacing... especially parts that can't be inspected without further dismantling. So the initially quoted repair cost can often rise during the repair process.

This is why the insurer will scrap the car well before the repair cost matches the car's valuation.

 

[Jockcl500]

I don't think that the other party's insurer can stop you from claiming directly off them.

Unless the other party did not accept liability in the first instance, in which case they are correct and the two insurers should agree the liability between them first.

At any rate, my advice is: stick to your guns regarding valuation - as long as you can reasonably justify it.

The other party did admit everything and it was on cctv which they forwarded to their insurer.
Problem is justification is a grey area, if they stick to their policy on valuations, I'm screwed as none of the five cars on autotrader are within 100miles of me and none have between 90000-100000miles on the clock all have fewer. so if no comparable cars fit the insurance company's criteria the instructed salvage estimator price will stand.
My insurer and the subbed out services they use are what seems to be the problem.
Fingers crossed I have better news on Monday.

 

[DSM10000]

The other party did admit everything and it was on cctv which they forwarded to their insurer.
Problem is justification is a grey area, if they stick to their policy on valuations, I'm screwed as none of the five cars on autotrader are within 100miles of me and none have between 90000-100000miles on the clock all have fewer. so if no comparable cars fit the insurance company's criteria the instructed salvage estimator price will stand.
My insurer and the subbed out services they use are what seems to be the problem.
Fingers crossed I have better news on Monday.

The Insurance company policy does not overrule law.

Do you have legal cover with your car or home insurance? If so then use this to give you more leverage.

 

[Jockcl500]

Starting a second thread about this and not including the fact (until several posts in) that it was a third pary to blame who has accepted laibility has not made it easy to follow.

Perhaps Admin can merge?

As I had originally posted in bodywork but then found insurance heading, Not sure how you would choose.

 

[Jockcl500]

The Insurance company policy does not overrule law.

Do you have legal cover with your car or home insurance? If so then use this to give you more leverage.

I would not know where the law stands on car valuations
I have legal cover on the policy and all excesses are waved, everything being claimed from the other partys insurer.

 

[markjay]

Since you are not claiming off yoir own policy, the insurer's evaluation rules are not binding for you.

They can work-out the value by whatever means they choose, but you are under no obligation to agree with their rules or with their valuation.

What they are doing is simply apply criteria that is deemed reasonable and that they can later defend in court if need be. And you should do the same.

Your issue is not with the valuation method employed by the insurer, but with coming-up with a valuation of your own that you can reasonably justify (unrelated to the insurer's valuation 'rules').

Perhaps you should cast your net wider and look also at the classified section in specialist publications such as Mercedes Enthusiast or Classic Car etc.

Ultimately, time is on your side, because that rental car they gave you is a ticking clock that's costing them money. Your are entitled to disagree with their valuation, and produce your own, as long as you do not act unreasonably or deliberately introduce a delay.

You could even get a specialist to value your car, though for the amounts involved it might be OTT.

 

[Teego]

Why not run your car through Parker's valuation guide or do you have a friend in the trade who would let you use his Glass's Guide?

 

[markjay]

Why not run your car through Parker's valuation guide or do you have a friend in the trade who would let you use his Glass's Guide?

This is a good idea, however trade prices (or quotes from the likes of WBAC) are likely to be lower than a private sale asking price.

The insurer can't really oppose the higher private sale price (as long as they can't claim that the other car is a better/newer model, in better condition, has less mileage etc).