EQA side impact damage

[mrb1972]

Hi, unfortunately our EQA was hit side on by a van a few weeks ago, quite a bit of damage to passenger side, both air bags deployed, glass shattered. Car was inoperable and had to be removed by recovery vehicle. Just waiting for estimate from insurance company.

What do we think, repairable? A little concerned about battery damage, I believe it runs under the passenger side on the EQA

 

[grober]

EQA: Intelligent Thermal Management

looks as if it may well be vulnerable to side impact so they may well write it off- might be for the best!

 

[BTB 500]

Yikes I hope the car is being stored somewhere safe - physical damage/distortion is one of the things that can cause Li Ion cells to spontaneously ignite, and this can take some time to occur. If there's the slightest sign of impact to the battery pack they will almost certainly have to write that off on safety grounds.

 

[markjay]

Sorry to hear this

A couple of questions.

1. Was it the other party's fault, and if so has their insurer accepted liability? Have you made a claim directly against the other party's policy, or are you claiming against your own policy? Did the insurer provide you with a rental car while your car is being assessed? Has the car been taken to a Mercedes Benz dealership, or to a repair facility chosen by the insurer?

2. Do you have any finance on the car?

Regarding the damage to the car, these days insurers are very quick to write off damaged cars. Even more so if the repair is to be done by an MB dealer. If the insurer does not approve a repair, then they still get some cash from Copart who will auction the car for parts, and they avoid the potential pitfall of additional damage being discovered while the work is ongoing. Plus, they don't have to pay for your rental car for the duration. For this reason, even a relatively small damage can write off a car these days. Obviously, being an EV, the question mark around possible damage to the battery makes it even more likely that the car will be written off.

 

[mrb1972]

Yes, it it a no fault claim, the car was taken to a recovery centre, our insurance company arranged the rest, it is currently with their approved repair centre waiting to their verdict. I hope they write it off as I’m concerned about battery damage

 

[markjay]

Yes, it it a no fault claim, the car was taken to a recovery centre, our insurance company arranged the rest, it is currently with their approved repair centre waiting to their verdict. I hope they write it off as I’m concerned about battery damage

If you want it written off, then tell them that you insist on a repair at a Mercedes Benz dealership (it's your right, regardless of what they say). This will significantly increase the cost estimate over that of the insurer's own repair centre.

Also, for future reference, in situations like this there's no need to involve your own insurer (other than to notify them of the event), instead you can simply contact the other-party's insurer and submit the claim directly with them, it speeds-up the process (all your insurer does is send emails back and forth between yourself and the other insurer).

 

[Teego]

My CLS55 was written off recently. Side impact didn't look as bad as yours but it also had other damage. Before they made the decision the insurance agent said it would likely be a wo because the air bags had deployed.

 

[fabes]

Airbags usually infer a write off
Any question or uncertainty on the fuel cells and it goes as well

The other issue is getting replacement parts. If they are on back order, it often makes it uneconomic to wait, pay for a c car and still have to do the repair

Sorry. ...

 

[mrb1972]

Thanks for all the messages, very helpful. Well it’s been a bit of a mission, the first place the car was taken to couldn’t work on EV vehicles, was then told it would have to go back to Mercedes, but it wasn’t !!! Went to another one of their approved repairers

So waiting to see the report now, but I’m nervous about it being repaired by anyone other than Mercedes specialist.

Am I right in thinking they can’t proceed with any repairs without my consent?

 

[fabes]

They do not need your consent.
Your (insurance) contract with the insurers is to have the car repaired or (financially) replaced. You've given your agreement already.
You may be able to insist on an MB repair, it depends on your policy wording. Most policies won't.

The problem is that their processes and operating model is to use their repairer network to contain costs and to be fair, maintain quality and control.

Most in those networks won't be able , still, to handle your car.

And most purists will be disappointed to hear that MB has very few shops themselves - most is contracted out anyway.

 

[mrb1972]

Had it confirmed today that as suspected the EQA is a write-off, just waiting for the valuation. Thanks for all the comments

 

[MeQ]

Probably for the best, was it very old?

 

[mrb1972]

Probably for the best, was it very old?

Not really, about 2 and a half years

 

[MeQ]

Not really, about 2 and a half years

Ah ok, I was asking as under a year old would likely be full amount of a new car without the need for gap insurance.

Hope it all goes smoothly

 

[st13phil]

Ah ok, I was asking as under a year old would likely be full amount of a new car without the need for gap insurance.

Interesting point.

I suspect that EV’s and the propensity for them being written off after a relatively minor collision that would have been repaired on an ICE car will see a big increase in GAP policies being taken out and - perversely - a big increase in their premiums.

 

[MeQ]

Interesting point.

I suspect that EV’s and the propensity for them being written off after a relatively minor collision that would have been repaired on an ICE car will see a big increase in GAP policies being taken out and - perversely - a big increase in their premiums.

It’s not something I take, I was offered it for the EQE but as it’s under a year old is insured for full replacement value of a new vehicle. After a year old my insurance broker offers a product that pays a percentage on top of settlement which is better value than gap.

 

[st13phil]

It’s not something I take, I was offered it for the EQE but as it’s under a year old is insured for full replacement value of a new vehicle. After a year old my insurance broker offers a product that pays a percentage on top of settlement which is better value than gap.

Every case is different. If you can get cover that will deal with a high value / high depreciation write-off, then a stand-alone GAP policy is worthless.

 

[markjay]

We recently got GAP cover for a company car on a business lease (Skoda Enyaq EV), it was £100 for 3 years (covering the lease term) from ALA, for that price it would have been foolish not to take it.

 

[st13phil]

We recently got GAP cover for a company car on a business lease (Skoda Enyaq EV), it was £100 for 3 years (covering the lease term) from ALA, for that price it would have been foolish not to take it.

I agree. GAP insurance has been refreshingly cheap and excellent value for those of us who choose to buy rapidly depreciating vehicles.

 

[Smiley]

They do not need your consent.
Your (insurance) contract with the insurers is to have the car repaired or (financially) replaced. You've given your agreement already.
You may be able to insist on an MB repair, it depends on your policy wording. Most policies won't.

I know that the OP situation is resolved. But fyi this is wrong in the case of claims for damage caused by third parties. You may very well make a claim VIA your insurer but your claim is actually against the third party themselves (and then for the third party to involve their insurer); it is quite simple that you should be put back in the position that you were in prior to the damage - and in the case of a relatively new car it is reasonable to INSIST (not ask) that the repair is carried out by the manufacturer's approved repairer. It is absolutely nothing to do with the terms of your own insurance policy.
If you are having trouble with the insurers (either your own or the third party) then just launch a claim for the full amount of the damages against the third party themselves and threaten legal action against them - that usually motivates the insurer to settle the claim more quickly.