99PPPDriver

I recently had a low speed crash, which damaged the front of my beloved scoob. I drove the car to a Subaru main dealer who did me a quote for repairs. The bonnet and bumper were damaged and the front fog lights were broken. Neither the engineer nor myself could open the bonnet to check for further damage. As the car had also lost the number plate to make the car road legal again (as all the other lights worked O.K.) I was supplied a new plate and send on my way. At no time was I advised not to drive the car. I reported the incident to the insurers and was hopeful over the coming days the repairs could be checked and agreed etc etc.

However….
A few days later driving along a dual carriageway the bonnet (which I had previously been unable to open) decided to open itself to great effect! I was lucky to avoid further injury, however now the windscreen and roof of the car were badly damaged. I once again informed the insurance company and got the car taken to the same Subaru dealership to get another quote for repairs. All was well until the assessor came to view the car and stated as the damage had taken place at 2 different times that I would have to make 2 claims! Thus I am looking at 2 excesses, 2 claims, and loss of no claims etc!

Can anybody give me any advice? It seems extremely hard that I am being penalised twice for damage that is clearly only due to once incident. The initial conversation with the insurance company seemed positive (the chap I spoke to said as long as the damaged all stemmed from one incident I would be O.K.) but now they appear to be changing their mind. Where do I stand legally? Surely I am not at fault for the second incident? Is the garage responsible in any way?

Any assistance gratefully received.

Cheers
Peter

simb 2

iTrader: (3)

1st sorry to hear about your bad luck.

the bad news is the assessor is correct in saying it is two incidents even though the second was resulting from the 1st.

from what you have said the best way out is to claim for the 1st
incident as this involves most of the damage and will be the most
expensive to put right. the 2nd incident if i'm right involves damage to the windscreen and roof. the bonnet however hopefully
was damaged beyong repair from the 1st incident and would of needed replacing anyway. this just leaves the windscreen and roof to worry about. the windscreen can be replaced by the insurance comapany under the windscreen section of the policy and is subject to either a £50 - £60 excess, as long as you use their approved company (dig out your policy booklet should be details in here), this will not affect your no claims discount as it is a perk of the policy.
then once you know where your scooby is going to be repaired go and see the garage and ask if you can pay extra on top of the insurance companies bill to get the roof done at the same time, this will help you avoid two excesses, no claims discount loss and two fault claims going against you in the future.

u could also call your company again and beg for some compassion but i don't fancy your chances.

if you got any other questions happy to help, let me know how you get on, good luck.

99PPPDriver

The cost of the roof repair is too much (£1000+) for me to pay personally, so i'm stuck with using the insurance company. Im chasing them currently to see what I can get them to agree to.

An idea...
Could I use the legal cover from the policy to sue the garage? They gave me the O.K. to use the car, and so are the most responcible for the extra damage.


Thanks
Peter

simb 2

iTrader: (3)

The legal cover on your policy is there for recovering any of your uninsured losses, such as your excess or any difficulties if there is a third party i.e if a car hit you.
you may want to try them for advise but your best bet is consulting a solicitor, to see where you stand in taking them to a small claims court on the basis of what the garage advised, but this can be a long process and will cost you.

try going back to the garage and see what they say, if they refuse mention you will be going to see a solicitor about your situation and see what they say then, you can only try.
you

ScoobyDooMe

This may be a long shot, but both accident are not independant, i.e. the result of the first accident caused the second. So the insurance assessor is probably right, but there maybe a technicality in the policy that you could exploit.

Go and see a solicitor who specialises in this, preferably the same type of solicitor that are used for the 'legal expenses' type cover that you may get with the insurance. They should now the car insurnace industry very very well.

Also, you mentioned a grand for the roof, is that through a subaru dealer? if so try a good (recommended) back street body repair garage, you may find that a cash job would be half that.

Remember, don't take any bull**** off the dealer, about repairs should only be done through approved subaru dealers becuase of paint matching etc, its a load of ****. The digital technology used by body repair centres these days for paint matching has gone far beyond the apprentice with a paint pot and a wooden stirrer.

99PPPDriver

Cheers for the advice,
It might be a bit late now as i've gone with the Subaru garage, and (gulp) opened 2 claims. I think i'm going to speak to the RAC though (where I have legal advice available). I have stated the second incident was not my fault AND that the garage should be persued to recover the excess etc using my legal cover on the insurance.

Peter

TUR80

Peter,
There is a basic insurance principal known as Proximate Cause.

A good way to illustrate this would be to imagine two buildings insured for fire only. One catches fire and the fire brigade (if not on strike) come along and put it out. Unfortunately, the water from their hoses runs into the second house causing flood damage, for which it is not covered. The second house is however covered for fire and fire was the Proximate Cause of the loss. The damage caused by the water will therefore be covered.

I would suggest to your insurance company that your situation is a perfect example of Proximate Cause and should therefore be considered as one claim. You fulfilled your duty of care in checking with the garage first.

I think it's a bit unfair to blame the garage, if the bonnet couldn't be opened manually then who would think that it would come open later?

All the best.