BIG_MVS wrote:Can Dave divulge if it's all getting repaired via insurance and put back on the road. I'm guessing from progress this is the case which is good news!
Hi Martin - yes the insurance work is approved...no write off (x2) nonsense...clearly if I had gone to different repairers we could have got into those discussions...(if I had quoted Renault bodyshops, or my local plastic/fibreglass body specialists...who seem more used to handling the aftermath of footballers/stockbrokers driving..and I'm sure with prices to match)...and financially it could have been a better outcome...as the car was already written off once for the engine fire. Conversely, it could have gone horribly wrong if I could not buy back, or at a reasonable amount..I have invested quite a bit of mental energy and money in this car. It would also have involved re MOT, another VIC test...and a fair amount of faff all round.
Long story short ....the third-party's claims people Active Fleet Solutions (for AIG) are paying RATS for the repair..they seemed more switched on than my insurers, RSA...and less interested in me sending all sorts of paperwork to complete. In fairness the "Third Party Intervention" companies are rewarded for handling such claims to reduce the loss to their clients....so they will be keen. It also means I don't then have to recover my excess...and there is no debate about whose fault the accident was.
Given they allowed me to appoint a repairer...then I am in favour of this approach...less admin; and ultimately keeps premiums down for all. (if they had nominated a repairer it would have been different).
Photos of the damage and the RATS quote/damage report were sent to them, and their desk-based engineers reviewed, had a phone chat with Lee, and approved the work. They will pay RATS in due course.
The claims people only want to deal with a single repairer, single bill...so Lee will arrange (i.e. sub-contract out) the painting.
Andy (Astral Automotive) also kindly provided an estimate - but as he is booked up until next year it was not really a viable option for the insurer.
by darrenbiggs » Tue Oct 14, 2014 5:00 pm 
