Can you keep the money after a car accident?

J

Joe Nonety

Registered User
Messages
418
If someone has been in a accident where the car is fine except for a few dents and has been quoted a certain amount by the panel beaters to fix the dents, can the person not bother getting the car fixed and keep that money for the quoted value?
 
I'm not sure but I don't think so. I think they will pay the person who is fixing your car directly but I am not in insurance so don't quote me on that, no pun intended.

good luck
 
This happened to me and I didnt bother getting the repairs done and just banked the cheque. That was about 8 years ago so not sure if things have changed since.
 
polo1 said:
This happened to me and I didnt bother getting the repairs done and just banked the cheque. That was about 8 years ago so not sure if things have changed since.
Click to expand...

Things have now changed AFAIK. I think what JJ343 says is becoming the norm now.

Never mind the fact that keeping the money and not carrying out repairs would constitute fraud of course.
 
I think that it may depend on the insurer. I had a case about year ago where I was rear ended and the damage came to less than a 1000 Euro and the other person's insurer paid the money directly to my mechanic.

Why not just call them and tell them you're going to do the work yourself. They may give you a cheque but they'll take off the VAT which for labour is around 13% (open to correction on that).

JJ
 
In my own case, where I was not at fault, his insurers paid the garage directly
 
a friend of mine was rear ended last week, not much damage done to her car but she got a quote and was told about 700 euro to repair. She told the fella and he agreed to give her the money they didnt go through insurance companies. His van was alot worse than her car!!
 
I think it would certainly be unethical. Are we talking about the insurance paying you the money, or the other party who caused damage?

Someone is paying you to fix your car, after they damaged it, not keep their money.
 
I don't see why it's unethical or considered fraud. If €X was the amount of damage done to the car, surely someone should have the choice to use that money whichever way they feel fit.
The person who caused the crash should be happy with that outcome as well seing that the job in the panel beaters was going to take 2 weeks so they would've had to pay for 2 weeks car hire as well otherwise.
 
Joe Nonety said:
I don't see why it's unethical or considered fraud. If €X was the amount of damage done to the car, surely someone should have the choice to use that money whichever way they feel fit.
Click to expand...

The money is supposed to go towards getting the damage fixed, not pocketed for the persons own use.
 
Smashbox said:
The money is supposed to go towards getting the damage fixed, not pocketed for the persons own use.
Click to expand...
Does the money not also reflect the reduction in value of the asset (i.e. the car), and it is up to the person to decide whether to restore the asset or not?
 
Yes, you can keep the money. The sum paid is to restore the car to its pre-accident condition. If the car owner is prepared to leave his car in a less valuable state ,then that is his choice.
 
It is none of the other persons business what you do with the money. If you choose not to repair the damage this would eventually be reflected in the trade in price or the resale value when you are disposing of the car. There is no question of fraud and I would contend that it is not unethical either.
If you cause an accident and are successfully sued for personal injury damages would you expect to be able to dictate when and how the injured party spends the award ?
 
I see the point - however I would have thought that somewhere in your contract with your insurer there is an understanding that they are only paying out because you have claimed to need to do the work and that in claiming, you have undertaken to do the work - don't you generally sign stating that "all the above is true..." or words to that affect. Part of which maybe covers this - no?

Or maybe I'm completely wrong of course.
 
Caveat said:
I see the point - however I would have thought that somewhere in your contract with your insurer there is an understanding that they are only paying out because you have claimed to need to do the work and that in claiming, you have undertaken to do the work - don't you generally sign stating that "all the above is true..." or words to that affect. Part of which maybe covers this - no?
Click to expand...

That would have been my thinking.

Claiming for car damage is different from suing someone for injuries sustained too.
 
I see the point - however I would have thought that somewhere in your contract with your insurer there is an understanding that they are only paying out because you have claimed to need to do the work and that in claiming, you have undertaken to do the work
Click to expand...

Your claim would not be against your own insurer but against the other party's insurance
 
I crashed , was in the wrong and paid other driver € 1,600 total.

It was based on a quotation from a local garage .I ensured the bank-draft was made payable to this garage .

However , I dont know if the repairs were ever carried out .............and could it be possible that the garage would hand over this money to driver , if he/she requested it ?

ps. There was actually no visible damage to car , it was all 'internal injuries ' ( underneath the boot )
 
allthedoyles said:
I crashed , was in the wrong and paid other driver € 1,600 total.

It was based on a quotation from a local garage .I ensured the bank-draft was made payable to this garage .

However , I dont know if the repairs were ever carried out .............and could it be possible that the garage would hand over this money to driver , if he/she requested it ?

ps. There was actually no visible damage to car , it was all 'internal injuries ' ( underneath the boot )
Click to expand...

Do you mind me asking how you crashed into another car without causing any visible damage?

I dint see anything unethical about claiming from insurance or other party and keeping the money.

Can the owner claim any compensation other than garage repairs to a vehicle? Even if the car if fixed to a high standard after a crash, it is still a crashed car.
 
kfk said:
Do you mind me asking how you crashed into another car without causing any visible damage?
.
Click to expand...

I know it sounds strange , however , I hit the car from behind with not much force , and I swear, bar one small spot of paint missing , there were no dents or other visible damage to the car.

After a thorough check in the local main dealers , it was discovered that the material underneath the boot was damaged .

The quotation to fix was € 950 labour and €650 parts .

The insurance company checked this out and said there was nothing they could do , to reduce the claim
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top