Car Insurance - Disputing repayment figure for car

Could anybody advice on the best steps to take when there is a dispute in the amount that an insurance company is offering to settle a claim.

Brief background:
* Car is a taxi
* Car next to taxi was burnt out (random vandals around Halloween), fire spread to taxi and it is a write-off
* Car was purchased 1 year ago for €18k
* Current cost price of equivalent car is around €16k, three equivalent cars priced in garages around the country and proof provided to insurer
* Insurance company are offering €11k on the basis that 'it is a taxi and you always loose money putting a roof sign on it'

Fairly massive difference between the cost to replace the car and what is being offered. Insurance company have said this is the 'final offer'. Even if we allowed €2k as a drop in value for the car being a taxi we are still down €3k.

Few basic questions:

• are we looking at things the wrong way by expecting the insurance to pay us the market value required to replace the car, if so they should be paying €15k - €16k
• is the fact that the car was a taxi relevant for the amount it costs to replace it
• if we put our complaint in writing to the company and it goes no further - where next, is it the financial services regulator or the ombudsman?

Thanks for any advice.

Is this your own policy?

Or the one of the burnt-out car's?

I have a friend in the taxi business, he was the middle vehicle in a pile up from behind, not his fault, insurance company offered him current replacement value and he replaced his vehicle, delighted with his insurer.

The purpose of insurance is to put you back where you were prior to the incident , ask them to locate a similar aged model with similar mileage.

Palerider is right. Its not about the value of your car if you were about to sell it. So the taxi comment makes no sense. Its about the current market value of a vehicle to replace it to the same level.

But, the market value of your car, having been driven as a taxi for one year since purchasing, would have dropped a heck of a lot more than €3k in that time.

I see their reason for this lower payment value. Should they only reduce your purchase price by €2k, and you having used this vehicle for a year as a taxi, you would be put in a far better position than you were!! and that is not what insurance is suppose to be about.

You dont get compensation in that case for any inconvenience, its purely facts and figures.

Thanks for the replies - I am getting the picture now which is the insurance company should actually be offering the amount of money it would cost to replace the car rather than the value if the car was to be sold.

So this means that their figure should be around the €16k mark since that is what it could cost to replace.

What are the next steps in this situation, they have made their 'final' offer. For starters we should get that in writing and then submit a reply in writing? Then if they continue to refuse to review - where do we go next?

Have you got examples of similar specd cars? Get onto carzone and do that. At least 3. And bear in mind just because someone is asking X on carzone doesnt mean they will get it and factor that in.

Thanks, yes - we sourced 3 prices from carzone and they were all in and around the same for the same mileage. Have them printed for our records.

They have already been given to the insurer who has ignored them and seems to be approaching things from the angle of valuing the car as if we wanted to see it rather than valuing it based on replacing it. So - they are knocking money off for it being a taxi, that doesn't really matter when we are buying a replacement.

But it does.

The fact that it was a taxi impacts on its value surely.

They need to give you the amount it would cost to buy the same car.

i.e. same age but was a taxi

The price of non-taxis isn’t relevant

Consider approaching an assessor to deal with the insurance company on your behalf. You may be able to recoup the cost of this from the insurers also.

Gordon Gekko said:

But it does.

The fact that it was a taxi impacts on its value surely.

They need to give you the amount it would cost to buy the same car.

i.e. same age but was a taxi

The price of non-taxis isn’t relevant

Click to expand...

See my previous post, the insured needs to be put back where they were prior to the incident, if their car was a 2016 Mondeo 100kms then that is the replacement vehicle and value and the 'new ' 2016 Mondeo 100kms or close to must be purchased prior to being certified and licensed as a taxi, my real example as it relates to another taxi accident write off is a live example, in that case it was a large van type worth over €44k.

I think you’re missing the point.

Two Mondeos; both with 100kms on the clock; one was a private vehicle, the other was a taxi.

The former is worth more than the latter.

Have you considered the cost of a new roof sign and taxi meter? I presume they were destroyed in the fire.

Luckily the meter and printer were included in a separate part of the policy, it is a bit annoying that the amount covered didn't actually cover the full cost though. Meter and receipt printer were €600 and that is the cap on that part of the policy.