Cat C

[pompei]

I know that this has been discussed before, so apologies ...

 

If someone repairs a Cat C car to sell, is there any obligation on them to arrange for whatever work has been done to be checked to ensure the car is OK?  I appreciate that the VIC doesn't do this and in any case has been abolished for some categories at least.  Does it have to have a new MoT or anything?

 

I would worry that if there has been a minor collision following which panel or bumper repairs have been completed, there could be more serious issues, for instance, damage to suspension components etc.  Is it possible to get hold of the insurance inspector's report which presumably would identify those parts of the car which were damaged?

 

Thanks

 

 

[cobblers]

There has never been any kind of official "safety" check of a repaired motor beyond the thing passing an MOT.

[spike60]

It needs a new Mot. I have a Cat C Z3 which had 2 mots in 3 months in 2011 when it was tested, damaged, repaired and tested again. Mine had a bolt on rear quarter panel, rear suspension arm and light. Owned 3 years with no problems.

[UltraWomble]

I had a Fiesta that was a Cat C, bought it back as salvage, popped a new wheel on it and sorted the ignition out and that was it - tested it with missing door lock, dents and shotgun holes.

Passed.

 

Engine gave up 7 months later.

[Vince70]

I went with a friend to have a look at a Cat C Mini Cooper which she bought and the seller was more than up front about the repair and the repair was cosmetic only and done to a very high standard and its been totally reliable and because of the Cat C marker it was nearly half the price of most she looked at.

 

All it needed was a plastic arch liner and a bumper plus a repair to the front clam so less than £100 in second hand parts plus paint but the car had been through a Vic test as it was done a couple of years back.

 

I really can't work out the CatC/D thing as I've seen some that are totally knackered with chassis damage and others that can be put back on the road with a quick bash with a rubber mallet and a second hand bumper..

 

I had a Ford Cougar a few years back and it got written off for a broken number plate plus number plate holder and a scratch on the bumper and a quick compound and a new number plate plus holder and it was good as new.

I got to keep the car and was given £1600 from the insurance company I wouldn't mind but I only paid £1250 for it three days earlier.

 

I would never dismiss a written off car and generally the older the car the less damage it takes to get written off and anything over 10 years old seems to just be ready for the bridge to most insurance companies

 

Also My ex bought herself an nearly identical Mini as my friend But it was only two years old at the time from BMW.

It was supposed to be Mini approved and it was as bent as a banana and had been in a far worse prang than the old Cat C mini we bought but hadn't been written off obviously because it was worth a lot at the time and the doors clam and bumper were all out of line and it also had overspray on the window surrounds so at least with a cat C/D you know what to expect unlike mini approved.

 

So don't write off a write off.

[Justin Case]

I recently checked with the brokers as to why my wife's 1.3 litre Toyota was only a few pounds less than my 2.0 litre Mazda, and they explained that mine would be written off rather than repaired evn though itwas cost effective to repair (cat C) as they didn't want the hassle. They said the figure was about 2/3 of the value, eg a £3,000 car might be written off if the estimate came to more than £2,000 if the parts were difficult to obtain. An opportunity for the shrewd shiter perhaps, look for an older car with minimal damage

[beko1987]

My insurance co would probably cancel our cover if they saw the zx in the flesh...

[groovylee]

As far as I'm aware, there is no actual legal status for the categorisation of write offs, it is an insurance industry category system. Happy to be proven wrong though. Cat c and d I thought didn't need re testing?

 

As an example, I smash my car up. I claim on my insurance. Write off. Let's say cat b. now to get it back on the road I need to jump through hoops....

 

If I don't claim, and repair it myself, as long as it passes an MOT when next due, jobs a good'un. No laws broken.

 

Or have I got it totally wrong?

 

Lee

[spike60]

I think a Cat B means the shell cannot be returned to the road so no hoop jumping needed!

[panhard65]

My old Peugeot 206 was a cat C I was talking to the bloke who did the vic and they don't even need a new mot. The inspector did get a copy of the insurance assesment but all they really checked was the vin. He did say he had a few that didn't tie in with the insurance companies damage report but as long as the vin was right and not tampered with they got a pass

[sierraman]

My old mans 10 plate Insignia just recent got crunched on the rear quarter, req new quarter, bumper sorting paint etc plus the crunch revealed corrosion on the arches. Given its done 80k i wouldn't be surprised if it got written off. Factor in a fortnight a car hire into it and you are looking at 3k at least. On a car worth possibly 4.5k trade in.

[lisbon_road]

I have had loads.  One I sold to some friends, declaring history obviously.  They were insured with direct line, who weren't happy that it was a cat c but agreed to insure it if I got a registered motor engineer to inspect it.  This I did - he looked sagely at it, checked panel gaps visually, charged me £150 and wrote a report using photographs I had given him.

 

Nothing anyone who has a vague idea could not have done.

[alf892]

Bro in law has an xkr which he had a bump in a few months ago. Insurance man came to have a look while it was sitting there with three damaged wheels, bent n/s/f wing and n/s front suspension arm bent. Verdict was a write off because inspector could decide if there would be further damage on stripping ie he was covering his arse. Insurance co paid out 22k nice and quick. A friend runs a body shop so it was taken in and measured up.......found to be ok. To be on safe side all n/s/ f suspension is getting replaced then just needs a set of wheels and a wing.

 

TLDR. How good they are depends on insurance co. They will write off at 60% of cap or less if estimate says there is a suspicion of further damage on stripping

[omegod]

I think a Cat B means the shell cannot be returned to the road so no hoop jumping needed!

 

A common misconception spikeyboy, there is nothing to stop one being repaired and put back into use, there was a cat B merc on the blueforum that was backup and running happily

[Eddie Honda]

There wasn't any legal impediment to getting an A, B or C through a VIC and putting back on the road. The only hassle would be the old boys club code of conduct which is all it is, a code, not a law.

[spike60]

A common misconception spikeyboy, there is nothing to stop one being repaired and put back into use, there was a cat B merc on the blueforum that was backup and running happily

A very common  misconception, one the RAC, the DVLA and the ABI (Association of British Insurers) were under unless it has recently changed. If you can be arsed to read it the categories and meanings are a little way down the page.

 

https://www.abi.org.uk/~/media/Files/Documents/Publications/Public/Migrated/Motor/Code%20of%20practice%20for%20disposal%20of%20motor%20vehicle%20salvage.pdf

[Richard]

It's not unknown for the DVLA site to be wrong, I had to point out an error in their speed limits page only last week.

[New POD]

As far as I'm aware, there is no actual legal status for the categorisation of write offs, it is an insurance industry category system. Happy to be proven wrong though. Cat c and d I thought didn't need re testing?

 

As an example, I smash my car up. I claim on my insurance. Write off. Let's say cat b. now to get it back on the road I need to jump through hoops....

 

If I don't claim, and repair it myself, as long as it passes an MOT when next due, jobs a good'un. No laws broken.

 

Or have I got it totally wrong?

 

Lee

 

Totally correct.

[RoadworkUK]

Evenin' all... sorry to reactivate a thread from the past but it may have suddenly become relevant to me.

 

Hypothetical* situation:

 

Say you've got a twenty year old 306 which you love dearly. Assume somebody ran his company car into the back of you causing quite considerable damage to that, but reasonably negligible damage to the 306.

 

Both parties insurance companies made aware, Company Car man has admitted liability so no worries there. Both cars automatically carted off to An Bodyshop for assessment.

 

Now. Any repair to the 306 likely to constitute an insurance write-off. Market value settlement offer likely to be insufficient to buy anything worth having. Car is totally driveable aside from a tailgate which no longer locks (tailgate still closes squarely but lock is out of alignment).

 

What are the choices? Rather than accept a derisory payout, can you simply say "OK, don't worry about repairing it, I'll come and get it?"

 

Never been here before, have no idea how it works. Thanks.

[The Moog]

In theory you can demand to be out back into the situation you were before the accident.

 

Reality is to try and get as much as you can and then get car back as salvage.

 

I think that even if you refuse a payout you still have to state you have had a claim through insurance. So get all downsides and none of the upsides

[Eddie Honda]

Well having it carted off to the bodyshop is a bad starter if you want to keep it as you may end up with the bill for moving it from there back to you.
 
The first theory is like The Moog says: Putting you back in the position you were prior to the accident.
The second theory is you duty to keep costs within reason and justifiable. e.g. smash a Mini, hire a Mini, not a Rolls Royce.
Market value usually translates to bottom book price, but the ABI says it should be the cost of a replacement of the same year/model/spec and LOCAL to you.
 
YMMV, but take for example my last crash, other side admitted liability within a couple of days:
 
1) 2006 Honda Jazz 1.4 SE Auto - Bought 14 months prior to crash in NI (4325 GBP), re-registered in RoI, local taxes paid, all-in total approx 6100 EUR.
2) After the crash, paid 123 EUR to recover it to my house.
3) Got local bodyshop out to my house to estimate.
4) Got assessor out to my house to look at it.
5) Assessor comes out, takes some pics, asks me on two occasions how much I have it insured for (twice I said "don't know" - it's his job to value it, not mine), he speaks to my bodyshop man. Agrees it is a total loss for insurance purposes (e.g. Cost of repair using genuine parts exceeds 60% of the pre-accident value (PAV))
Then assessor looks up his books, ends up speaking to a couple of contacts in the trade as "his books don't go back that far and offers two figures - a lower PAV of 5000, and an upper PAV of 6000. So he's leaning towards splitting the difference and suggests 5500. Further discussion only gets him to budge 50 EUR more to 5550. What he says, goes with the paying insurer. I could always hire my own assessor, but then if he comes up with a similar figure, then that's money down the drain, so no point unless the offer is well wide of the mark.
6) I express an interest in retaining salvage. Insurer seems to run a not very (well to me) transparent bidding system with trade, supposedly the highest bid they had was 1460 EUR. So bottom line is 5550 and they take it away, or 4090 if I want to keep it.
7) I'm without my car for two weeks but decline a hire car (I could of got one if they took it away to their preferred one-stop bodyshop for assesssment). I say I want loss of use @20 a day, they say hire car rate for them is 17.50 a day, they'll pay me 14 - 14 days@ 14 = 196, we rounded to 200.
8 ) So 4090 + 200 + 123 = 4413 EUR is paid within 3 days by bank transfer and now I have some quality used spares on the drive.
9) Personal injury sustained by Mrs P - ongoing matter.
10) I can't get my 300 EUR road tax (10 months remain) back unless I officially scrap it myself, or export it, or am dead. It's a cunt to get any road tax back here, so that's the last time I'm buying a fucking annual disc. 3 or 6 month discs from now on.
 

IMG_20150610_151522_018 by E Honda, on Flickr
 
Now I'd be in a different position is I had the car carted off. The feckers would probably deduct the bill for shifting it from bodyshop to home, etc. etc. My opinion is if have it carted home you can always get them to come round and lift it later after your repair bloke of choice has had a gander at it.
 
Said quality used spares is still sitting on the drive.
 
I bought a cheap replacement of same spec and model year.
 

IMG_20150701_160607_911 by E Honda, on Flickr
 
Has some dings, scuffs and non-matching bits, but it'll do. At least being yellow they will see me coming. 10k more on the clock and a knackered reverse gear, but it was (1650 GBP) about 3100 EUR after paying local taxes to be on-the-road. So I have about 1200 left of the settlement to fix the old one. It might eat up 1500-odd. I'm going to do what I can myself (pull engine out) and let the bodyshop man do the pulling and painting. A load of ball-ache all round, but just trying to make the best of a piece of bad luck.
 
 
In your case...PAV on 20 y-o Pug will be rather minimal. They will cat C it. Best you can do is haggle it upward, claim a tenner a day loss of use (to cover from date of accident to 5 days after you get the cash-in-yer-'and, you need a nominal amount of time to purchase a replacement and any other losses that are a result of the accident. Haggle, haggle, haggle. There's always room for negotiation. Always. Obviously don't ask for the moon on a stick, just be persuasive for a bit more.
 
Find a shit-hot local panel beater and get it a quote or three and if you decide to get it fixed for sentimental purposes then pick the one least likely to fanny you around and do a half-decent job. It's a lot of fannying around, but it's YOUR car until you sign your rights away on it.
 
You could even elect no payout, just get proof of liability to keep you own insurer happy and fix it at your own expense without it being categorised. Hell you could just ask them for "pay in-lieu of claim" and to leave the vehicle cat-ting out of it. That route is the "just gimmie some money and I'll go away" option.
 
Remember, if you're not at fault, tell them what you want to put it right (within reason). Example, if the PAV of a car is 1000 and the repairs exceed 600 it might be a write-off, but if you were agreeable to use non-Pug aftermarket bits or second-hand instead and thus the repairs were 550 then they could fix.
 
Reality is to let it go and find another one...

[gm]

When the blue mx5 (23 years old and worth roughly a grand) got a bump whilst parked, the blind old giffers insurance company agreed to make 'payment in lieu of repairs" so I got around £400 for a dented wing. I'd already located a replacement in the right colour on eBay for a fraction of that so was happy to accept.

[RoadworkUK]

Thanks all. I rather like the "payment in lieu of repair" idea as the photo's wifey took point to a repair being feasible with a nudge of a hydraulic ram. Doesn't even look like the bumper needs replacing. All depends on the boot floor I guess.

 

Cheers for the help.

[Eddie Honda]

If you decide to keep the car, make sure it is as it was when you get it back.

 

What I saying is it's not unheard of for someone to think it's a total loss and start swapping/pinching bits off it...

[Christine]

Yeah, and the fuel tank will be empty " for safety " .. 

[the judge]

The principle of insurance is that you should neither loose,nor gain. It seems you have to be on the ball and push not to be stuffed with the former.

 

Although not many complain about the latter,myself included