Who is at fault here

there should have been someone out to inspect the car within a week, usually less. that part is rather odd...

My wife had a similar incident, albeit a car pulled out in front of her. 3rd party denied that she had caused sufficient damage to write the car off, however the insurance assessor felt differently (It doesnt take a lot to write off and ageing Peugeot 307 with quarter of a million miles on the clock.
It went on for ages, even had a forensic engineer checking photo's of the 3rd parties car.
My arguement all along was that if the insurance company wanted to write the car off, thats up to them, I certainly wasnt going to lose any sleep over it.
3 years later it was agreed that she was at fault and everything was cleared up.

You were not at fault, make sure you have a good solicitor.

Yeah, same set up as me then! You'll get what you need in the end but it's very drawn out. Just stick with it!

Hi Rapidyellow.

I try to keep quiet about this, but I work in a Law Firm (literally 5 miles from Garvins!) and someone in our office used to work there too.

Garvins should issue Court Proceedings for you.

I know you call it a Courtesy Car, but in reality this will be a credit hire car and whilst you are personally liable for the cost, Easidrive will defer payment whilst the claim is ongoing (technically, you are obliged to pay the full amount within 1 year).

I have today issued court proceedings for a client who has been in a car for 154 days to date as the insurers believe his car (a plated taxi) could have been used with the damage on it. They will not listen to me when I say a taxi cannot be driven with damage and his Private Hire Vehicle Licence was revoked.

When court proceedings are issued, the insurers will immediately send the file to their panel solicitors. They (usually) have a bit more intelligence than the insurers and will take a much more pragmatic view of the matter.

So, to answer your question again, I would be asking your solicitor to hurry the f£&k up and issue court proceedings. Believe me, it really speeds things up.

Dave,

Hi,

Giving the hire car back before you get paid for your own car will create more problems than it solves. If you can manage without the hire car today, why couldn't you have given it back a week ago? If you could give it back a week ago, why didn't you give it back a month ago? Why did you hire it in the first place?

You have to have a 'need' to hire a car in order for it to be justified.

I had someone drive into the back of me whilst stationary at a roundabout. Smashed up back bumper and damage to the tailgate (Or boot, I've suddenly turned american!) Insurance company were really good about it and paid up for the repairs and hire car straight away. (Couldn't really argue about it and the guy driving the car (must have been 80, could barely walk and fell over the pavement after he'd finally made it out of the car!) admitted liability straightaway. My brother on the other hand drove into the back of someone (not relevant, but our younger brother!) and has had absolute nightmares. There is a point..... Insurance companies seem to be incapable (in the main, I'm with the AA and they've been excellent)of dealing with their clients promptly and like someone said before seem to think that if they fark you around for long enough you'll just give up and move on, paying an increased premium next time you renew! No wonder there are so many uninsured drivers on our roads (In no way condoning that, it's just inevitable)

Finally, I have had a claim in for whiplash (No, I didn't think it was a real thing either, let me assure you it is!) since the accident in mid April and I'm still waiting.....