VIC Check

[jb64das]

Not vindictive, simply SOP.

I would say if it's SOP it's very sketchy! I have a friend who repairs salvaged cars and has bought many extensively damaged cat 'd' right offs without vic markers and he told me that it was because the insurance company get more for them at the salvage auction without the marker than with it so it sounds more self interest than standard procedure to me.
My cars damage was so minimal that it's only visible if you look closely. It didn't ever leave the road or my possession and didn't require repair so how on earth can it fit the criteria for the vic scheme if a badly damaged car bought from a salvage auction doesn't?
Having said that the assessor probably did me a favour if he made it cat 'c' as the amount they deducted from the payout for me to keep the car would probably have been double if it had been cat 'd' without a marker!
My main issue is that the insurance company never told me that the marker had been placed and that it required a vic check so I have been driving around for a year in a car that will flag up on police ANPR and could potentially have invalid insurance as a result. Is that SOP?

[OneCarefulOwner]

They told you it was a write-off. That's what being a write-off means. They might possibly have explained more fully, but they did let you know.

Cat C & Cat D have different implications, which is why different markers are applied.

[jb64das]

They told you it was a write-off. That's what being a write-off means. They might possibly have explained more fully, but they did let you know.

Cat C & Cat D have different implications, which is why different markers are applied.

You say "That's what being a write-off means" and then "Cat C & Cat D have different implications" so surely they should have informed me what category they had written it off at and what the implications of that were?
The damage on mine being so minimal I couldn't see how it could have been anything other than cat D which from my research doesn't incurr a marker although in Terry G's response to my original post he says he had a cat D with a marker and a cat C without so how can Joe public be expected to know these things? They explained nothing to me. I received a phone call after the assessment of the vehicle saying it was uneconomical to repair and offering a sum of money that they considered market value less a deduction for me to retain the vehicle which I accepted. They transferred the money into my bank there and then and that was the last I heard of it. If it is not their obligation to inform me that it had a marker placed on it and I would need to re apply for a log book then I'm sorry but in my opinion it should be and SOP should be looked at.

[mach1rob]

The VIC has been the norm for any vehicle written off since April 2003, most people who have their cars written off would just take the payment, not worry what happened to their old car, and just go and buy another with the payout. I would say that there are very few people who would ask to buy back the salvage, after all that's what it is once written off, and those that do are aware of the situation with VICs and getting the car sorted. You can argue that the insurance company should tell you they're putting a marker against the vehicle, but that has been standard industry practise for almost 10 years now, they would counter argue that you should know the situation before buying the salvage back off them, swings and roundabouts I'm afraid.

And yes, it takes very little damage for them to decide to write off, my 45 got written off for this!



The black marks on bumper were scuffs from the 3rd parties tyre when he hit me and most of it would have T Cut out, and I could have lived with the wing or easily filled it.

[TerryG]

This was a cat C back in 2001 (i feel old now!)

Dented Minor.JPG (57.99 KiB) Viewed 1156 times

The Cat D was a Clio belonging to an ex so I don't have any pics of that to hand.
This doesn't have a marker but it did take a year to get back on the road. For the record i walked away without a scratch.

[kstrutt1]

I have had a similar situation twice now once when my lotus elan was rear ended and once when my land rover was, in both cases I have agreed a payment for me to repair the vehicle and it is not considered a write off,in the case of a third party claim the vehicle is yours, they can't write it off etc without your agreement, and they have a duty to adequotely compensate you which means you can dictate the terms as long as they are reasonable. The first time it was pretty straight forward and the assessor arranged it all, the second time (direct line a year ago) took some arguing but they coughed up in the end, in fact they messed around so long I had repaired it (new rear X member) by the time their assessor was due to come round so they had to pay up from the photos.