Briggies Mistral Accident

[clivvy]

so I went to see Peter again today, and he has got his Mistral back minus the repairs (Peter will fill us in later). I was suspicious before when they claimed it would be fixed within a week, and taking a look today, I believe they were going to bodge it somewhat, and use the "its an old car" excuse for any other minor damage, which I have pictured below.

so I went to see Peter again today, and he has got his Mistral back minus the repairs (Peter will fill us in later). I was suspicious before when they claimed it would be fixed within a week, and taking a look today, I believe they were going to bodge it somewhat, and use the "its an old car" excuse for any other minor damage, which I have pictured below.

rear bumper hastily put back, but well out of alignment

new damage

door alignment out

rear door alignment out (made worse by bumper-cant open door)

screw in the tyre, looks new

looks very oily underneath

ok, only one drip, but its a drip, and it never dripped oil before

very oily belly

light out

they have actually pulled the bumper OUT

brake fluid in the cyclinder was halfway..not sure if this is relevent

so theres just a few pics. The doors are almost all out of alignment. Drivers door hardly opens, and makes an awful metal grinding noise. Sunroof looks higher at one side, doors are higher or lower, sticking or out. Rear door has dropped. front grill is loose, oil underneath. I believe the chassis is twisted a bit, but what do you guys think?

 

[96terrano]

Id say Definatly twisted. Same sort of thing happend when a transit went into The front of my dads maverick. Sunroof and doors went out of alignment

 

[clivvy]

Id say Definatly twisted. Same sort of thing happend when a transit went into The front of my dads maverick. Sunroof and doors went out of alignment

cheers buddy, I think so too, seems the obvious cause. Car came at the bumper from the rear drivers side towards the passenger side, an angle, so I think it has twist one way, moved the other....

 

[illy]

Any pics of damage befor repair.

illy

 

[cncfabs]

Any pics of damage befor repair.

illy

I dont think its been repaired yet :lol

 

[Liam]

Do they repair damage back to as new condition on older cars? I hit the back of an old car years ago and the guy tried to claim for all new parts, way more than the value of the car. Case went to court and was thrown out because of the guys greed. Judge was not impressed as the whole car before the accident was valued less than alleged cost of repairs. Just wondering as it seems unlikely from the pictures that a new bumper is needed. Oil could have been prior to the accident and I don't understand about the brake fluid, seems more likely that a cylinder is shot, because of the low fluid level. Scratch near the wheel arch could have been caused by towing company or when parked in a car park. I don't know how repairs are treated by insurance companies in the UK but it is unlikely that they would replace the bumper for a new one over here based on damage shown in the pictures. Door alignment is possibly just a minor repair, as it could just be slight movement of the hinges or locking mechanism. There is , of course, the issue of whether the chassis is twisted but that can be verified by the machinery at any good bodyshop, plus it gives a printout so not just based on somebody saying it is ok. Anyway, I hope Pete gets it sorted to HIS satisfaction and doesn't end up out of pocket or without his motor for too long. :thumb2

 

[cncfabs]

Do they repair damage back to as new condition on older cars? I hit the back of an old car years ago and the guy tried to claim for all new parts, way more than the value of the car. Case went to court and was thrown out because of the guys greed. Judge was not impressed as the whole car before the accident was valued less than alleged cost of repairs. Just wondering as it seems unlikely from the pictures that a new bumper is needed. Oil could have been prior to the accident and I don't understand about the brake fluid, seems more likely that a cylinder is shot, because of the low fluid level. Scratch near the wheel arch could have been caused by towing company or when parked in a car park. I don't know how repairs are treated by insurance companies in the UK but it is unlikely that they would replace the bumper for a new one over here based on damage shown in the pictures. Door alignment is possibly just a minor repair, as it could just be slight movement of the hinges or locking mechanism. There is , of course, the issue of whether the chassis is twisted but that can be verified by the machinery at any good bodyshop, plus it gives a printout so not just based on somebody saying it is ok. Anyway, I hope Pete gets it sorted to HIS satisfaction and doesn't end up out of pocket or without his motor for too long. :thumb2

Would have thought it would take a very large impact to twist a chassis on a terrano the damage in the pictures look superficial to me the oil under the engine has not just come as a result of the accident but of course i havent seen it just going by the pics

 

[briggie]

thanks guys for your comments , im really not happy about the condition of my car ,what you cant see in those pics is the rear cross member is badly dented , bumper is tied on with cable ties , most doors are out of alignment , the exception being the passengers door ( i think ) .

it looked a heck of a lot worse than that after the accident , and its obvious that despite their comments that a new bumper would be supplied , that does not appear to be what they where doing.

im no expert , but to me its obvious the chassis is twisted and the body shell too, and i refuse to drive it in that condition bearng in mind i often take my grandkids in it .

my point is surely im entitled to have my car back in the same condition ( or better ) than it was before the accident , which has allready been admitted wasnt my fault ?

this car was in excellent condition before the accident as many people will testify .

its a bluddie wreck at the mo and i will not allow it to be bodged , am i right ?

 

[4wheel]

There is little doubt that your car should be returned in a safe and roadworthy condition.At the very least it should be in the same condition as before the accident.It is possible that as it stands that vehicle would fail an MoT.Perhaps you could get an independant asessment of the vehicle and then tackle the insurance company.Maybe take it to a local garage and ask them to give you a quote to repair/MoT the vehicle as it stands without mentioning insurance. I do know that in time gone by if you were an AA member they would provide that service.I reckon that if you had a professional evaluation the insurance would have a hard time refuting the info.
All the best and I sincerely hope the insurance company meets their obligation.:thumbs

 

[clivvy]

i think the oil leak is a result of the accident. A 40 MPH shunt from a car weighing around a ton is going to send shocks right through the Mistral, whch is why is was catapulted quite a distance even with the brakes on. If Peter and Sheila got hurt, you can bet your ass something else under that vehicle has been damaged too, plus, the door is twisted. I suspect that the oil sump is damaged.

The insurance company or assessors are the ones that have said "new bumper", all Peter has asked is to get his car back in the condition it was in before. I have to say, I am surprised that the insurance had even suggested new parts on a car this old, im also surprised they suggested a fix without a proper assesment, which it hasnt had. The chap who delivered the car back to Peter said, the chassis has NOT been inspected, can you believe it?

Seems to me, as I said before, they ar eusing the "its an old car" excuse to get away with a poor quality fix using existing parts where the insurance company will be paying for "new", this then affects Peters claims, policy and of course, vehicle.

somethings not quite right here, but I think when the other assessors have a look, we will have a clearer view of the situation.

 

[Liam]

thanks guys for your comments , im really not happy about the condition of my car ,what you cant see in those pics is the rear cross member is badly dented , bumper is tied on with cable ties , most doors are out of alignment , the exception being the passengers door ( i think ) .

it looked a heck of a lot worse than that after the accident , and its obvious that despite their comments that a new bumper would be supplied , that does not appear to be what they where doing.

im no expert , but to me its obvious the chassis is twisted and the body shell too, and i refuse to drive it in that condition bearng in mind i often take my grandkids in it .

my point is surely im entitled to have my car back in the same condition ( or better ) than it was before the accident , which has allready been admitted wasnt my fault ?

this car was in excellent condition before the accident as many people will testify .

its a bluddie wreck at the mo and i will not allow it to be bodged , am i right ?

Whatever about being entitled to have the car the way it was prior to the accident, no way are they going to do anything which would make it better. Just to give an interesting case, my mate was sitting in his legally parked car at the side of the road, driver of other vehicle CROSSES to wrong side and hits him. Result, his car is written off, other driver totally at fault (provisional licence and unaccompanied). End result, while his car was properly roadworthy,taxed,insured TP,F and T, he lost out big time as insurance would not repair and his settlement was not enough to replace the car. Moral of the story, if you can get the car legally roadworthy, regardless of new or used parts, and can get the chassis checked to make sure it is ok, take the car and keep driving because the alternative will most likely result in a write off and small payout because of it's age and the fact it's an import. Unless the dent in the cross member is a MOT fail and assuming they sort the door alignment and use correct fittings to fix the bumper, you will be doing ok. As CNCFABS said, it looks superficial and appearance won't effect it's roadworthiness. Cross your fingers for the injury compo in a couple of years and hope you can keep the Mistral going until then. Good luck whatever you decide, but remember the insurance is only there to cover actual loss, not the cosmetics of the car, so minor dents and scratches which don't effect the function of the car won't wash with them. If it turns out the chassis is twisted, it will probably become a write off which should give you enough cash to buy a kids scooter (second hand , of course). I got screwed like that after a write off, eighteen months and lots of hassle later, I got €1,100, had to spend €4,000 for a replacement.

 

[Deleted account DD]

if you were back ended and the sunroof is out of alignment the shell is twisted. if the body shell is distorted i would suggest its not a safe and roadworthy car.............end of :nenau

 

[cleangreenm/c]

damage???

I know this wont help but -----i have just had anew sump fitted to my t2 [04] sump £205 PLUS vat---- sealer£37.50 plus vat local mech time10 hrs to remove dif/sumpand replace £320 total of over £600.
so what chance does brigge stand? if his sumpis damaged could be that the eng mounts have come unbonded?? roy

 

[rustic]

if you were back ended and the sunroof is out of alignment the shell is twisted. if the body shell is distorted i would suggest its not a safe and roadworthy car.............end of :nenau

The Terrano/Maverick/Mistral has a "Ladder " Chassis, there is no diagonal cross bracing, so impact on one side of the chassis will move that part forward, due to the inertia from the 2 tonne weight of the Terrano.

The vehicle when driven, will crab down the road, ie the rear wheels will not follow the line of the front wheels, the steering wheel will also not be straight ahead when driven in a straight line.
Get a friend to follow you to observe the crabbing, if any.



The chassis MUST be checked for allignment.

 

[Deleted account DD]

The Terrano/Maverick/Mistral has a "Ladder " Chassis, there is no diagonal cross bracing, so impact on one side of the chassis will move that part forward, due to the inertia from the 2 tonne weight of the Terrano.

I know, my point is that if the bodyshell is distorted its highly unlikely the chassis isnt plus the body shell is now out of alignment to it whatever else is going on and not meant to be operated in that shape. If it is detectable by the naked eye its buggered.

You simply dont know what stress's and strains are now being imposed on fixtures, fittings and controls not to mention damage to components with mountings common to both shell and chassis eg steering column and brake operating systems.

I personally wouldnt drive it at all.

 

[Deleted account DD]

Do they repair damage back to as new condition on older cars

no, it would be thoroughly impractical in so many ways.

thats why the % value of the car is taken into account against repair costs as a cut off point.

if its probable your car is going to be written off its wise to work out the cost of buying a close or exact replacement to make sure you get a sensible market value from the ins company. When my sierra was written off i managed to find one for sale just the same with higher mileage to prove to them what mine was (or had been :lol:lol) worth.

dead easy to do these days assisted by the internet :thumb2

 

[illy]

Ok then, the car should be repaired to original condition, new parts should be used if the old ones are beyond repair (subject to avalability), if you cant get parts the insurance assessor may ortherise the use of some second hand parts ie bumper but againe should be put back to orignal state. How ever if the garage has missed somthing on its assessment of the repair the insurance man wont tell them, hes there to agree a price on their estimat and save his insurance company money. If the insurance man thought it was dangerus he may say somthing. My exsperiance with insurance assessors is they will save every peny they can.

I once estimate a hevey front damaged car and both front wheel rims were buckled as it had gone up the curb I put on the estimate for 2 wheels and 2 tyres, he said ok to wheels but no damage to tyres so no to them, I said sorry how can you tell what has happend to the internal wall of the tyre, he says no tyres ok, so I write on estimate "tyres refused, against my saifty advice" I asked him to signe it, he said no ok have your F tyres. So what im saying is the only thing they are interested in telling his bos how much he saved his company.

Did you signe a satisfaction note.

 

[makeitfit]

Blinking heck, what's going on? I've been away for the weekend and now you've got this wreck back again
No way can a bent body chassis truck be repaired for a grand or so :doh
Briggie, please tell me this isn't the fixed truck
What was the repair estimate by the way ? :nenau
As above I hope you've not signed it off. Do you still have the hire car?

 

[Deleted account DD]

should be put back to orignal state.

that is the key. you cannot reasonably expect refurbishment to a brand new standard. that is unrealistic.

its down to sensible negotiation between all parties. shy kids get nowt.

all this internet myth about "restoring to as new" , "second hand parts cant be used" is bullshit.

 

[solarman216]

I know this wont help but -----i have just had anew sump fitted to my t2 [04] sump £205 PLUS vat---- sealer£37.50 plus vat local mech time10 hrs to remove dif/sumpand replace £320 total of over £600.
so what chance does brigge stand? if his sumpis damaged could be that the eng mounts have come unbonded?? roy

looks like you went to the wrong place cos we did one on a tdi a month or so ago total cost £150 , Rick