IIZI has been providing a damage assistance service to its customers for quite some time, and in the course of providing this service we have come across a variety of damage-related problems. These mostly relate to the choice of the workshop and the extent of the repairs carried out. These problems have been exacerbated in particular in recent times in the context of the rising cost of living that has also pushed up the cost of repairs. This is why it pays to draw the customer’s attention to their rights in relation to the organisation of the repair of their vehicle.
Customers order repairs
“The number one myth misleading owners of vehicles damaged in a traffic accident is that the insurer is the one who has to arrange the repair of the vehicle,” says Kaido Tropp, head of IIZI’s legal department. In reality, legislation only stipulates that the role of the insurer is to settle the repair costs and, if the customer so wishes, assist the customer in finding a workshop to carry out the repairs.
“It is important to know that, according to the law, the customer is the one ordering the repair of a vehicle damaged in a traffic accident, meaning that upon suffering damage, the customer has the absolute right to choose a workshop whose services they are used to relying on and whose quality they trust,” stresses Tropp.
Seeing as the insurer’s statutory obligations are limited to the reasonable cost of restoring the vehicle, it is customary for the insurance undertaking to request, in addition to the customer’s preferred workshop, a comparative quote from its partner company. “If the offer is in the same price range as the customer’s preferred option, then this will not lead to any issues and repairs on the vehicle can commence at the workshop preferred by the customer”, says Tropp. Unfortunately, we also see cases where the insurer is reluctant to accept the customer’s preference, and refers them to a company where the repairs will be more reasonable, i.e cheaper in the opinion of the insurer.
And this brings us back to the start – the customer is the one ordering the repairs and the one who enters into a contract with the workshop, meaning that any complaints about the quality of the work can only be made by the customer “The customer is responsible and bears the risk for poorly executed work,” underlines the expert.
Despite the fact that indemnification is a routine activity for the insurer and they have a lot of information about the capabilities and work quality of different workshops, this does not mean that the insurer is responsible for the quality of the repairs if the vehicle ends up being repaired at a workshop recommended by the insurer.
Note again that the role of the insurer is limited to the payment of the repair costs.
Information on vehicle repairs must be public to customers
If a price offer from a workshop preferred by the customer and an alternative offered by the insurer are both on the table, they must be substantively compared. In the event of differences of opinion with insurance undertakings, the proper course would be to go through the offers in detail. “Unfortunately, we do see cases where the repair offer preferred by the insurer is drawn up without inspecting the damaged vehicle and the insurer is not prepared to share the details of the offer with the customer,” says Tropp, adding that it is important to keep in mind that the vehicle belongs to the customer and all information regarding the repair of the customer’s vehicle must be communicated to said customer.
“I would like to highlight that the customer has every right to know what makes the offer preferred by the insurer more reasonable,” says the expert. It often comes down to an overlooked detail or a difference in assessment between different workshops as to whether a damaged part needs to be restored or replaced. “In my experience, the practice of comparing alternative bids line by line helps to resolve most disagreements.” According to Tropp, differences of opinion most often arise with vehicles that are “almost” new, where disagreements tend to arise over restoration versus updating costs. In this case, the customer always expects the damaged part to be replaced while the insurer considers restoration more reasonable.
IIZI recommends:
“You were the one behind the wheel at the time of the accident, you are in charge and you decide on the repair process of the damaged vehicle,” underlines Kaido Tropp. He strongly recommends that customers make use of their statutory right to express their preference for a workshop. “If there is a difference of opinion with the insurer regarding the performance and cost of repairs, take some time to analyse the different offers and involve an expert, if necessary, to help you go through the details of the different offers.”
While insurers deem the cost of the vehicle’s repair to be a very important aspect, customers are entitled by law to enforce their preferences with regard to the repairs.
