Hello again - private street lighting hit by delivery van

[swiss_toni]

Well, no need because ten minutes ago the insurer says....

"Please be advised that liability is admitted and we are willing to assist with rectifying the damage caused to your property.

We are able to instruct our own approved contractor to make contact with you and obtain an estimate for us. If you would like us to do so please confirm the best contact details to reach you on. We would also appreciate confirmation of who the owner of the property is and their VAT status.

If you would like to discuss anything further with us please do not hesitate to contact us on ***.

I look forward to hearing from you.

Kind Regards,

Elliot | Claims Adjuster"

However - we would like to use our retained electrician, especially as they hold stock of the matching but discontinued light that a contractor will not be able to obtain.

How do we go about this? I suspect that there contractor will be dearer anyway, we are looking at about £500 here for an in-house job.

Can we simply agree to the estimate and if ours is less then simply ask to use our contractor instead? Or just insist on our own contractor?

[R0b]

You can insist on your own contractor if you like. It would probably add weight if you explained to them that the bollard light has since been discontinued but the contractor you currently retain currently holds stock of the discontinued light. Might be worth getting a price to carry out the works/installation and see what they say to that.

Less time and hassle chasing up the insurers.

[des8]

Just explain the position to their claims adjuster, stressing that you will require matching discontinued equipment which your contractor already holds and you are instructing him to proceed and you anticipate they will meet his costs in full.

[swiss_toni]

Pleased to say all now resolved and with little argument full payment has been made to the usual electrician by the insurers, thanks again for all help and advice on this thread.

[des8]

thanks for the update..... well done

[swiss_toni]

You're not going to believe this - same again!

Amazon. Again. Same insurer.



Ah well, maybe I should just reply to the same person I was emailing before

Don't need any advice this time, just thought you'd all like to know!

At least the CCTV captures it better this time, including him stopping and making a lame attempt to 'fix' it!

[des8]

time to move the lighting bollard (or protect it with landmines?)

[swiss_toni]

I agree about moving it as an option, but, the issue is that moving it as opposed to replacing it would be an expense to residents - also there are about 25 more on the estate in varying states of 'prone-ness' but the fact is everyone seems to manage to avoid them - mostly! It was talked about changing it for a fully recessed 'airfield' style light but that might be a trip hazard, then it would be us being taken to the cleaners most likely

[des8]

Ahh well, just let short sighted drivers bounce off it then!

[swiss_toni]

I know, its a hard one, at least with the CCTV its at zero cost to residents (providing the vehicle is insured, I guess - does the MIB cover 'minor' damage to property?). The funny thing was that before the CCTV, in this location, it only happened one other time in ten years, that was the bin lorry who admitted it, and now have cab CCTV / banksman policies that actually seem well enforced. We've had others that have been hit by cars unknown, but in less busy locations and the bollards haven't been hit so hard and have been repairable, especially when they are against walls and fences and the odd reinforcing bracket or repair plate doesn't look so bad under the ivy...

[des8]

I think that if the vehicle involved is identified there is no excess on property damage claims made to MIB, otherwise there is a £300 excess.
However my info might be out of date as it does change from time to time.