Car Damaged at Work

Lundstram

My car was damaged at work. Forklift driver dropped a bin and it hit the rear of my car breaking a light and also caused a dent. The lad came in and told me what happened and I and the manager took pictures. He said he'd sort it no problem. This was in October. I gave him two quotes in December, one for the new light and one for the cost of dent reapair and respray. Total came to €600 (the light is a copy and not an original part so was €100 compared to Ford's real one at €245), I thought I wouldn't lumber them with a massive bill, I'm sorry I didn't now!

Asked him three times about it and he dragged his feet. Anyway, I got onto him today to have the money for me by the end of the week as it's gone on too long now. He said he lost the quotes and to give me the name of the repairers and I did. He then said I'll ring them an pay it directly via credit card. I said no, you'll pay me the money. My property, my money. He never replied.

I'm thinking he's being a prick about this now as he knows I'll fix it myself or get it done cheaper, which I proably will to be honest.

Where do I stand on this? Does he have the right to not pay me and pay the repairer directly?

anewme

Lundstram wrote: »

My car was damaged at work. Forklift driver dropped a bin and it hit the rear of my car breaking a light and also caused a dent. The lad came in and told me what happened and I and the manager took pictures. He said he'd sort it no problem. This was in October. I gave him two quotes in December, one for the new light and one for the cost of dent reapair and respray. Total came to €600 (the light is a copy and not an original part so was €100 compared to Ford's real one at €245), I thought I wouldn't lumber them with a massive bill, I'm sorry I didn't now!

Asked him three times about it and he dragged his feet. Anyway, I got onto him today to have the money for me by the end of the week as it's gone on too long now. He said he lost the quotes and to give me the name of the repairers and I did. He then said I'll ring them an pay it directly via credit card. I said no, you'll pay me the money. My property, my money. He never replied.

I'm thinking he's being a prick about this now as he knows I'll fix it myself or get it done cheaper, which I proably will to be honest.

Where do I stand on this? Does he have the right to not pay me and pay the repairer directly?

Should work not pay and not the forklift lad?

MAJJ

Get quotes from ford or Denning's who do work for insurance companies, let your boss pay directly. It's transparent and takes out the doubt.

Lundstram

anewme wrote: »

Should work not pay and not the forklift lad?

To be clear, it's the manager I'm dealing with not the employee.

_Brian

Car damaged by an employee in the line of their work then chase the employer for the repair.

You didn’t want to lumber them with a big bill but still you want to make a profit by actually getting it done cheaper - nice

Lundstram

_Brian wrote: »

Car damaged by an employee in the line of their work then chase the employer for the repair.

You didn’t want to lumber them with a big bill but still you want to make a profit by actually getting it done cheaper - nice

I am chasing the employer.

It's a company worth about €10 million, I won't lose sleep by profiting a few hundred euro from them.

raxy

Lundstram wrote: »

I'm thinking he's being a prick about this now as he knows I'll fix it myself or get it done cheaper, which I proably will to be honest

There's nothing wrong with him paying for it with a credit card. It's a business with accounts which need to balance. Your comment above would be a perfect example of why they may insist on it.
They're obliged to pay for the repair not give you cash to the value of what the repair could cost so you can try profit from it.

the14thwarrior

he's entitled to want to pay the bill himself, directly, if he wants to.
He's offering to pay the bill.
that is the end of the story really.

unless a new one begins with him not paying.................

Lundstram

raxy wrote: »

There's nothing wrong with him paying for it with a credit card. It's a business with accounts which need to balance. Your comment above would be a perfect example of why they may insist on it.
They're obliged to pay for the repair not give you cash to the value of what the repair could cost so you can try profit from it.

Nothing wrong with it but it's not his call.

I'm not looking for cash specifically, I've no problem with bank transfer or any paper trail. It's compensation.

Lundstram

the14thwarrior wrote: »

he's entitled to want to pay the bill himself, directly, if he wants to.
He's offering to pay the bill.
that is the end of the story really.

unless a new one begins with him not paying.................

Where did you get this from? Is there some sort of law I've missed?

daheff

OP is entitled to be compensated for the damage done to the vehicle. Either the company pays the cash for the cost of doing the job to the op, or directly to the repairer.

If paid to the OP, the op is not under any onus to have repairs carried out. The OP has received cash equivalent to the damage done to the vehicle so is no better or worse off than if no damage was done. If the OP then decides to repair the vehicle with lesser quality materials then the difference between the cost and the amount received should be roughly equivalent to the loss in value on the vehicle.

cannotlogin

He is obliged to repair the car and that's what you are entitled to.

I suspect there's multiple reasons he wants to pay the garage directly- record keeping, accuracy on price, vat reclaim etc.

I'm not sure what you should be compensated for - he has agreed to repair the damage.

So work is willing to pay the quote to repair the damage by paying directly and getting a VAT receipt for their accounts, but you are not happy with this as you want to make money on the side?

Wise manager.

Johnny Sausage

Lundstram wrote: »

Nothing wrong with it but it's not his call.

I'm not looking for cash specifically, I've no problem with bank transfer or any paper trail. It's compensation.

Eugh Compo vulture

Lundstram

cannotlogin wrote: »

He is obliged to repair the car and that's what you are entitled to.

I suspect there's multiple reasons he wants to pay the garage directly- record keeping, accuracy on price, vat reclaim etc.

I'm not sure what you should be compensated for - he has agreed to repair the damage.

I keep seeing this entitled word. Why is he entitld to do what he wants? I'm pretty sure it's the opposite?

Lundstram

Dav010 wrote: »

So work is willing to pay the quote to repair the damage by paying directly and getting a VAT receipt for their accounts, but you are not happy with this as you want to make money on the side?

Bingo!

Lundstram

Lundstram wrote: »

I keep seeing this entitled word. Why is he entitld to do what he wants? I'm pretty sure it's the opposite?

But you gave him the quote you claim is necessary to repair the car, then after you get the cash you want to get a cheaper repair and pocket the difference, you don’t see the issue with doing that?

Lundstram

Dav010 wrote: »

But you gave him the quote you claim is necessary to repair the car, then after you get the cash you want to get a cheaper repair and pocket the difference, you don’t see the issue with doing that?

The way I see it is, my property was damaged to the value of the quote, (actually a lot lower because the light is not the same quality), pay me and it's done. None of his business what I do with the money.

Lundstram

Lundstram wrote: »

The way I see it is, my property was damaged to the value of the quote, (actually a lot lower because the light is not the same quality), pay me and it's done. None of his business what I do with the money.

He should pay the garage the cost of fixing it. You weren’t injured in any way so aren’t due compensation.

Perhaps the manager knows not to trust you and wants to deal direct with the garage.

Purple Mountain

You do know that a company must keep account of where their money goes?
Their accountant needs an invoice and a receipt of payment as to where company money goes.
The other option is going through insurance but that won't float your boat if you're looking to get a few bob in the back pocket.

hawkelady

I’m beginning to hope you leave the handbrake off the forklift tomorrow and it rolls into your car , at speed !!! Greedy clown

Lundstram

Purple Mountain wrote: »

You do know that a company must keep account of where their money goes?
Their accountant needs an invoice and a receipt of payment as to where company money goes.
The other option is going through insurance but that won't float your boat if you're looking to get a few bob in the back pocket.

Yes it will. Insurance companies pay the person not the repairers.

Lundstram

Lundstram wrote: »

Yes it will. Insurance companies pay the person not the repairers.

That's incorrect.

Lundstram

Ward J. Littell wrote: »

That's incorrect.

No it's not. I've had a cheque sent to me from an insurance company in 2014 after a van clipped my rear.

Purple Mountain

Lundstram wrote: »

Yes it will. Insurance companies pay the person not the repairers.

I was hit by a car before and her insurance company paid the garage directly for my repairs.
I didn't have the option to sex up the costs.

Donald Trump

Sure just do what he wants. Don't get the spurious parts. Get the genuine ones and get an even higher bill sent to the employer. If they question the increase in price just explain that you had been trying to save them a few quid but that you thought they were being cunts so you didn't bother.


Personally, I think they are within their rights to ask to do it that way. Much easier for them to account for a bill to the garage than account for a few extra quid paid to an employee. Not to mention yourself and possible tax implications/headaches.

Lundstram

Donald Trump wrote: »

Sure just do what he wants. Don't get the spurious parts. Get the genuine ones and get an even higher bill sent to the employer. If they question the increase in price just explain that you had been trying to save them a few quid but that you thought they were being cunts so you didn't bother.


Personally, I think they are within their rights to ask to do it that way. Much easier for them to account for a bill to the garage than account for a few extra quid paid to an employee. Not to mention yourself and possible tax implications/headaches.

This is the issue, no one seems to know for sure what must happen in this situation or what the legal standing of it is.

If they insist on paying directly, I'll be for sure getting a genuine Ford one and for them to fit it aswell which will bring the bill to near €1k.

Lundstram

Lundstram wrote: »

No it's not. I've had a cheque sent to me from an insurance company in 2014 after a van clipped my rear.

Was the sum of the cheque based on an estimate given by a garage approved by the insurance company?

Spook_ie

€600 is a lot of petty cash to be accounted for, if he needs an invoice/receipt for the money then he needs an invoice/receipt, and I don't mean one knocked up on a beermat.

Lundstram

Ward J. Littell wrote: »

Was the sum of the cheque based on an estimate given by a garage approved by the insurance company?

Myth.

Insurance company have no right to insist on where a car gets repaired. I sent them a quote and they returned it along with a cheque.

Eggs For Dinner

Employee of the month candidate

Lundstram

Lundstram wrote: »

Myth.

Insurance company have no right to insist on where a car gets repaired. I sent them a quote and they returned it along with a cheque.

That's not really correct. The insurance company would have been under no obligation to accept the quote you sent them.

Lundstram

Ward J. Littell wrote: »

That's not really correct. The insurance company would have been under no obligation to accept the quote you sent them.

And I would be under no obligation to accept theirs or where I get it repaired.

holyhead

The fact that you are trying to make money out of a genuine accident in your workplace stinks. I don't blame the manager for playing cautious. It is not his job to help you make money out of a unfortunate accident. It's his job to account for money paid out. He is perfectly entitled to invoices for work done. It's a business and revenue require any monies paid out to be accounted for.

cannotlogin

I'm not sure it's your employer that's being the prick.

Captain Flaps

Given the OPs quotes in this thread I'd say the manager is keen to avoid handing over any cash at all

cruizer101

holyhead wrote: »

He is perfectly entitled to invoices for work done. It's a business and revenue require any monies paid out to be accounted for.

They are not entitled to invoices, maybe quotes.
The op has to be compensated for the damage done, they do not have to get it repaired, that is their choice.
How the company deal with accounting for it is none of the OPs concern.

Turbohymac

The employer for many reasons here is spot on..the delay of months was probably your doing ..in not swiftly issuing your employer with a quote from preferably a ford main dealer with all genuine parts supplied and fitted and if they couldn't repair dent and spray it themselves they would include cost of a reputable body shop..also they would give you replacement vehicle for duration that your car is being repaired and even if there was a charge to transfer insurance etc the whole package would be covered by your employer in a timely manner..otherwise you could seek legal advice and I'm almost certain then that your employer would play fair..
As it stands you're employer isn't to blame..its your approach..
Just do the above..provide genuine and accurate quote and stop moaning..

ZiabR

Lundstram wrote: »

If they insist on paying directly, I'll be for sure getting a genuine Ford one and for them to fit it aswell which will bring the bill to near €1k.

Then please do that so this thread can be closed and I don't have to see any more of your posts on the matter. It really is quite simple.

1) Company vehicle hits your car and damages it.
2) You approach the manager and the company agrees to repair your car.
3) Company says they have no problem in paying the repair garage directly via a company CC so that there is a record for VAT etc.

You essentially don't like the fact that the company wants to pay to fix your car and instead you try to be a smart a**e and attempt to gouge the company out of cash so you can pocket some on the side. And then you come on here to moan about that very fact.

If you think you are "entitled" to more, take your "employer" to the small claims court over what is essentially a couple of hundred euro and see where you end up. I think its time to wise up OP.

CruelCoin

daheff wrote: »

OP is entitled to be compensated for the damage done to the vehicle. Either the company pays the cash for the cost of doing the job to the op, or directly to the repairer.

If paid to the OP, the op is not under any onus to have repairs carried out. The OP has received cash equivalent to the damage done to the vehicle so is no better or worse off than if no damage was done. If the OP then decides to repair the vehicle with lesser quality materials then the difference between the cost and the amount received should be roughly equivalent to the loss in value on the vehicle.

That's not true.
You can't have a situation where 5k of damage is done to a car worth 1k on the open market and expect the 5k to be paid.
If you make any kind of insurance claim, the insurer pays the repair cost, on proof of repairs/quote. It's not a cash windfall as you put it.

CruelCoin

holyhead wrote: »

The fact that you are trying to make money out of a genuine accident in your workplace stinks.

Unless he's a complete mong, the manager would have had "parked at owners risk signs around the place".
He'd better have them now.

CruelCoin

ZiabR wrote: »

If you think you are "entitled" to more, take your "employer" to the small claims court over what is essentially a couple of hundred euro and see where you end up. I think its time to wise up OP.

The "worth 10 million" quote from earlier was pretty illuminating.

ghost of ireland past

I don't understand why the OP is getting such abuse.

He didn't ask for his car to be damaged.

The employer should compensate the OP. The OP can do what he wants with the money. He is not obliged to fix his car. The employer owes him the money even if he doesn't get the car fixed. The employer is not entitled to claim back VAT on this money.


If the employer damages their own car and gets it fixed they can reclaim the VAT.
If an employer damages someones else's car they pay compensation which doesn't include VAT. Therefore, they cannot claim VAT back. If the third party spends the money and pays VAT that is not the employer paying VAT and the employer cannot claim it back.

The employer has to tell the truth to his own accountant, and perhaps also to his own insurance company (which covers third party liability and public liability). It is not petty cash to pay 600 euro legal compensation, it is legal compensation and should be recorded as such in the books.


Why hasn't the employer paid up already?
He owes the man, pay the man. Stop making excuses.



It is complicated as to whether the ocmpany can claim back the VAT. If you allow them to pay the bill they would likely be able to reclaim VAT but is it totally legal?
Paying you compensation is a genuine business expense. Paying your bill for you and reclaiming the VAT is different from that and I'm not sure of the legality.

I don't think the employer can insist that the OP must spend the compensation money on a service that attracts VAT and then give the receipt to the employer.

The employer should cop on and stop damaging their employee's cars.



edit: I think now that the employer could pay the bill and reclaim the VAT, but the employer cannot force you to actually spend the compensation money on the repair. If you damage something irreplacable, like a work of art which cannot be replaced as it's unique you still have to pay compensation, and the money can't be spent on the same piece of art as the piece was unique. Therefore, compensation paid, but no sale, and no VAT.

Jim2007

Lundstram wrote: »

I'm thinking he's being a prick about this now as he knows I'll fix it myself or get it done cheaper, which I proably will to be honest.

And you think he is being a prick

Lundstram wrote: »

I am chasing the employer.

So you are chasing both the driver and the company, look up the definition of fraud and note it is a crimial offense.

Jim2007

CruelCoin wrote: »

Unless he's a complete mong, the manager would have had "parked at owners risk signs around the place".
He'd better have them now.

Well if he has then the OP is entitled to nothing.

Bikerman2019

Jim2007 wrote: »

Well if he has then the OP is entitled to nothing.

Indeed. The OP appears to be trying to commit fraud. Trying to charge for repairs but trying to get more than is real. Saying it costs X but then trying to pocket cash by getting it done cheaper


I say bravo employer, the OP appears to be trying to dishonestly con them.

jimmycrackcorm

Lundstram wrote: »

No it's not. I've had a cheque sent to me from an insurance company in 2014 after a van clipped my rear.

They do this if your estimate is cheaper than what a garage will charge or they're is a write off. You just happened to be the cheapest garage.

holyhead

cruizer101 wrote: »

They are not entitled to invoices, maybe quotes.
The op has to be compensated for the damage done, they do not have to get it repaired, that is their choice.
How the company deal with accounting for it is none of the OPs concern.

I couldn’t see quotes cutting much ice with revenue

Bikerman2019

holyhead wrote: »

I couldn’t see quotes cutting much ice with revenue

And quite rightly so. Repairs to the car are a legitimate expense. But you need a receipt showing work done. Not a quote. The quote would be fraudulant anyway as the OP has already said he will pocket some of the cash. Unless he declares it as income to revenue ?

Jim Root

this is gas, he offered to pay it directly, what's the problem?

CruelCoin

Jim Root wrote: »

this is gas, he offered to pay it directly, what's the problem?

The problem is the OP wouldn't be able to get some booze money out of it. Sure, they deserve no less, being worth 10 mill and all.