nicedayforit wrote:

^+1 You simply have no way of knowing what stress the impact caused to the towbar assembly, for all you know it could be cracked somewhere. New components is the only way to be sure of future safe towing.

As i said though, where do you draw the line? I mean if you fit a complete new armature, and the mounting points on the body are weakened you could be in the same boat.

there are a few posts on here saying how weak those quick release mechanisms are. If it was a bent farmers hitch i wouldn't hesitate in binning the whole thing, but there is only a relatively small pin to stop the QR swan neck rotating.

Depends how receptive the insurers are. I can't see them arguing over just replacing the QR head and mounting, but you might end up with a whole load of hassle trying to get the whole armature etc changed - depends how much you're going to weigh up the hassle involved vs. the potential risk.

The severity of damage reduces by a certain factor the further you get from the point of impact. My logic being the tow bar itself, FUBAR'd, the receiver damaged, the cross member 'sprained'. I'm sure if you wanted to you could push it right down to the suspension, it's just weighing up actual vs possible damage and the structural integrity of the parts. Only time will tell...

But then the armature is so solid would it not just transfer the force to the next weakest point? Without any give in it, it can't absorb it.

Thing is if you'd not had the QR part fitted at the time of the collision, you'd probably not even have thought of the tow bar just the damaged bumper, if the qr part hadn't moved Iexpect you'd be posting how you got away with just a scratch. How many times has the tow ball taken a whack by someone in a car park without you being aware of it?

Zirconblue wrote:

nicedayforit wrote:

^+1 You simply have no way of knowing what stress the impact caused to the towbar assembly, for all you know it could be cracked somewhere. New components is the only way to be sure of future safe towing.

If the armature is damaged then i would imagine it's buckled the body shell too, i mean the armature is far more substantial than the body it's attached to, it could just as easily have damaged the mounting points on the body, you've got no more way of knowing that either. But where do you draw the line?

I expect they would argue it, anything to get out of paying for stuff. They can just say they're not replacing it as it's not damaged, then the ball is in your court to prove that it is. Or they might argue that the tow armature is old and corroded, and they'll only contribute to a new one and not offer new for old cover.

You could say the head restraint took a bit of a whack too from your head and you want a new one of those too, but i doubt they'd want to pay for it.

And this is based on what experience? Or are you just guessing/making this stuff up?

Well i'm not really interested in turning this into a contest but you asked, so....

I've had 3 claims for my own car, 2 of which were non fault.

I also dealt with various claims as part of my fleet admin work in a previous job - sorry i can't remember the exact number of them, would have been about 30 at a guess. I can't remember the split of fault/non-fault. But they were various scenarios, where our own insurer would have to pay out and others where we dealt with the third party's insurers having to pay for damage to our vehicles.

Assessors and insurance companies were always looking for ways to save money on a claim, they take into account wear and tear on most things, so if a tyre is punctured in an accident for example they'll even look at the amount of tread left before they decide if they'll pay for the tyre or not. there was one where a car hit the front quarter of a Sprinter, it burst the tyre and broke one of the wishbones. The wishbone and transverse leaf spring were replaced as was the tyre. They only paid for something like 50% of the tyre because there was only 4mm tread remaining, i think they replaced the damper strut too. They reused the original wheel rim, we did argue that perhaps the wheel was damaged or weakened but they simply said it wasn't buckled so it was good, they did replace the plastic hub cap!

I can remember a VW LT35 that had a heavy front end shunt, the floor was all pushed up in the drivers foot well. We felt it would be a write off, but they pulled all the floor back out straight and said that it was now all good. The plastic cover for the jack in the passenger foot well never did fit properly afterwards. They simply stated the jig points were in the right place so it was all fine. Could well have been weakened, compared to when it was new but the insurer's body shop said it was good so that's what they went with.

I also spent about 12 years of spending pretty much all my days off helping out at a small garage in return for the use of the facilities (ramp etc). And a bit of outside space to restore old Minis. Although i was unpaid i learned a massive amount, probably as much if not more than someone on a 3 year apprenticeship! During the 12 years they did a quite a few insurance jobs, the assessors always wanted to argue the toss on things, because it's basically their job to save the insurer money. Much like when people insist on Pilkington windscreens, and the insurer says they'll do that but the claimant pays the difference, they're looking to save as much money as possible, they're just there to make a profit fixing peoples cars is secondary.

For a tow bracket they'll just measure it and if the dimensions are with in spec they'll say it's fine, the same as they do with body shells.... If the armature is bent, then it's likely the mounting points on the shell are too and there is a good chance the insurers will then just cat B or C it to eliminate any come back on them.

Thank you for accusing me of "making stuff up" though. That was just plain rude without good cause, because i wasn't rude towards you. Perhaps you just have experience with much more generous insurers.

Thank you for accusing me of "making stuff up" though. That was just plain rude without good cause, because i wasn't rude towards you. Perhaps you just have experience with much more generous insurers.

Im not being rude, And if you thought i was then i apologise my friend... My comments were based on my experience with insurance companies on these such matters!!! I have NEVER (in my 23yr working life) seen a car which has been rear ended & gone through an insurance claim NOT have any towing equipment replaced! Simple fact sir!

I too am not after any form of p ing competition either but!!! My comments/advice are based on fact/experience. All gained as a specialist working on FFRR’s! NOT in the commercial vehicle sector nor a Mini refurbishment centre...

May i just finish by adding, I’m not paid to be here! This is a forum for advice to be sought by members with questions/problems that need help in resolving said issues sir. Im NOT here to argue with people! The advice i have given reference this tow bar is NOT my opinion but IS based on FACT & experience. Simples

If the OP was towing his GG past my children and the tow bar failed Lets simply say, I don’t think that insurance company would just get a small wrap on its knuckles now would it!!!

Quote:

I have NEVER (in my 23yr working life) seen a car which has been rear ended & gone through an insurance claim NOT have any towing equipment replaced!

Irrespective of whether the insurance company agrees to pay for the complete towbar assembly to be changed or not, for piece of mind I would change the complete assembly at my own cost if necessary.
I note that the op tows "a very expensive horse trailer and a pretty valuable GG frequently". Given this I would not hesitate to change the complete assembly.

Zirconblue wrote:

How many times has the tow ball taken a whack by someone in a car park without you being aware of it?

Well, the FFRR is back on the drive, new tow bar assembly and a re-sprayed bumper. Can't begin to describe how happy I am to get the Rangie back - I was less than enamoured with the hire car I was given (Audi Q7), although it did the job. What it did make me realise is that a) I never want an Audi and b) how fabulous a motor the Rangie actually is.

Seriously, if you ever find you might be thinking of changing, drive something else for a couple of weeks and then go back!

By way of a small personal celebration, I'm treating the old girl to some sidesteps and a re-trimmed steering wheel. It really will be as good as new then!