Insurance company will not consider AWD only AGE & mileage for write off

Definitely push back, its a negotiation, so never take the first offer. Lack of other similar models to back up your claim makes it awkward though.

If, say, you have a 2015 in a particular spec, and all that’s out there second hand today in that spec is 2018, the question is if they should pay out the the value of a 2018 so you can get a more like-for-like replacement?

It’s crap to have someone crash into you, and there is usually a bit of leeway with payouts especially where you’re bit at fault, but I can’t see them paying a lot more than your own car was worth, but you’re in a better position than if you were at fault.

Insurers are open to negotiation when you can provide supporting documentation. Where such is not available it can be very difficult and insurers rarely budge. Reasoned argument gets you further than making demands or threatening solicitors

Is there an AWD younger model out there, what is the differential in price to a like for like fwd model , or a number of both, if you can build your argument this way you may be able to increase your bargaining power

Thats not how an Irish market valuation works.

Insurance companies aren’t obliged to give you like for like a replacement, they just pay out the value of the car. No more than if I had a yellow car and there were no yellow ones available.

In my experience if your insuring a cheap car you’ll usually get a little discount by increasing the value by a couple of grand.

As far as I know, if you insure your car for say €10k then thats the max they will pay out, so if it turns out the car is actually worth €13k, the insurance company will have saved themselves €3k by letting you decide the value.

But if you insure it for €13k and its only worth €10k then you’ll only get the lower amount. You can’t win.

I think it’s absolutely scandalous what the insurance companies get away with. Unless it’s a new car with a new car replacement clause, you never, ever get the value of your car, and you end up out of pocket for something that was not your fault. They seem to do whatever the hell they want to do and no one gives a rats. OP, you’ll have a tough time getting them to budge. They offer what the car can be bought at in the trade, which we all know is not realistic. Given that the government make it illegal to drive without insurance they surely have a responsibility to step in here and sort it out, but they couldn’t be bothered.

You can win - simply by being realistic in your valuation.

They will pay out up to a maximum of what you have insured it for or the current market value. Whichever is the lowest. Same formula applies across insurance types.

Insurers are fully transparent in that they all agree that you get the market value, capped by the declared sum insured. The difficulty in the event of a claim is establishing that figure. If you disagree with their assessment and can provide clear evidence to the contrary, they will negotiate

Getting back to the original issue.

The relevant principle is that the culpable party's insurers must indemnify the claimant. Indemnification means putting the claimant in the exact financial position they enjoyed just before the crash.

The problem is agreeing the measure of indemnity. In the case of a write-off that means the market value less any salvage value. Age and mileage are not always the sole determinants of the market value. Sometimes the parties just cannot agree the relevant figure and a judge has to do it. Insurance companies facing cases on quantum only [no contest on liability] can always be stretched a bit as they will not like to incur legal costs and will cough a little bit more to avoid litigation.

As far as car hire is concerned a claimant must remember that although the other party may be at fault they - the claimant - have an obligation to minimise their losses. A claimant cannot just hire a replacement vehicle on an open ended basis. I think that a period of around 3 weeks hire is probably reasonable for a write-off case.