Luton Airport Fire update:
I was in touch with our insurers while we were still in Antibes and they
had already told me to get a taxi from the airport and arranged a hire
car back in Bedford which we've been using ever since.
I had another long call with them on Sunday morning when the outlook
looked bleak and gave them details of the car, year, mileage, extras etc
and an example of a car that was almost identical and was about £1500
more than the online valuation I'd done. I dug out the exact model
variant as well and sent that to them, so when they had confirmation
from the airport that all 1400 cars were written off they made an offer
that was even higher than the one I'd asked for. Since we got the
Outlander new on an employee deal through a friend, our 5 years of
motoring has been fairly cheap at just over 1Kpa.
Money was paid Tuesday and arrived in the account Thursday. So all this
bollocks like I've just listened to on Look East about people in the
dark is, errm, bollocks as the MIB has been advised of all the cars
affected apart from a very few so badly burned they can get the Reg or
VIN. Even the ones that are not damaged are written off too because they
can't get them out any time soon because of the structural damage. We
might get some contents back if and when salvagers can get in, but they
need to shore up the structure first and make it safe.
Courtesy car goes back on today, but we've already bought a new one
which should be ready to pick up later this morning - a Skoda Kodiaq,
very similar to old Outlander but 2 years newer, lower mileage, a few
extra nice features and it's petrol instead of diesel so is cheaper to
run and insure.
Can't speak highly enough of LV insurance, they've been brilliant and it
looks like Saga Household Insurance will cover the car contents – they
must be sick of us as we had a multi-thousand pound claim in the summer
from my car contents theft. I'd also compliment Luton Airport as they've
been great in providing updates whenever they have new information and
really seem to have done the best they can.
I would avoid Luton Airport for a while though - the dropoff point is
inaccessible and DART is out of action. Dropoff is now at midterm
carpark which means a 10-15 minute walk, DART station closed too so they
are back to buses which is a problem as the bendy buses were sent to
Ukraine and the traffic is really bad up to the bus/taxi station at the
terminal. It's not going to improve for months.

On Fri, 20 Oct 2023 10:35:33 +0100, BrritSki wrote:

> Luton Airport Fire update:

> Money was paid Tuesday and arrived in the account Thursday. So all this
> bollocks like I've just listened to on Look East about people in the
> dark is, errm, bollocks as the MIB has been advised of all the cars
> affected apart from a very few so badly burned they can get the Reg or
> VIN.

It's possible that other insurers have not been as on the ball as yours.
And those with 3rd party rather than comprehensive presumably have a
different, much slower, route to getting compensation.

--
Jim <http://www.jim-easterbrook.me.uk/>
1959/1985? M B+ G+ A L- I- S- P-- CH0(p) Ar++ T+ H0 Q--- Sh0

On 20/10/2023 12:33, Jim Easterbrook wrote:
> On Fri, 20 Oct 2023 10:35:33 +0100, BrritSki wrote:
>
>> Luton Airport Fire update:
>
>> Money was paid Tuesday and arrived in the account Thursday. So all this
>> bollocks like I've just listened to on Look East about people in the
>> dark is, errm, bollocks as the MIB has been advised of all the cars
>> affected apart from a very few so badly burned they can get the Reg or
>> VIN.
>
> It's possible that other insurers have not been as on the ball as yours.
> And those with 3rd party rather than comprehensive presumably have a
> different, much slower, route to getting compensation.
>

In my experience (car accidents, house fire) LV has been excellent
(crossing fingers for the future). Quite stringent on proof, but once
convinced, very generous.

--
Kate B

On 20/10/2023 12:33, Jim Easterbrook wrote:
> On Fri, 20 Oct 2023 10:35:33 +0100, BrritSki wrote:
>
>> Luton Airport Fire update:
>
>> Money was paid Tuesday and arrived in the account Thursday. So all this
>> bollocks like I've just listened to on Look East about people in the
>> dark is, errm, bollocks as the MIB has been advised of all the cars
>> affected apart from a very few so badly burned they can get the Reg or
>> VIN.
>
> It's possible that other insurers have not been as on the ball as yours.
> And those with 3rd party rather than comprehensive presumably have a
> different, much slower, route to getting compensation.
>
True, but it's probably also true that a lot of them sat on their Rses
and didn't contact the airport or the insurers and wanted everything on
a plate.

In message <kpevv5Fsgv1U1@mid.individual.net> at Fri, 20 Oct 2023
10:35:33, BrritSki <rtilburyTAKEOUT@gmail.com> writes
>Luton Airport Fire update:
[]
>Money was paid Tuesday and arrived in the account Thursday. So all this
>bollocks like I've just listened to on Look East about people in the
>dark is, errm, bollocks as the MIB has been advised of all the cars
>affected apart from a very few so badly burned they can get the Reg or
>VIN. Even the ones that are not damaged are written off too because
>they can't get them out any time soon because of the structural damage.
>We might get some contents back if and when salvagers can get in, but
>they need to shore up the structure first and make it safe.

Sounds a nasty thing (and looked it on the news). Thinking about it,
it's inevitable, as fuel will run across the smooth surfaces. Maybe
there'll be a change to regulations, such that (presumably initially
only new, eventually back-enforced to existing) car parks have to have a
row of bricks or something, rather than just a painted line, between
bays, to act as a berm (is that the right word?) in case of leaks.
(Would also encourage people to park properly too!) [OK, row of bricks
not a good seal, but something could be devised.]

>Courtesy car goes back on today, but we've already bought a new one
>which should be ready to pick up later this morning - a Skoda Kodiaq,
>very similar to old Outlander but 2 years newer, lower mileage, a few
>extra nice features and it's petrol instead of diesel so is cheaper to
>run and insure.

Škoda are good value. Petrol cheaper? I know Diesel costs more, but I
generally feel I get more than enough more miles per whatever to justify
(especially as the difference between prices has dropped a lot in the
last year or so). Interesting about the insurance. So, you didn't feel
inclined to go electric or at least hybrid? (I'm still after a "range
extender" - basically pure electric, but with a little generator built
in - that can't drive the wheels directly, which seems excessively
complicated/heavy. But I think nobody makes those any more [I think BMW
did, something like a 3i].)

>Can't speak highly enough of LV insurance, they've been brilliant and

Liverpool Victoria isn't it. I'm with them, though for a different
reason (they're on unlock's list).

>it looks like Saga Household Insurance will cover the car contents –
>they must be sick of us as we had a multi-thousand pound claim in the

Have you lost anything irreplaceable?

>summer from my car contents theft. I'd also compliment Luton Airport as
>they've been great in providing updates whenever they have new
>information and really seem to have done the best they can.
>I would avoid Luton Airport for a while though - the dropoff point is

For those of us for whom that phrase always means … here's the link:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8ydVbn0gMk4
(nobody has the right to be that beautiful).

>inaccessible and DART is out of action. Dropoff is now at midterm
>carpark which means a 10-15 minute walk, DART station closed too so
>they are back to buses which is a problem as the bendy buses were sent
>to Ukraine and the traffic is really bad up to the bus/taxi station at
>the terminal. It's not going to improve for months.

I was going to say that, despite much coverage to the contrary in the
media recently, I had no trouble accessing the DART site (I've just
checked, and my balance has gone down as I expected, after my trip to
Norfolk and back), but since you mentioned a station, I presume you're
not discussing the DART I thought of.

I just had a very pleasant couple of days in Norfolk, with an American
cousin* and her husband who visited, looking round graveyards and
generally doing family tree stuff. (Fifth cousin.)

* the phrase always reminds me that "my American cousin" was apparently
the name of the play - apparently a farce - that president Lincoln was
watching.

(If any fellow UMRAt genealogists also have Norfolk roots: surnames
Ne[a]ve, Slaughter [including a Savage=Slaughter marriage!], Beck,
Matthews, Vincent, Curtis/ies, and many others but more
Neave/Slaughter/Beck than anything else. Where: more or less any village
in northeast Norfolk, but particularly Honing, Barton Turf, East Ruston,
Scottow, Smallburgh, Neatishead, and Catfield. Would be lovely to
establish a connection to another UMRAt!)
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

"You _are_ Zaphod Beeblebrox? _The_ Zaphod Beeblebrox?"
"No, just _a_ Zaphod Beeblebrox. I come in six-packs." (from the link episode)

In message <kpfbp9F7ukU1@mid.individual.net> at Fri, 20 Oct 2023
13:57:13, BrritSki <rtilburyTAKEOUT@gmail.com> writes
>On 20/10/2023 12:33, Jim Easterbrook wrote:
>> On Fri, 20 Oct 2023 10:35:33 +0100, BrritSki wrote:
>>
>>> Luton Airport Fire update:
>>
>>> Money was paid Tuesday and arrived in the account Thursday. So all
>>>this
>>> bollocks like I've just listened to on Look East about people in the
>>> dark is, errm, bollocks as the MIB has been advised of all the cars
>>> affected apart from a very few so badly burned they can get the Reg or
>>> VIN.
>> It's possible that other insurers have not been as on the ball as
>>yours.
>> And those with 3rd party rather than comprehensive presumably have a
>> different, much slower, route to getting compensation.

Yes, they'll be chasing Luton (well, _it_'s insurers) direct. And _they_
will be trying to push the "at own risk" signs as far as they can (I
suspect not very far, as there's at least some _implied_ duty of care,
especially as you pay. But IANAL).

There are probably several ambulance-chaser (or whatever the correct
term is in this circumstance) firms saying "we'll handle it for you for
a hefty cut"; normally I'd eschew such, but in this case (a) it might be
worth it because of the amount of faff involved, (b) because of the
number of claimants, it might be more effective anyway to do a mass
joint action like that.
>>
>True, but it's probably also true that a lot of them sat on their Rses
>and didn't contact the airport or the insurers and wanted everything on
>a plate.

Indeed. Though they have some right to be annoyed.
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

"You _are_ Zaphod Beeblebrox? _The_ Zaphod Beeblebrox?"
"No, just _a_ Zaphod Beeblebrox. I come in six-packs." (from the link episode)

On 20/10/2023 14:23, J. P. Gilliver wrote:

<snipped>

> Maybe
> there'll be a change to regulations, such that (presumably initially
> only new, eventually back-enforced to existing) car parks have to have a
> row of bricks or something, rather than just a painted line, between
> bays, to act as a berm (is that the right word?) in case of leaks.

I would plump for 'bund'.

--
Cheers
Clive

In message <ugu1if$147t2$1@dont-email.me> at Fri, 20 Oct 2023 15:07:10,
Clive Arthur <clive@nowaytoday.co.uk> writes
>On 20/10/2023 14:23, J. P. Gilliver wrote:
>
><snipped>
>
>> Maybe there'll be a change to regulations, such that (presumably
>>initially only new, eventually back-enforced to existing) car parks
>>have to have a row of bricks or something, rather than just a painted
>>line, between bays, to act as a berm (is that the right word?) in
>>case of leaks.
>
>I would plump for 'bund'.
>
That might have been what I was thinking of. Berm reminds me of the line
in one of the Pink Panther films: "It is a berm [bomb]. Were you
expecting one?"
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

As soon as Piglet realised he was useful, he didn't feel frightened any more.
- (Quoted by) Anneka Rice, 2023/5/3 and in RT 2023/3/18-24

On Fri, 20 Oct 2023 14:23:49 +0100, J. P. Gilliver wrote:

> Sounds a nasty thing (and looked it on the news). Thinking about it,
> it's inevitable, as fuel will run across the smooth surfaces. Maybe
> there'll be a change to regulations, such that (presumably initially
> only new, eventually back-enforced to existing) car parks have to have a
> row of bricks or something, rather than just a painted line, between
> bays, to act as a berm (is that the right word?) in case of leaks.

How would one drive into (and out of) such a walled enclosure?

--
Jim <http://www.jim-easterbrook.me.uk/>
1959/1985? M B+ G+ A L- I- S- P-- CH0(p) Ar++ T+ H0 Q--- Sh0

On Fri, 20 Oct 2023 12:49:28 +0100, Kate B <elvira@nospam.demon.co.uk>
scrawled in the dust...

>On 20/10/2023 12:33, Jim Easterbrook wrote:
>> On Fri, 20 Oct 2023 10:35:33 +0100, BrritSki wrote:
>>
>>> Luton Airport Fire update:
>>
>>> Money was paid Tuesday and arrived in the account Thursday. So all this
>>> bollocks like I've just listened to on Look East about people in the
>>> dark is, errm, bollocks as the MIB has been advised of all the cars
>>> affected apart from a very few so badly burned they can get the Reg or
>>> VIN.
>>
>> It's possible that other insurers have not been as on the ball as yours.
>> And those with 3rd party rather than comprehensive presumably have a
>> different, much slower, route to getting compensation.
>>
>
>In my experience (car accidents, house fire) LV has been excellent
>(crossing fingers for the future). Quite stringent on proof, but once
>convinced, very generous.

This is good to know. I'm always annoyed by surveys which ask me my opinion
on insurers. I only know one I wouldn't touch with a barge pole (Aviva),
since they made such a mess of my only household claim. You can only rate
an insurer properly when you have needed to claim.
--
Penny
Annoyed by The Archers since 1959

In message <kpfh8jFqe38U2@mid.individual.net> at Fri, 20 Oct 2023
14:30:43, Jim Easterbrook <news@jim-easterbrook.me.uk> writes
>On Fri, 20 Oct 2023 14:23:49 +0100, J. P. Gilliver wrote:
>
>> Sounds a nasty thing (and looked it on the news). Thinking about it,
>> it's inevitable, as fuel will run across the smooth surfaces. Maybe
>> there'll be a change to regulations, such that (presumably initially
>> only new, eventually back-enforced to existing) car parks have to have a
>> row of bricks or something, rather than just a painted line, between
>> bays, to act as a berm (is that the right word?) in case of leaks.
>
>How would one drive into (and out of) such a walled enclosure?
>
Only at the sides, not the entrance! (And - for new car parks at least -
a very slight downslope - and drainage - could become obligatory, to
stop it getting out of the entrance side.)
--
J. P. Gilliver. UMRA: 1960/<1985 MB++G()AL-IS-Ch++(p)Ar@T+H+Sh0!:`)DNAf

I'm too lazy to have a bigger ego. - James May, RT 2016/1/23-29

On Fri, 20 Oct 2023 15:55:27 +0100, "J. P. Gilliver" <G6JPG@255soft.uk>
scrawled in the dust...

>In message <kpfh8jFqe38U2@mid.individual.net> at Fri, 20 Oct 2023
>14:30:43, Jim Easterbrook <news@jim-easterbrook.me.uk> writes
>>On Fri, 20 Oct 2023 14:23:49 +0100, J. P. Gilliver wrote:
>>
>>> Sounds a nasty thing (and looked it on the news). Thinking about it,
>>> it's inevitable, as fuel will run across the smooth surfaces. Maybe
>>> there'll be a change to regulations, such that (presumably initially
>>> only new, eventually back-enforced to existing) car parks have to have a
>>> row of bricks or something, rather than just a painted line, between
>>> bays, to act as a berm (is that the right word?) in case of leaks.
>>
>>How would one drive into (and out of) such a walled enclosure?
>>
>Only at the sides, not the entrance! (And - for new car parks at least -
>a very slight downslope - and drainage - could become obligatory, to
>stop it getting out of the entrance side.)

Something rubbery (and fireproof). Are there such things as foam
sprinklers?
--
Penny
Annoyed by The Archers since 1959

On 20/10/2023 14:23, J. P. Gilliver wrote:
> In message <kpevv5Fsgv1U1@mid.individual.net> at Fri, 20 Oct 2023
> 10:35:33, BrritSki <rtilburyTAKEOUT@gmail.com> writes
>>
>
> Škoda are good value. Petrol cheaper? I know Diesel costs more, but I
> generally feel I get more than enough more miles per whatever to justify
> (especially as the difference between prices has dropped a lot in the

The mpg on newer petrol cars is claimed to be much better, so the price
difference between petrol and diesel is more significant allegedly, but
we will see. The car is noticeably quieter though and I won;t get such
smelly hands now when I fill up.

> last year or so). Interesting about the insurance. So, you didn't feel
> inclined to go electric or at least hybrid?

Most certainly not. My first thought was that the fire would be an EV
but I thought again when I saw they'd got it out relatively quickly and
the local fire chief claims it was a diesel.

But I have now seen a video of a McLaren hybrid battery fire that was
put out in 30 minutes, so maybe they have developed a better technique
or maybe hybrids with smaller batteries don't have so much of a problem.
There is a picture of the vehicle where the fire allegedly started that
is claimed to be a Range Rover Evoque hybrid.

Even if there wasn't a risk of fire I would be wary of electric
vehicles, even before you get to range anxiety and long recharge times.
A hybrid would be good as we could use our own solar power to recharge
on the drive, but I am concerned that the insurance costs are going to
rise quickly (some insurers won't handle them already and others have
given people huge increases) and that they will be banned from some
places such as ferries and Euroshuttle as well as some aging carparks
because of their extra weight.

And they're not that green either. Volvo says that it takes 6 years
before you "repay" the additional CO2 costs in building them, and then
most of the electricity used to charge them is from fossil fuels anyway.
Plus they spew out more PM25 particulates than normal cars because they
are heavier and have better acceleration so tyres wear more quickly and
brakes have to work harder even with regenerative braking.

And road pricing is going to come in soon too to replace the lost fuel duty

> Have you lost anything irreplaceable?

No, luckily

On 20/10/2023 15:55, J. P. Gilliver wrote:
> In message <kpfh8jFqe38U2@mid.individual.net> at Fri, 20 Oct 2023
> 14:30:43, Jim Easterbrook <news@jim-easterbrook.me.uk> writes
>> On Fri, 20 Oct 2023 14:23:49 +0100, J. P. Gilliver wrote:
>>
>>> Sounds a nasty thing (and looked it on the news). Thinking about it,
>>> it's inevitable, as fuel will run across the smooth surfaces. Maybe
>>> there'll be a change to regulations, such that (presumably initially
>>> only new, eventually back-enforced to existing) car parks have to have a
>>> row of bricks or something, rather than just a painted line, between
>>> bays, to act as a berm (is that the right word?) in case of leaks.
>>
>> How would one drive into (and out of) such a walled enclosure?
>>
> Only at the sides, not the entrance! (And - for new car parks at least -
> a very slight downslope - and drainage - could become obligatory, to
> stop it getting out of the entrance side.)

A drain full of burning petrol will spread the fire round the car park
quite effectively. If cars were powered by electricity there wouldn't be
a problem.

I'm not sure you would get a big problem from burning fuel spreading. If
a car is leaking it would need to be ignited by something, if the car is
already burning then the fuel will burn as it comes into the air (unless
the tank splits and dumps its entire contents).

--
Ric

On Friday, October 20, 2023 at 1:57:16 PM UTC+1, BrritSki wrote:
> On 20/10/2023 12:33, Jim Easterbrook wrote:
> > On Fri, 20 Oct 2023 10:35:33 +0100, BrritSki wrote:
> >
> >> Luton Airport Fire update:
> >
> >> Money was paid Tuesday and arrived in the account Thursday. So all this
> >> bollocks like I've just listened to on Look East about people in the
> >> dark is, errm, bollocks as the MIB has been advised of all the cars
> >> affected apart from a very few so badly burned they can get the Reg or
> >> VIN.
> >
> > It's possible that other insurers have not been as on the ball as yours..
> > And those with 3rd party rather than comprehensive presumably have a
> > different, much slower, route to getting compensation.
> >
> True, but it's probably also true that a lot of them sat on their Rses
> and didn't contact the airport or the insurers and wanted everything on
> a plate.
Also true IMO. But isn't that exactly the market that the insurance industry
has been pitching to for the past several years?

Glad to hear that, in the long-ago words of Commercial Union, they're not
making a drama out of a crisis.

Nick

On 21/10/2023 23:11, Nick Odell wrote:
> On Friday, October 20, 2023 at 1:57:16 PM UTC+1, BrritSki wrote:
>> On 20/10/2023 12:33, Jim Easterbrook wrote:
>>> On Fri, 20 Oct 2023 10:35:33 +0100, BrritSki wrote:
>>>
>>>> Luton Airport Fire update:
>>>
>>>> Money was paid Tuesday and arrived in the account Thursday. So all this
>>>> bollocks like I've just listened to on Look East about people in the
>>>> dark is, errm, bollocks as the MIB has been advised of all the cars
>>>> affected apart from a very few so badly burned they can get the Reg or
>>>> VIN.
>>>
>>> It's possible that other insurers have not been as on the ball as yours.
>>> And those with 3rd party rather than comprehensive presumably have a
>>> different, much slower, route to getting compensation.
>>>
>> True, but it's probably also true that a lot of them sat on their Rses
>> and didn't contact the airport or the insurers and wanted everything on
>> a plate.
> Also true IMO. But isn't that exactly the market that the insurance industry
> has been pitching to for the past several years?

I have no idea, I never watch, read or listen to ads. :)

On 20/10/2023 14:23, J. P. Gilliver wrote:
> (If any fellow UMRAt genealogists also have Norfolk roots: surnames
> Ne[a]ve, Slaughter [including a Savage=Slaughter marriage!], Beck,
> Matthews, Vincent, Curtis/ies, and many others but more
> Neave/Slaughter/Beck than anything else. Where: more or less any village
> in northeast Norfolk, but particularly Honing, Barton Turf, East Ruston,
> Scottow, Smallburgh, Neatishead, and Catfield. Would be lovely to
> establish a connection to another UMRAt!)

A large number of my Blanchflower forebears were in, and around Norfolk,
mainly around Kings Lynn and East Dereham, certainly throughout the 19th
century. I don't recognise any of the names you mentioned from my tree
though.

On the other side of my family tree, I also had a gt-gt-gt uncle,
Charles Currie, who was rector of Tilney All Saints, in Norfolk, from
sometime before 1841, till between 1871 and 1881. He would have been
several rungs up the ladder, socially, from my Blanchflower relatives
but I would have loved it if he had been responsible for any
Blanchflower christenings / marriages / funerals! Of even, if he'd had
any Blanchflower servants working for him.

--
Best wishes, Serena
"No one can defeat us unless we first defeat ourselves." - Dwight D.
Eisenhower