Start with the objects, not the total
Place the calculation beside your latest inventory. Is each assessed object identifiable? A sofa and separate armchair should not silently become one item when you notified two distinct losses. For missing entries, ask whether assessment is continuing or whether they have been excluded.
The assessed loss, the amount payable, and the eventual bank transfer can differ. Repair arrangements, deductions, and earlier payments may intervene. Read the explanation as well as the highlighted final figure.
Identify the valuation route
Univé explains the distinction between new replacement value and depreciated value, including the possible relevance of age and wear. Actual application depends on the product and wording. Do not import a threshold or depreciation percentage from another policy as a universal rule.
For each relevant object, ask whether the proposal uses repair, comparable replacement, or pre-loss value. Identify the model, purchase date, and condition used. An incorrect age is a different issue from disagreement about whether repair is technically possible.
For a new comparable product, consider type and quality rather than only an attractive shop price. If the original model is discontinued, ask why the chosen comparison is appropriate. Keep a specific supported alternative if you disagree.
Do not confuse depreciation with repair scope
A quotation describes work, whereas valuation identifies the financial basis being used. If a repair proposal is limited by a value ceiling, ask which provision supports that. The single word depreciation does not explain every reduction to a contractor's quote.
Check accessories for duplication or repeated deductions. A replacement package may include components separately listed in the inventory. The calculation should make clear which original belongings correspond to each proposed remedy.
Ask whether figures include or exclude VAT and why. A mixed record involving personal possessions and business-used equipment may require explanation. Do not invent a tax treatment yourself; ask for the basis of the amounts.
Follow the path from assessment to payment
Identify the deductible, limits, residual value, and earlier advances separately. For each deduction, ask which item and wording it concerns. An advance is a previous payment, not another loss item. A deductible also differs from a reduction for age.
A purely fictional arithmetic example helps: an accepted amount of 900, a deduction of 100, and an earlier advance of 300 leave 500 if these are the only steps. This is not a statement about your cover or entitlement. It shows why the remaining transfer can be lower than the assessed amount without the entire difference being rejected damage.
Check payments made directly to a repairer too. Money already paid to a contractor will not necessarily appear again in your account. Request a record that lets you follow both payment routes.
If several objects share one limit, ask how the limit is applied across those entries. Do not assume each line has been valued independently merely because the calculation displays separate rows. The explanation should identify the order and scope of any adjustment.
Request a focused correction
For each disputed point, state the error and supporting document. Examples include the wrong model, a later revised diagnosis, or an advance deducted twice. That is clearer than saying only that the overall amount is too low.
Ask which parts remain provisional. Keep the dated calculation and your response. When a revision arrives, compare the changed lines. This shows whether the underlying issue was resolved or only the total altered.
Do not treat an arithmetically correct total as agreement with every assumption. Numbers can add up while using the wrong object, age, or repair scope. Conversely, a small calculation error can be corrected without reopening an otherwise agreed technical assessment. Separating these points makes the remaining discussion manageable.
