Purchased a 2015 SEAT Ibiza Category S insurance write-off and needed an engineer's report

Needed Engineers Report For Insurance Company To Assess Roadworthy Condition

Published

08 Nov 2026

Customer

Bernard K.

Vehicle inspected

SEAT IBIZA TOCA 2015
Purchased a 2015 SEAT Ibiza Category S insurance write-off and needed an engineer's report
The buyer's story

Why they booked

I recently bought a 2015 SEAT Ibiza that had been declared a Category S insurance write-off. After purchasing the car, my insurance company informed me that they needed an engineer's report to assess its condition before they could insure it.

As the vehicle had previously suffered structural damage, I wanted a professional inspection to check its current condition and identify any remaining safety concerns or issues with previous repairs. I booked the inspection to obtain the report requested by my insurer and hopefully get the car insured and back on the road.

Booking reason

Needed Engineers Report For Insurance Company To Assess Roadworthy Condition

Independent assessment

Inspection findings

Purpose and inspection scope:

The purpose of this inspection was to assess the condition, structural integrity and quality of repairs to a vehicle previously recorded as a Category C insurance write-off, classified as repairable damage, and to form an opinion on its roadworthiness.

Each side of the vehicle was jacked up for inspection. The vehicle was also driven onto plastic ramps to allow examination of the underside. I examined the vehicle for structural concerns and reviewed photographs showing the previous accident damage.

Structural condition and repair quality:

Based on my examination and review of the available accident photographs, I consider the vehicle structurally sound and the accident repairs satisfactory within the scope of the inspection. The overall condition and standard of completed repairs were satisfactory, although significant cosmetic damage remains visible on the driver’s door and colour shade mismatch on passenger right door.

Bodywork and paint thickness:

Paint thickness readings on the measured body panels ranged from 100 to 180 microns. The plastic front and rear bumpers were excluded from paint thickness measurement.

Evidence of previous repairs was identified on the right-hand side of the vehicle, including respraying of both right-hand doors and replacement of the front wing. A bumper had also been replaced. The salvage record photographs dated 11 March 2026 show damage to both right-hand doors only.

Previous accident history:

The observed repairs, considered alongside the previous accident photographs, suggest that the vehicle may have been involved in two separate accidents. This is an inspection opinion rather than a confirmed accident history. The number of incidents cannot be established conclusively from these observations alone.

Advisories and required attention:

The vehicle has a valid MOT certificate. A broken mounting fitting was identified on the right-hand front headlight, although the headlight unit remains secure. This could affect beam alignment; however, no headlight beam alignment issue was recorded in the MOT history.

The rear number plate light is inoperative. Replacement is advised before driving outside normal daylight hours.

During the road test, I noted that the vehicle pulled to the right, although it otherwise drove and stopped satisfactorily. The cause of the pulling should be investigated and rectified as necessary.

The rear wiper blade requires replacement. Non-safety-related advisories may be addressed by the seller in due course.

Engineering conclusion

In my opinion, the vehicle is structurally sound, and the accident repairs have been completed to a satisfactory standard within the scope of my inspection. I consider the vehicle to be in a roadworthy condition, with the outstanding defects and advisories recorded above.
Read full findings Show less
Purpose and inspection scope:

The purpose of this inspection was to assess the condition, structural integrity and quality of repairs to a vehicle previously recorded as a Category C insurance write-off, classified as repairable damage, and to form an opinion on its roadworthiness.

Each side of the vehicle was jacked up for inspection. The vehicle was also driven onto plastic ramps to allow examination of the underside. I examined the vehicle for structural concerns and reviewed photographs showing the previous accident damage.

Structural condition and repair quality:

Based on my examination and review of the available accident photographs, I consider the vehicle structurally sound and the accident repairs satisfactory within the scope of the inspection. The overall condition and standard of completed repairs were satisfactory, although significant cosmetic damage remains visible on the driver’s door and colour shade mismatch on passenger right door.

Bodywork and paint thickness:

Paint thickness readings on the measured body panels ranged from 100 to 180 microns. The plastic front and rear bumpers were excluded from paint thickness measurement.

Evidence of previous repairs was identified on the right-hand side of the vehicle, including respraying of both right-hand doors and replacement of the front wing. A bumper had also been replaced. The salvage record photographs dated 11 March 2026 show damage to both right-hand doors only.

Previous accident history:

The observed repairs, considered alongside the previous accident photographs, suggest that the vehicle may have been involved in two separate accidents. This is an inspection opinion rather than a confirmed accident history. The number of incidents cannot be established conclusively from these observations alone.

Advisories and required attention:

The vehicle has a valid MOT certificate. A broken mounting fitting was identified on the right-hand front headlight, although the headlight unit remains secure. This could affect beam alignment; however, no headlight beam alignment issue was recorded in the MOT history.

The rear number plate light is inoperative. Replacement is advised before driving outside normal daylight hours.

During the road test, I noted that the vehicle pulled to the right, although it otherwise drove and stopped satisfactorily. The cause of the pulling should be investigated and rectified as necessary.

The rear wiper blade requires replacement. Non-safety-related advisories may be addressed by the seller in due course.

Engineering conclusion

In my opinion, the vehicle is structurally sound, and the accident repairs have been completed to a satisfactory standard within the scope of my inspection. I consider the vehicle to be in a roadworthy condition, with the outstanding defects and advisories recorded above.
Condition and costs

Poor findings and repair costs

Poor condition findings

No poor condition findings were recorded for this case study.

After the inspection

The customer experience

Outcome

The inspection was intended to provide the necessary professional assessment and help the customer progress with arranging insurance cover.

A buyer reviewing a report beside a car
Your next step

Check before you commit

Understand the car's condition before you buy. Choose an independent inspection and get the findings you need to decide your next step.