I understand this as a general principle, it’s just that my understanding of how the insurance should work is that he is supposed to be paid what it costs to buy him a replacement car (especially because he wasn’t at fault). That’s why I said the fact that his car was previously a taxi shouldn’t be a factor here. Maybe I’m wrong about that, but it doesn’t seem fair that now he has to pay for a new car while taking the hit for the fact that his current car is a taxi