TeGGeR's appraisal: TeGGeR makes a boo-boo
 

http://www.tegger.com/hondafaq/appraisal/index.html

It pains me to have to admit this, but if making it public helps anyone
else...

--
TeGGeR®

The Unofficial Honda/Acura FAQ
www.tegger.com/hondafaq/

Re: TeGGeR's appraisal: TeGGeR makes a boo-boo
 

"TeGGeR®" <tegger@tegger.c0m> wrote in message
news:Xns968A61A8BFD1tegger@207.14.113.17...
> http://www.tegger.com/hondafaq/appraisal/index.html
>
> It pains me to have to admit this, but if making it public helps anyone
> else...
>
> --
> TeGGeR®
>
> The Unofficial Honda/Acura FAQ
> www.tegger.com/hondafaq/

Okay - that makes my head spin. I understand the warped logic of it - they
are hedging the recovery value rather than your loss - but it convinces me
we live in the Land of the Weasel.

Mike

Re: TeGGeR's appraisal: TeGGeR makes a boo-boo
 

"TeGGeR®" <tegger@tegger.c0m> wrote in message
news:Xns968A61A8BFD1tegger@207.14.113.17...
> http://www.tegger.com/hondafaq/appraisal/index.html
>
> It pains me to have to admit this, but if making it public helps anyone
> else...
>
> --
> TeGGeR®
>
> The Unofficial Honda/Acura FAQ
> www.tegger.com/hondafaq/

Okay - that makes my head spin. I understand the warped logic of it - they
are hedging the recovery value rather than your loss - but it convinces me
we live in the Land of the Weasel.

Mike

Re: TeGGeR's appraisal: TeGGeR makes a boo-boo
 

"Michael Pardee" <michaeltnull@cybertrails.com> wrote in
news:7OWdnT9RsuymuFbfRVn-oA@sedona.net:

> "TeGGeR®" <tegger@tegger.c0m> wrote in message
> news:Xns968A61A8BFD1tegger@207.14.113.17...
>> http://www.tegger.com/hondafaq/appraisal/index.html
>>
>> It pains me to have to admit this, but if making it public helps
>> anyone else...
>>
>
> Okay - that makes my head spin. I understand the warped logic of it -
> they are hedging the recovery value rather than your loss - but it
> convinces me we live in the Land of the Weasel.
>


What's really, really weird is that you can have an engine and transmission
that are on their last legs and would cost many thousands to fix, and they
treat that the same as a brand-new engine and transmission. IOW, they DON'T
CARE EITHER WAY.

But get a paint job and some nice rims on a mechanical shitbox, and they'll
pay you for that.

I did some digging for an insurance company here that would be willing to
do "agreed value" they way they do in England, but no dice. Thanks to no-
fault and the 1986 Family Law reforms, the pool of available insurance
companies is about 10% of what it was in 1986.

--
TeGGeR®

The Unofficial Honda/Acura FAQ
www.tegger.com/hondafaq/

Re: TeGGeR's appraisal: TeGGeR makes a boo-boo
 

"Michael Pardee" <michaeltnull@cybertrails.com> wrote in
news:7OWdnT9RsuymuFbfRVn-oA@sedona.net:

> "TeGGeR®" <tegger@tegger.c0m> wrote in message
> news:Xns968A61A8BFD1tegger@207.14.113.17...
>> http://www.tegger.com/hondafaq/appraisal/index.html
>>
>> It pains me to have to admit this, but if making it public helps
>> anyone else...
>>
>
> Okay - that makes my head spin. I understand the warped logic of it -
> they are hedging the recovery value rather than your loss - but it
> convinces me we live in the Land of the Weasel.
>


What's really, really weird is that you can have an engine and transmission
that are on their last legs and would cost many thousands to fix, and they
treat that the same as a brand-new engine and transmission. IOW, they DON'T
CARE EITHER WAY.

But get a paint job and some nice rims on a mechanical shitbox, and they'll
pay you for that.

I did some digging for an insurance company here that would be willing to
do "agreed value" they way they do in England, but no dice. Thanks to no-
fault and the 1986 Family Law reforms, the pool of available insurance
companies is about 10% of what it was in 1986.

--
TeGGeR®

The Unofficial Honda/Acura FAQ
www.tegger.com/hondafaq/

Re: TeGGeR's appraisal: TeGGeR makes a boo-boo
 

TeGGeR® wrote:
> I did some digging for an insurance company here that would be willing to
> do "agreed value" they way they do in England, but no dice. Thanks to no-
> fault and the 1986 Family Law reforms, the pool of available insurance
> companies is about 10% of what it was in 1986.

what were the Family Law reforms?

Re: TeGGeR's appraisal: TeGGeR makes a boo-boo
 

TeGGeR® wrote:
> I did some digging for an insurance company here that would be willing to
> do "agreed value" they way they do in England, but no dice. Thanks to no-
> fault and the 1986 Family Law reforms, the pool of available insurance
> companies is about 10% of what it was in 1986.

what were the Family Law reforms?

Re: TeGGeR's appraisal: TeGGeR makes a boo-boo
 

SoCalMike <mikein562athotmail@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:-P2dne_hRM2E9FbfRVn-rA@comcast.com:

> TeGGeR® wrote:
>> I did some digging for an insurance company here that would be
>> willing to do "agreed value" they way they do in England, but no
>> dice. Thanks to no- fault and the 1986 Family Law reforms, the pool
>> of available insurance companies is about 10% of what it was in 1986.
>
> what were the Family Law reforms?
>


After extensive discussion this morning with my insurance company, I have
discovered that it is ILLEGAL for ANY insurance company in Ontario to sell
me "agreed value" insurance unless the car is officially an "antique".

The Ontario (Canada) Family Law Reform Act of 1986 (among other things)
greatly expanded who could sue, when, where, and for how much, in the case
of an automobile collision.

The intentions were noble enough, as lobbyists and lawmakers sought to
imitate American tort expansion in an effort to protect those adversely
affected by unfortunate events. However, the cure ended up being much worse
than the disease.

The result of the new Act was near-instantaneous, causing a liability
crisis by 1987 (which I remember quite clearly). By the next year or soon
after, "no-fault" had been imposed as a solution.

Each succeeding year, regulations on insurance companies have been
tightened more and more, and each succeeding year, rates have gone nowheree
but up and your choices have been steadily eroded. In spite of that,
insurance companies as a whole in 2003 lost $1.17 in claims for each $1.00
taken in in premiums. This was NOT the case before the screws were
tightened on the insurance companies.

Did you know that it is now ILLEGAL to bargain for insurance in Ontario? It
used to be legal to negotiate premiums.

The result of this fiasco is that about 90% of the companies that were
selling auto insurance in 1986 have either stopped selling it, have greatly
constrained who they will sell to, have jacked prices sky-high, or have
pulled out of Ontario altogether.

What a mess. Thanks, governments, for royally f***ing things up for me.

--
TeGGeR®

The Unofficial Honda/Acura FAQ
www.tegger.com/hondafaq/

Re: TeGGeR's appraisal: TeGGeR makes a boo-boo
 

SoCalMike <mikein562athotmail@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:-P2dne_hRM2E9FbfRVn-rA@comcast.com:

> TeGGeR® wrote:
>> I did some digging for an insurance company here that would be
>> willing to do "agreed value" they way they do in England, but no
>> dice. Thanks to no- fault and the 1986 Family Law reforms, the pool
>> of available insurance companies is about 10% of what it was in 1986.
>
> what were the Family Law reforms?
>


After extensive discussion this morning with my insurance company, I have
discovered that it is ILLEGAL for ANY insurance company in Ontario to sell
me "agreed value" insurance unless the car is officially an "antique".

The Ontario (Canada) Family Law Reform Act of 1986 (among other things)
greatly expanded who could sue, when, where, and for how much, in the case
of an automobile collision.

The intentions were noble enough, as lobbyists and lawmakers sought to
imitate American tort expansion in an effort to protect those adversely
affected by unfortunate events. However, the cure ended up being much worse
than the disease.

The result of the new Act was near-instantaneous, causing a liability
crisis by 1987 (which I remember quite clearly). By the next year or soon
after, "no-fault" had been imposed as a solution.

Each succeeding year, regulations on insurance companies have been
tightened more and more, and each succeeding year, rates have gone nowheree
but up and your choices have been steadily eroded. In spite of that,
insurance companies as a whole in 2003 lost $1.17 in claims for each $1.00
taken in in premiums. This was NOT the case before the screws were
tightened on the insurance companies.

Did you know that it is now ILLEGAL to bargain for insurance in Ontario? It
used to be legal to negotiate premiums.

The result of this fiasco is that about 90% of the companies that were
selling auto insurance in 1986 have either stopped selling it, have greatly
constrained who they will sell to, have jacked prices sky-high, or have
pulled out of Ontario altogether.

What a mess. Thanks, governments, for royally f***ing things up for me.

--
TeGGeR®

The Unofficial Honda/Acura FAQ
www.tegger.com/hondafaq/

Re: TeGGeR's appraisal: TeGGeR makes a boo-boo
 

In article <Xns968B2FC68150tegger@207.14.113.17>,
TeGGeR® <tegger@tegger.c0m> wrote:
>What's really, really weird is that you can have an engine and transmission
>that are on their last legs and would cost many thousands to fix, and they
>treat that the same as a brand-new engine and transmission. IOW, they DON'T
>CARE EITHER WAY.
>
>But get a paint job and some nice rims on a mechanical shitbox, and they'll
>pay you for that.

Because such things are visible to the insurance adjuster and to the
person checking out used cars at dealer lots for the purpose of finding
"comparable" vehicles. In neither case is a test drive or mechanical
inspection likely to happen (if it is even possible, given a car that
may be a total loss) due to the time involved.

--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Timothy J. Lee
Unsolicited bulk or commercial email is not welcome.
No warranty of any kind is provided with this message.

Re: TeGGeR's appraisal: TeGGeR makes a boo-boo
 

In article <Xns968B2FC68150tegger@207.14.113.17>,
TeGGeR® <tegger@tegger.c0m> wrote:
>What's really, really weird is that you can have an engine and transmission
>that are on their last legs and would cost many thousands to fix, and they
>treat that the same as a brand-new engine and transmission. IOW, they DON'T
>CARE EITHER WAY.
>
>But get a paint job and some nice rims on a mechanical shitbox, and they'll
>pay you for that.

Because such things are visible to the insurance adjuster and to the
person checking out used cars at dealer lots for the purpose of finding
"comparable" vehicles. In neither case is a test drive or mechanical
inspection likely to happen (if it is even possible, given a car that
may be a total loss) due to the time involved.

--
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Timothy J. Lee
Unsolicited bulk or commercial email is not welcome.
No warranty of any kind is provided with this message.

Re: TeGGeR's appraisal: TeGGeR makes a boo-boo
 

"> I did some digging for an insurance company here that would be willing to
> do "agreed value" they way they do in England, but no dice.

Agreed value is only used on classic/antique auto policies, whereby the
insurance carrier agrees to pay the value the car is insured for. In the
world of antique/classic cars where they do appreciate in value rather than
depreciate, the need for an appraisal is far more important to keep a
vehicle properly insured. The standard auto policy does not have provisions
for this, rather, settlement is based upon "actual cash value" at the time
of loss. Insurance carriers use tools that track actual sales of vehicles
within a specific radius and then make adjustments. If you look in
valuation guides, even with classic cars, there are no adjustments for
updated vehicle maintenance such as new tires, rebuilt engines/transmissions
and such. However, given such documentation, the insurance company can make
some fine adjustments with condition of vehicle to help counter these
issues.....but even so, it adds minor dollars to the total value.

Re: TeGGeR's appraisal: TeGGeR makes a boo-boo
 

"> I did some digging for an insurance company here that would be willing to
> do "agreed value" they way they do in England, but no dice.

Agreed value is only used on classic/antique auto policies, whereby the
insurance carrier agrees to pay the value the car is insured for. In the
world of antique/classic cars where they do appreciate in value rather than
depreciate, the need for an appraisal is far more important to keep a
vehicle properly insured. The standard auto policy does not have provisions
for this, rather, settlement is based upon "actual cash value" at the time
of loss. Insurance carriers use tools that track actual sales of vehicles
within a specific radius and then make adjustments. If you look in
valuation guides, even with classic cars, there are no adjustments for
updated vehicle maintenance such as new tires, rebuilt engines/transmissions
and such. However, given such documentation, the insurance company can make
some fine adjustments with condition of vehicle to help counter these
issues.....but even so, it adds minor dollars to the total value.

Re: TeGGeR's appraisal: TeGGeR makes a boo-boo
 

"Larry" <ziggy_calif@nospam_yahoo.com> wrote in
news:aR%ye.1458$6%2.1246@newssvr21.news.prodigy.co m:

>
> "> I did some digging for an insurance company here that would be
> willing to
>> do "agreed value" they way they do in England, but no dice.
>
> Agreed value is only used on classic/antique auto policies, whereby
> the insurance carrier agrees to pay the value the car is insured for.
> In the world of antique/classic cars where they do appreciate in value
> rather than depreciate, the need for an appraisal is far more
> important to keep a vehicle properly insured. The standard auto
> policy does not have provisions for this, rather, settlement is based
> upon "actual cash value" at the time of loss. Insurance carriers use
> tools that track actual sales of vehicles within a specific radius and
> then make adjustments. If you look in valuation guides, even with
> classic cars, there are no adjustments for updated vehicle maintenance
> such as new tires, rebuilt engines/transmissions and such. However,
> given such documentation, the insurance company can make some fine
> adjustments with condition of vehicle to help counter these
> issues.....but even so, it adds minor dollars to the total value.
>
>


Corresponds exactly with what I learned over the last couple of days.

Oh well. Life is full of lessons, isn't it?

--
TeGGeR®

The Unofficial Honda/Acura FAQ
www.tegger.com/hondafaq/

Re: TeGGeR's appraisal: TeGGeR makes a boo-boo
 

"Larry" <ziggy_calif@nospam_yahoo.com> wrote in
news:aR%ye.1458$6%2.1246@newssvr21.news.prodigy.co m:

>
> "> I did some digging for an insurance company here that would be
> willing to
>> do "agreed value" they way they do in England, but no dice.
>
> Agreed value is only used on classic/antique auto policies, whereby
> the insurance carrier agrees to pay the value the car is insured for.
> In the world of antique/classic cars where they do appreciate in value
> rather than depreciate, the need for an appraisal is far more
> important to keep a vehicle properly insured. The standard auto
> policy does not have provisions for this, rather, settlement is based
> upon "actual cash value" at the time of loss. Insurance carriers use
> tools that track actual sales of vehicles within a specific radius and
> then make adjustments. If you look in valuation guides, even with
> classic cars, there are no adjustments for updated vehicle maintenance
> such as new tires, rebuilt engines/transmissions and such. However,
> given such documentation, the insurance company can make some fine
> adjustments with condition of vehicle to help counter these
> issues.....but even so, it adds minor dollars to the total value.
>
>


Corresponds exactly with what I learned over the last couple of days.

Oh well. Life is full of lessons, isn't it?

--
TeGGeR®

The Unofficial Honda/Acura FAQ
www.tegger.com/hondafaq/