Total Loss Evaluation - nationwide market OK for comp?

by Guest » Fri Nov 01, 2013 01:06 am
Guest

There are exactly zero cars in my half of the US that meet the 90 day window +/- 1 year from my model. My insurance company is basing comps on one car in Texas and one in Minnesota. I live in San Francisco, California. Is it being unreasonable to ask for adjustment to include differences in smog equipment requirements and to factor in something for the fact that EVERYTHING is more expensive here?

I understand that there is nothing local - I've looked, but going nationwide seems ridiculous. I can't just go buy the car and the point of insurance is to make me whole, right ?

Am I being unreasonable ? Is there something in the Cali insurance code to help back me up on this ?

Total Comments: 4

Posted: Fri Nov 01, 2013 05:40 am Post Subject:

I can't just go buy the car and the point of insurance is to make me whole, right ?

The principle of indemnity ("make me whole") is a little broader than that. It is to restore you to the condition that existed prior to the loss without gain.

You don't mention what kind of vehicle this is. I find it hard to believe there are only two similar vehicles in the entire US. What vehicle are we talking about?

Getting back to indemnity, however, in auto insurance it is not quite "make me whole" in the sense of 100% restoration. The auto insurance contract only promises "actual cash value" which is defined as REPLACEMENT COST MINUS DEPRECIATION. It is not, buy me a new vehicle to replace what was lost. The contract gives the insurance company the option to repair, replace, or reimburse.

If the damage is to great to replace, and they cannot replace with like kind and quality (same year, make, model, accessories, and approximate mileage), then the only option available is reimbursement, which will almost always be NOT to a person's liking. And that's where you have the opportunity to plead your case for more money.

The Insurance Code exists in large part to protect consumers from fraud and abuse. It is also in place to protect insurers from fraud, waste, and abuse. And that's where the tension lies. The fact that you live in the Bay area, and the inflated cost of living there, is factored into the cost of your insurance, but it does not necessarily raise the value of your vehicle.

After all, a car is just a box on wheels to move you and your stuff around town. Your are entitled to something of like kind and quality, but only within the definition of Actual Cash Value.

Posted: Fri Nov 01, 2013 02:08 pm Post Subject:

I have a 1994 750il. I checked ebay,carsoup, autotrader and craigs. There is nothing really nothing out there. My car is total loss as there is frame damage. It is a bummer. The car is really something special and I have enjoyed my time with her.

It still seems bizarre to me that a nationwide market can be used with no adjustment or consideration to need for additional smog equipment ( California ), or the differential in markets (California vs Texas/Minnesota, huge shifts in value of things).

I'm just looking for fair. To me fair is putting me in another vehicle of my make, model, year, options where I live. Neither of those cars do that.

Thank you for your response!

Posted: Fri Nov 01, 2013 02:54 pm Post Subject:

additional smog equipment ( California )

Almost all vehicles have been built to comply with California Emissions Standards since the 1990s. There is no special "adjustment" for that. A vehicle as scarce as an E38 750iL is not going to vary much in price from one market to another primarily due to inavailability. (I am assuming yours is an E38, not a last of run E32.)

EVERYTHING is more expensive here

And San Francisco pays its municipal workers way too much money, too. Garbage collectors went on strike in 1997 over Norcal's offer then which raised the average worker's hourly wage from $20.58 to $23.33 over five years--included elimination of health co-payments and raised current pension benefits 45% (at the time of the strike, the workers were earning about $49,000/yr on average, when the state minimum wage was $5.00 per hour, or $10,400 per year). The dysfunctionality of San Francisco, which causes it to be one of the most expensive places to live in the world, is not the insurance company's problem -- you were not forced to live there.

It's also a 20-year-old vehicle and although it is a "flagship" vehicle in the BMW line, it is not really a "collector's" car, however nice that V-12 was. It was at least a James Bond vehicle in Tomorrow Never Dies.

Nevertheless, the valuation of your vehicle must be based on "like kind and quality" so another vehicle without all the same accessories, mileage, or other characteristics would not be a perfect comparison, but would represent a baseline from which additional value would be added for your vehicle's components.

Autotrader.com lists 28 vehicles nationally in the 750iL class (two were built earlier than 1994, so I don't take those into account because they are the E32 750iLs. Still, those two E32s are each about $6500.). There is a 1995 with 166,000 miles for $6000, another is a 1996 with 87,000 miles for $12,000, and a third one is also 1996 with 103,000 miles for $7,700.
http://www.autotrader.com/cars-for-sale/searchresults.xhtml?zip=94102&modelDescription=750iL&modelCode1=750IL&makeCode1=BMW&makeDescription=BMW&searchRadius=0

Yours will be somewhere in that same range from $6,000 to $12,000. Pick a number and present it to the insurance company, and prepare to defend your ground, or have a fall-back number in mind as your minimum acceptable value and negotiate up from there. If $12,000 is too low in your mind, there is nothing to support a higher valuation.

Posted: Fri Nov 01, 2013 05:25 pm Post Subject:

The insurance company told me it must be +/- one year. If I can go +2 to the 96 that is awesome news and I think will help round out the comps.

THANK YOU!!!!

Add your comment

Image CAPTCHA
Enter the characters shown in the image.