WARNING!! Pre Owned 1Ms for sale

[Dan Parker]

People just need to have a smooth and patient right foot with electronics off. Baby steps are required and apparently have not been used by a few. Journalists/reviews aren't usually the best drivers but they are often excellent writers. This isn't a 110 hp miata. Wet road/track + torque + a lot of throttle = bad results unless you have very quick reflexes. In other words, not a beginners car.

[M3 Adjuster]

Originally Posted by Dan Parker

People just need to have a smooth and patient right foot with electronics off. Baby steps are required and apparently have not been used by a few. Journalists/reviews aren't usually the best drivers but they are often excellent writers. This isn't a 110 hp miata. Wet road/track + torque + a lot of throttle = bad results unless you have very quick reflexes. In other words, not a beginners car.

Agreed... I have years of experience autocrossing and driving on track and I been working my way up slowly... After turning off ALL the electronics on an autocross and spinning the wheels to a 56 second run... I later turned the traction control back ON (MDM) and dropped 3 seconds to 53 seconds.. Once i had found out where I was having issues with wheelspin... my times dropped to 52 and then 51 seconds with MDM off.


I was on track at high speed track this past weekend and used the first day to learn the track with MDM on and then turned it off on day 2. With students in the car...it's easy to just hot lap with MDM on, and then turn it off when I have the car to myself. Looking forward to taking it out on my home track soon.

[Slats]

Originally Posted by M3 Adjuster

Or the police department, but yes.
Carfax is a tool to use when buying a vehicle, but all that carfax does (as far as I know) is obtain public records from police reports and the DMV.

I would be surprised to find that any insurance company reports to carfax. I can't imagine that any insurance company would sell information on their customers claims/vehicles due to privacy issues.

Although implementation is ongoing, a comprehensive database that will soon give the best information available on a vehicle's history can be found at

http://www.vehiclehistory.gov/nmvtis_states.html

A friend of mine has been instrumental in getting this system up and running. The goal is to have all insurance claims in this database.

Insurance companies already have this kind of information. Insurers often run C.L.U.E. reports to perform post-claims underwriting, i.e., research a vehicle's prior claims history when an insured makes a claim. If it turns out the vehicle has suffered major damage previously, the insurance company will use this to say the vehicle is worth less than book value and will consequently pay less for the totaled vehicle.

[Spec Volcanic]

Originally Posted by Lucky1

Paraphrasing here but one of the early reviews I read basically stated rain + traction control off = BAD IDEA!

To put it into perspective I never worry too much when its raining and I'm driving my 128i

Does that make this a safe DD for up here in Canada?
Can only imagine what happens in the snow.

The 1M is working in the snow just fine for me all you need good winter tires and not to drive like an ass

[M3 Adjuster]

Originally Posted by Slats

Although implementation is ongoing, a comprehensive database that will soon give the best information available on a vehicle's history can be found at

http://www.vehiclehistory.gov/nmvtis_states.html

A friend of mine has been instrumental in getting this system up and running. The goal is to have all insurance claims in this database.

Insurance companies already have this kind of information. Insurers often run C.L.U.E. reports to perform post-claims underwriting, i.e., research a vehicle's prior claims history when an insured makes a claim. If it turns out the vehicle has suffered major damage previously, the insurance company will use this to say the vehicle is worth less than book value and will consequently pay less for the totaled vehicle.

I find your wording interesting.....

Originally Posted by Slats

" the insurance company will use this to say the vehicle is worth less than book value and will consequently pay less for the totaled vehicle "

Are you saying you would not agree with this practice? Your statement sure makes it sound like the insurance company is doing something wrong or that the average person would NOT do... which is certainly NOT the case.
Most buyers are not willing to pay the same price for a vehicle that has been damaged and repaired vs one that has not been damaged in the past.... Perhaps the sentence should be...

" the insurance company will use this to show the vehicle is worth less than book value and will consequently pay an adjusted value for the totaled vehicle "

By the way... note that SOME insurance companies will do this, not necessarily all, and it also depends on the situation. I have paid a non adjusted actual cash value on vehicles that have been previously totaled and repaired/restored competently. My company's position is that if a vehicle has been damaged and previously repaired, then there should not be a change in it's value. However, if the vehicle has been damaged and repaired previously... and the vehicle has been damaged a second time... such info can be very useful if an owner is attempting to make a claim for Diminished Value.


With respect to CLUE.. this is usually a tool that underwriters use to determine the driving history of a prospective applicant. ISO is a tool used by claims personnel to determine if a person or a vehicle has prior injuries or prior damage from previous losses.

[Slats]

Originally Posted by M3 Adjuster

By the way... note that SOME insurance companies will do this, not necessarily all, and it also depends on the situation. I have paid a non adjusted actual cash value on vehicles that have been previously totaled and repaired/restored competently. My company's position is that if a vehicle has been damaged and previously repaired, then there should not be a change in it's value. However, if the vehicle has been damaged and repaired previously... and the vehicle has been damaged a second time... such info can be very useful if an owner is attempting to make a claim for Diminished Value.

You are right, I should have said some insurance companies, as I only know of the ones that I have come across in my practice, although they were major companies.

The practice to which I was referring involves charging premium based on the vehicle's book value and then, when the claim comes in, researching the vehicle's history, finding previous accident damage and paying less than book because of the prior damage. If the prior history had been checked at the time coverage was written, the premium would have been adjusted accordingly (or, the insured may have, upon learning of the prior damage, not even bothered to insure the vehicle and instead made the seller buy it back).

I'm glad to hear your company pays full value if the prior damage was competently repaired, but that has to depend on the extent of the prior damage. If a vehicle is totaled, it is less likely to be competently repaired, as being declared a total loss means an insurer has already determined the car too far gone to bring back to specs, the needed repairs being more costly than the car is worth (one exception being an older car, which takes less damage to justify writing off as a total loss).

When you go from looking at first party claims to looking at third party claims, most consumers don't realize that when someone runs a light and crashes into them, the other driver's insurance company should pay not only the cost of the repairs, but also diminution in value, i.e., the difference in value between a car that has been wrecked and repaired and one that has never been wrecked and repaired. This can be several thousand dollars, no matter how competently repaired.