Wrecked 1M

[jhall1957]

Originally Posted by HERR FSTIR

If you don't mind sharing, what company offers the best package for insuring a virtually impossible to replace car such as the 1M? Are there any specific policy provisions we should have on our 1M policies which we otherwise would not normally carry?

Maybe something good can come of this unfortunate circumstance and we can all learn about optimizing coverage for our beloved 1Ms.

Claims adjusters are not big on answering "what if" questions because there are always a million moving parts, but I spoke to Erie Ins. claims adjustor, explained about the car and the fact that what I paid (ED price) would have nothing to do with replacing the car and he said the policy is clear and it will give me the value needed to replace the car.

[jhall1957]

Originally Posted by Ky1M

1) But it would be nice if insurance would just do what is right and just.. Than consumers wouldn't have to get an attorney everytime something went wrong.




2) How many times have any adjusters told a client after sustaining damage to a rare car oh you are also in line for a diminished value claim after your repairs. I learned that the hard way.

1) It would help if consumers took responsibility and read and understood what they are buying!

2) Diminished value on a rare car???? First off, no one knows the value of a car until it's sold and it seems that these 1M's are all selling for more then people paid so pleaase explain the diminished value idea to me. If you are talking about a reduction in the value because of the accident, that's life! The value of a car is less after 10,000 miles then when it's new. Who should pay for that claim? You buy the car, you drive the car, if something bad happens insurance should indemify you(Put you back the way you were). If the car is fixed, your whole. Diminished value only happens once the car is sold.

Don't get me wrong, if you can get Diminished Value, great. I just am not sure its as easy as saying your cars worth less because of a claim/wreck. Who amoungest us won't paid MSRP for an original M1? Even one that has been wrecked some?

I had a very nice E30 M3 that had replacement fenders and front clip on it. Did I pay less then I would have for a perfect one? Yes. Did I pay more then what it was worth after it was in the orginal owneers hands for one year? Heck yea!

If you are worried about Diminished Value you better call Hagerty and get an "agreed amount" policy (NOT "stated amount").

[Ky1M]

Originally Posted by firechicken99

I take it this is a separate claim for the fact that because the "rare" vehicle now has a repair history its overall market value will be somewhat lower than the same vehicle with no prior damage, and is compensation for that difference?

Yes firechicken it's a seperate claim after repairs have been made. And it's back and forth on amounts .

[Ky1M]

Originally Posted by jhall1957

1) It would help if consumers took responsibility and read and understood what they are buying!

2) Diminished value on a rare car???? First off, no one knows the value of a car until it's sold and it seems that these 1M's are all selling for more then people paid so pleaase explain the diminished value idea to me. If you are talking about a reduction in the value because of the accident, that's life! The value of a car is less after 10,000 miles then when it's new. Who should pay for that claim? You buy the car, you drive the car, if something bad happens insurance should indemify you(Put you back the way you were). If the car is fixed, your whole. Diminished value only happens once the car is sold.

Don't get me wrong, if you can get Diminished Value, great. I just am not sure its as easy as saying your cars worth less because of a claim/wreck. Who amoungest us won't paid MSRP for an original M1? Even one that has been wrecked some?

I had a very nice E30 M3 that had replacement fenders and front clip on it. Did I pay less then I would have for a perfect one? Yes. Did I pay more then what it was worth after it was in the orginal owneers hands for one year? Heck yea!

If you are worried about Diminished Value you better call Hagerty and get an "agreed amount" policy (NOT "stated amount").

Well jhall don't know why you took my comments so personal but my rare Z3 M coupe s54 1 of 690,all original was smashed but repairable . After the accident ( no fault of mine) and the car repaired it was now worth a substantial amount less than if the car fax had not said accident, damage. That's the Diminished Value I was referring too. Good day

[Marioalex24]

Originally Posted by AW 1M

I totaled my 1M in March. It is the salvaged 1M in the thread that had the roof replaced. I have to say that that my experience with the insurance company was top rate. They treated me well and the results were very fair.

In retrospect, my best friend in the whole process was the tow truck driver. He spontaneously explained what to expect, step by step and what he would do along the way. Everything happened the way he described. By knowing what to expect, I was prepared and there was no drama and minimal emotion involved. He probably saved me thousands of dollars. My only regret is that I only tipped him $100.

After the accident, while still in the car, I knew it was totaled. I was therefore not surprised when the insurance company informed me there was $50K of damage and they were declaring the car a total loss. They had an outside company determine the value of the car. I did not accept the first offer. There was some pleasant discussion about options, mileage and the rarity of the car. There were no harsh words and certainly no need for attorneys. I knew they had given me their best offer when they told me the next step would be arbitration. I was happy with the offer and deposited the check for the car 18 days after the accident.

Once the car was declared a total loss they asked to move the car, just as my friend the tow truck driver predicted. I released the car and I don’t think it had any bearing on the discussion of the value of the car.

Again, it was a very pleasant experience, although one I hope never to repeat.

How did you flip the car if I may ask? Was it a hard impact for you?

[AW 1M]

Originally Posted by jhall1957

Nice, that is the way the industry wants these to go!

Name of the company??

I'm not ready to give a public endorsement just yet. The same company is dealing with 2 other 1M's which are likely total losses.

[AW 1M]

Originally Posted by Marioalex24

How did you flip the car if I may ask? Was it a hard impact for you?

It wasn't a flip. More like a slow motion roll. The air bags never went off.

[firechicken99]

Originally Posted by AW 1M

I'm not ready to give a public endorsement just yet. The same company is dealing with 2 other 1M's which are likely total losses.

Wonderful. More reasons for my rates to change...... SMH

[mPlasticDesign]

It's a sad reality in this section. People love talking about wrecked 1M's so much, it's like tragedy pr0n. I don't get it??? Maybe we should talk about modding more....

[mattm]

Originally Posted by Mr.Metak2you

Maybe we should talk about modding more....

Or autocrossing them!

[M3 Adjuster]

Originally Posted by Ky1M

As the world turns

I love our forum its just life here and there. But it would be nice if insurance would just do what is right and just.. Than consumers wouldn't have to get an attorney everytime something went wrong. How many times have any adjusters told a client after sustaining damage to a rare car oh you are also in line for a diminished value claim after your repairs. I learned that the hard way.
I just think if the person is in the business and they know all the ins and outs why not do the right thing.
My two cents only and I know it's not a perfect world but guess who makes it that way ! We do . sorry

Insurance companies DO notify their OWN insureds regarding Diminished Value. At least at my company we do. We don't notify claimants...there is no legal requirement too, and certainly no one would look for reasons to pay out more than is needed.

Also keep in mind that whether or not DV is even considered a valid claim is something that varies from state to state in the US, and can also depend on whether the person is an insured or a claimant. Typically, most insureds are NOT eligible for DV if they wreck their OWN vehicle, with the exception of Georgia.


Attorney's are not used in the great majority of claims. And that is the point that a few of have been making. The claim process is NOT nearly as adversarial as it's made out to be... Just like MOST cops aren't looking to go out and shoot people.. although they certainly get a bad rap when a bad apple or two does something wrong.

[M3 Adjuster]

Originally Posted by AW 1M

I totaled my 1M in March. It is the salvaged 1M in the thread that had the roof replaced. I have to say that that my experience with the insurance company was top rate. They treated me well and the results were very fair.

In retrospect, my best friend in the whole process was the tow truck driver. He spontaneously explained what to expect, step by step and what he would do along the way. Everything happened the way he described. By knowing what to expect, I was prepared and there was no drama and minimal emotion involved. He probably saved me thousands of dollars. My only regret is that I only tipped him $100.

After the accident, while still in the car, I knew it was totaled. I was therefore not surprised when the insurance company informed me there was $50K of damage and they were declaring the car a total loss. They had an outside company determine the value of the car. I did not accept the first offer. There was some pleasant discussion about options, mileage and the rarity of the car. There were no harsh words and certainly no need for attorneys. I knew they had given me their best offer when they told me the next step would be arbitration. I was happy with the offer and deposited the check for the car 18 days after the accident.

Once the car was declared a total loss they asked to move the car, just as my friend the tow truck driver predicted. I released the car and I don’t think it had any bearing on the discussion of the value of the car.

Again, it was a very pleasant experience, although one I hope never to repeat.

thank you.

[mattm]

Originally Posted by M3 Adjuster

Sorry, that was a quick post. Not trying to say that insurance companies done make a profit...Of course insurance companies make a profit. In the US, health insurance companies make a ton of profit. Auto companies much less. Should there be more controls on insurance companies and profit in this country just like oil companies and probably banks as well? In my opinion, Probably so!

But my point is still valid. Premiums would be higher certainly without insurance companies putting pressure on OEM manufacturers and repair shops to keep parts pricing lower.


OEM parts are expensive in many cases. Without a healthy aftermarket, including insurance companies that spec these parts, then dealer parts would be much higher than they are now because they would have a monopoly.

The same is true for labor rates.
Look at dealer service department labor rates. Here in Dallas, Classic BMW charges $140.80 cents an hour for labor. People pay that For work performed by individuals that likely don't even have a college degree.

It's not like that money is going to an attorney or CPA or some highly skilled professional. I'm not knocking auto mechanics, they need to make money too

The local rate for body shop labor is 46.00 an hour in comparison. The mechanical rate for labor in a body shop is about $78 an hour. I certainly personally think that an auto mechanic and an auto body shop worker are equally skilled. Actually I would defer to the auto body shop worker. I've no idea why the disparity in hourly labor rate, but I bet pressure from insurance companies on body shops is a factor.

And that lower body shop labor rate is something that any of us favors when they need work done.

Sorry insurance cos forced the super low rates. "Drop your rate or will send business elsewhere." Your insurance cos are the 800 pound gorilla. Slow pay or no pay. $46 an hour across the US is not fair. Sorry crocodile tears.

Originally Posted by jhall1957

Gosh, I hate to jump into this mess, but after being an independent agent for 30 years, I feel the need.

A few points.

Mattm, savings that a insurance company experiences ALWAYS have a positive effect for the consumer. ALWAYS! I'm not saying that 100% of any and all savings are pasted on in the form of discounts, but it is a competitive market out their and all companies walk a fine line on profit and expense. If the comapny CAN save money, it DOES effect what their pricing picture is. This is simple economics.

Second point. Glass, not ALL claims cause issues and while your advise is generally good, I think it's a BAD idea for any consumer to go into a claim assuming the worst. There is always a place where it's a win/win deal and both sides should have the same goal. Be realistic in what you expect.

Third point. Consumers should accept some responsibility for the negative results of many claims issues. Please, by a show of hands, how many of you have actually ready your insurance policy???? Yea, like I figured, not many. And I always hear the same excuse, "I don't understaand it!". Dang, you are paying big money for a legal contract you neither read nor understand? And you actually think the insurance comapny is at fault for you getting screwed! Geez! If you don't understand it, call someone. Your agent, your company, heck, even a lawyer. This is important stuff! If all you have is a 800 number, well, you get what you pay for! Good luck. Find a professional and pay for good expert service!

I wonder why so many consumers turn to an attorney to get fair compensation for a repair? The concept is to return to original condition, not install lesser quality parts into the car. OEM fits, hangs and is a better fit. The body shop spends more time making non-OEM stuff fit. Of course that is done at a labor rate below market value.

Originally Posted by Ky1M

As the world turns:
I love our forum its just life here and there. But it would be nice if insurance would just do what is right and just.. Than consumers wouldn't have to get an attorney everytime something went wrong. How many times have any adjusters told a client after sustaining damage to a rare car oh you are also in line for a diminished value claim after your repairs. I learned that the hard way.

Word!

[M3 Adjuster]

Originally Posted by mattm

I wonder why so many consumers turn to an attorney to get fair compensation for a repair? The concept is to return to original condition, not install lesser quality parts into the car. OEM fits, hangs and is a better fit. The body shop spends more time making non-OEM stuff fit. Of course that is done at a labor rate below market value.

How much do you think " so many consumers" is ?
I've said it several times. Consumers do NOT routinely get attorneys when it comes to auto claims, PARTICULARLY property damage, which few attorneys will even touch because there is so little money in it for them. Attorneys in the US typically will not handle DV claims or PD claims. They only handle bodily injury liability and uninsured motorist bodily injury.

Seriously. All you people who feel that individuals get an attorney in even 25 percent of all the claims an insurance company sees are GROSSLY wrong. I would guesstimate that attorneys represent people in slightly more than ten percent of claims. The number of those claims that actually go to suit is a fraction of that 10 percent.

[firechicken99]

Jhall- Without going into a long post all I will say is why should I lose money on the diminished value of my car because you were an irresponsible driver and hit me? (just for ex.)

If it was the owners own fault, that may be a different story, but when someone else hits you I dont see why DV wouldn't be fair....

[Ky1M]

Originally Posted by firechicken99

Jhall- Without going into a long post all I will say is why should I lose money on the diminished value of my car because you were an irresponsible driver and hit me? (just for ex.)

If it was the owners own fault, that may be a different story, but when someone else hits you I dont see why DV wouldn't be fair....

Plus 1

[jhall1957]

Originally Posted by firechicken99

Jhall- Without going into a long post all I will say is why should I lose money on the diminished value of my car because you were an irresponsible driver and hit me? (just for ex.)

If it was the owners own fault, that may be a different story, but when someone else hits you I dont see why DV wouldn't be fair....

Firechicken, We don't disagree on this point. I'm just saying that "lose(ing) money" is a relative thing! My point is that if you pay $50,000 for a car and then have some damage to it that is correctly repaired and then turn around and sell that car a number of years later at a higher (higher then $50,000 paid) price, did you really have a Diminished value claim?

[jhall1957]

Originally Posted by M3 Adjuster

How much do you think " so many consumers" is ?
I've said it several times. Consumers do NOT routinely get attorneys when it comes to auto claims, PARTICULARLY property damage, which few attorneys will even touch because there is so little money in it for them. Attorneys in the US typically will not handle DV claims or PD claims. They only handle bodily injury liability and uninsured motorist bodily injury.

Seriously. All you people who feel that individuals get an attorney in even 25 percent of all the claims an insurance company sees are GROSSLY wrong. I would guesstimate that attorneys represent people in slightly more than ten percent of claims. The number of those claims that actually go to suit is a fraction of that 10 percent.

M3, you are dead on the money here! I've been in the business 30 years and can count on two hands the number of property damage claims where a Lawyer got involved. Why so few? Because there is no money for the lawyers to make on these and normally the values are pretty well defined.

I just think it's a simplistic way of dealing with things to blame the insurance companies and call them crooks! Most of my clients are VERY glad they have those companies after a major claim.

[M3 Adjuster]

Originally Posted by firechicken99

Jhall- Without going into a long post all I will say is why should I lose money on the diminished value of my car because you were an irresponsible driver and hit me? (just for ex.)

If it was the owners own fault, that may be a different story, but when someone else hits you I dont see why DV wouldn't be fair....

Originally Posted by jhall1957

Firechicken, We don't disagree on this point. I'm just saying that "lose(ing) money" is a relative thing! My point is that if you pay $50,000 for a car and then have some damage to it that is correctly repaired and then turn around and sell that car a number of years later at a higher (higher then $50,000 paid) price, did you really have a Diminished value claim?

Agree. And jhall is making the point that one can certainly have the opinion that DV is only an issue if one sells the car. That is the time when ACTUAL DV occurs. If someone wrecks my 1M and their insurance pays to repair it and I drive it into the ground 16 years later with 240k miles on it. Did the car ever lose any value?

Jhall and I both understand dv and realize that payments are made for DV claims based on the *principle* or THEORY that the vehicle has lost value, however a vehicles true diminished value can really only be calculated when the vehicle is sold, because the amount of diminished value lost decreases over time with the age and the mileage added by the owner prior to the sale of the vehicle, and it diminishes to zero if the owner never sells the vehicle.

Again. Just making a point to ponder here, not saying that companies don't pay based on theoretical dv all the time.

[Papethova]

Originally Posted by cooler2442

As long as the OP can get 55k-58 from insurance he shouldn't have an issue finding one for that much. All the 60k+ ones are not selling but the 55-58 ones are.

Im not going to say much because I dont want to affect anything but 55-58 is way low. I know 2 others that have gotten in the 70s

[cooler2442]

Originally Posted by Papethova

Im not going to say much because I dont want to affect anything but 55-58 is way low. I know 2 others that have gotten in the 70s

You mean paid out 70 by insurance or sold their cars for 70? I was just stating what the cars on ebay and forums are realistically selling for these few weeks.

[firechicken99]

Originally Posted by M3 Adjuster

Agree. And jhall is making the point that one can certainly have the opinion that DV is only an issue if one sells the car. That is the time when ACTUAL DV occurs. If someone wrecks my 1M and their insurance pays to repair it and I drive it into the ground 16 years later with 240k miles on it. Did the car ever lose any value?

Jhall and I both understand dv and realize that payments are made for DV claims based on the *principle* or THEORY that the vehicle has lost value, however a vehicles true diminished value can really only be calculated when the vehicle is sold, because the amount of diminished value lost decreases over time with the age and the mileage added by the owner prior to the sale of the vehicle, and it diminishes to zero if the owner never sells the vehicle.

Again. Just making a point to ponder here, not saying that companies don't pay based on theoretical dv all the time.

I will preempt this with a grammar/spelling apology, this was typed via mobile

Jhall included, I COMPLETELY agree with you on this point.

The only issue with it is that it assumes a lot of."what if's" thatcan make or break the case. Amd there will always be some DV aftwr an.incident, and I agree like a cara value it will get less.

On the other hand I feel its all part of the game. the incident happens point in time, and sothe DV has to happen point in time as well... and however, with todays "show me the car fax" era any little squeak tied to the vin will haunt the cars sale for its lifetime.