Ideas to Protect Your Car value?
#1
Ideas to Protect Your Car value?
So in light of my recent experience, I quickly learned that you're pretty much SOL on value of your car it gets damaged in an accident(specifically in ONTARIO) - be it your fault or someone else. Insurance will not pay you above the value; at best you have waiver of depreciation, and you'll get the MSRP back. In my case, if your car has appreciated and is selling well above list price...well that's too bad. Accelerated depreciation is also out of the question. Since it's happened already I'm now looking forward to see how I can protect my assets in the future.
I know we expect to have new changes to insurance coverage coming in June, but I don't think this is something that will be addressed.
I know we expect to have new changes to insurance coverage coming in June, but I don't think this is something that will be addressed.
#2
Rennlist Member
Diminished value has been paid out in Ontario. Most insurance companies don't want to pay this but they can be sued for it. I can assist with going after diminished value if anyone needs.
Bunnn what type of car do you own and what happened?
Bunnn what type of car do you own and what happened?
#3
Insurance is meant to put you back in the position you were before the loss not for you to profit from it. If you have a car that is appreciating get it appraised and advise your insurer. That will protect you
#4
Nordschleife Master
^very true
I think some people bought into a car when it was low. Now for example 993 Turbo owners sitting on cars that are double their value. Same can be said about other older models as well. They still pay premiums for back in the day value.
If they want to get what the cars worth today they need to get it appraised and pay for this new value.
Not sure though how it works for newers cars though which I think the OP is talking about.
I think some people bought into a car when it was low. Now for example 993 Turbo owners sitting on cars that are double their value. Same can be said about other older models as well. They still pay premiums for back in the day value.
If they want to get what the cars worth today they need to get it appraised and pay for this new value.
Not sure though how it works for newers cars though which I think the OP is talking about.
#5
^very true
I think some people bought into a car when it was low. Now for example 993 Turbo owners sitting on cars that are double their value. Same can be said about other older models as well. They still pay premiums for back in the day value.
If they want to get what the cars worth today they need to get it appraised and pay for this new value.
Not sure though how it works for newers cars though which I think the OP is talking about.
I think some people bought into a car when it was low. Now for example 993 Turbo owners sitting on cars that are double their value. Same can be said about other older models as well. They still pay premiums for back in the day value.
If they want to get what the cars worth today they need to get it appraised and pay for this new value.
Not sure though how it works for newers cars though which I think the OP is talking about.
For those interested, these are the 2 recent cases I'm referring to. (specific to Ontario as I know BC and Alberta has more success)
“The decision of Deputy Judge Anschell in Heiner v. Pasha et al. (January 27, 2016) addresses this issue. In this matter, the plaintiff claimed the diminished value of a vehicle, arguing that same was equivalent to a pure economic loss, and therefore did not fall under section 263(5) of the Insurance Act. The plaintiff urged that the court follow Alberta and British Columbia case law.
Deputy Judge Anschell concluded that the language of section 263 clearly barred the plaintiff from bringing an action for diminished value of her vehicle. As a result, the plaintiff’s claim was dismissed.
Deputy Judge Anschell referenced the 2007 decision of the Ontario Court of Appeal in Clarendon National Insurance v. Candow, which stated as follows:
Section 262 of the Insurance Act replaced the tort system that resolved automobile damage claims prior to its enactment. In the new statutory scheme, insureds can no longer sue the tortfeasor driver whose negligence has caused damage to their cars. Rather, their own liability insurer pays for the damage, to the extent that they were not at fault, under the third party liability section of their motor vehicle liability policies. Insureds can recover the at-fault portion of their damage by purchasing collision coverage. Insurers have no right of subrogation for payments to their own insureds, but, on the other hand, do not have to pay the subrogated claims previously brought by other insurers in the tort system. The result is the statutory regime eliminates the transactions costs that were inherent in the tort system.
Deputy Judge Anschell also referenced the recent decision of Keyhani v. Downsview Chrysler Toronto, 2016, in which Deputy Judge Hunt concluded that “any effort to recover the apparent diminished value of the vehicle is barred by the operation of section 263 of the Insurance Act”
#6
Rennlist Member
The issue is if you have a car that was damaged and fixed. if there are two cars side by side and one has had a 65k insurance claim, which is worth more money? answer is obvious so insurance should pay you for the difference between the two cars aka diminished value.
I know of some parties that have been paid dv by insurance companies on Ontario.
I know of some parties that have been paid dv by insurance companies on Ontario.
#7
Burning Brakes
Trade it in to a Quebec dealer? Maybe they will CPO it for the next guy
Trending Topics
#8
The issue is if you have a car that was damaged and fixed. if there are two cars side by side and one has had a 65k insurance claim, which is worth more money? answer is obvious so insurance should pay you for the difference between the two cars aka diminished value.
I know of some parties that have been paid dv by insurance companies on Ontario.
I know of some parties that have been paid dv by insurance companies on Ontario.
#9
#12
Yes, it's currently going around 35-40 over list. It takes away from the whole value preposition of the car, but that's another discussion.
I had another thread about this, but to keep it short. Employee returning my car took an unnecessary turn to check out another residences car(a Lava 991 GT3RS), admitted to going a bit fast and couldnt clear the short left hand turn. Proceeded to smash into a Continental GT and GTI.
I had another thread about this, but to keep it short. Employee returning my car took an unnecessary turn to check out another residences car(a Lava 991 GT3RS), admitted to going a bit fast and couldnt clear the short left hand turn. Proceeded to smash into a Continental GT and GTI.
#13
I wonder if it's possible to do agreed value on insurance on a new car. I insisted with my insurance company that my 997.2 RS was worth more then what I paid (I bought it used a few years ago). I had to fill out a form, send some ads showing that the car was worth more, and after a little back and forth, I got an agreed value for only a small increase in premium.
Sorry to hear about your car, I was hoping to see you at the Glen again!
Sorry to hear about your car, I was hoping to see you at the Glen again!
#14
Drifting
My question on new car values and agreed value insurance is that wouldn't you need a value appraisal yearly as well as paying an increase in premium payments to match the latest values?
One could suggest that the no fault insurance act was never intended to insure an 'investment loss'.
Like the ambulance chasing lawyers that have moved north from Buffalo that have driven up everyone's premiums - we now have several deprecated value lawsuits in our courts?? Great...
It's an unusual and happy circumstance for GT4 owners that due to Porsche underestimating demand, these cars have jumped up in value over what they paid. But I fail to see why I and all other auto insurance clients in Ontario should be saddled with extra costs should these lawsuits prevail *unless* you are paying an increase based upon a yearly appraisal.
One could suggest that the no fault insurance act was never intended to insure an 'investment loss'.
Like the ambulance chasing lawyers that have moved north from Buffalo that have driven up everyone's premiums - we now have several deprecated value lawsuits in our courts?? Great...
It's an unusual and happy circumstance for GT4 owners that due to Porsche underestimating demand, these cars have jumped up in value over what they paid. But I fail to see why I and all other auto insurance clients in Ontario should be saddled with extra costs should these lawsuits prevail *unless* you are paying an increase based upon a yearly appraisal.
#15
I wonder if it's possible to do agreed value on insurance on a new car. I insisted with my insurance company that my 997.2 RS was worth more then what I paid (I bought it used a few years ago). I had to fill out a form, send some ads showing that the car was worth more, and after a little back and forth, I got an agreed value for only a small increase in premium.
Sorry to hear about your car, I was hoping to see you at the Glen again!
Sorry to hear about your car, I was hoping to see you at the Glen again!
My question on new car values and agreed value insurance is that wouldn't you need a value appraisal yearly as well as paying an increase in premium payments to match the latest values?
One could suggest that the no fault insurance act was never intended to insure an 'investment loss'.
Like the ambulance chasing lawyers that have moved north from Buffalo that have driven up everyone's premiums - we now have several deprecated value lawsuits in our courts?? Great...
It's an unusual and happy circumstance for GT4 owners that due to Porsche underestimating demand, these cars have jumped up in value over what they paid. But I fail to see why I and all other auto insurance clients in Ontario should be saddled with extra costs should these lawsuits prevail *unless* you are paying an increase based upon a yearly appraisal.
One could suggest that the no fault insurance act was never intended to insure an 'investment loss'.
Like the ambulance chasing lawyers that have moved north from Buffalo that have driven up everyone's premiums - we now have several deprecated value lawsuits in our courts?? Great...
It's an unusual and happy circumstance for GT4 owners that due to Porsche underestimating demand, these cars have jumped up in value over what they paid. But I fail to see why I and all other auto insurance clients in Ontario should be saddled with extra costs should these lawsuits prevail *unless* you are paying an increase based upon a yearly appraisal.