NSXTC

I was at Pioneer Center in San Diego getting my Cayenne S in for a recall inspection. Low and behold, a silver CGT in the service bay with the rear fender and engine cover all apart.

The story behind it is he just took delivery ($6K/month lease!) and was on his way to the gas station down the street to fill it up. Got rear ended by a big truck.

Damage estimates? The service manager says $200K!!! Guess with parts being as rare as the CGT, it costs that much? I would have hated to be the guy who rear ended the owner.

There's still more drama...Apparently, there's something about medical costs in there and also heard that the insurance company (either truck owner or CGT owner, it was not clear) may not cover the whole bill.

Hypothetical question...is it still the truck driver's fault if the CGT slammed his brakes (testing out PCCB for instance)?

Too bad I didn't have my Dig camera handy.

Side note...The service tech started the CGT to move it around the bay. The service manager who was with me told him to rev it up. Service tech said..."No can do, engine is still cold." What impressed me about this was he respects the car as it was his own. Most techs would not have cared and reved the hell out of it. CGT was so low that it needed special wooden ramps to get it on/off the lift.

ben in lj

Well, that's one less CGT running around SD for the next 12 months + or so. It's gonna take forever to get that car back together if there was any damage to the chassis. That absolutely sucks to have had that happen at all - especially just off the lot and presumably on Miramar. I wonder if the guy can take it to the track in it's present condition as he awaits parts, etc or if it'll have to be shipped back to Germany. The truck's insurance is in for a world of hurt cause in addition to $200k in damages, there's $72k in lease payments, and probably $100K+ in diminished value depending on the extent of the damage.

$200k, eh. Good thing it was a commercial truck because most people running around SD don't have limits anywhere near that. They're all stretching to make their interest only, adjustable rate mortgages to be bothered by excess coverage.

Incidentally, any speculating the owner of the #1 CGT in SD was comtemplating, has now turned from a $200k profit to a $200k loss depending on how the insurance company handles it. Given the damage repair, lease costs, and diminished value, totalling the car from the insurance company is probably a very viable option. However, any chance of having them buy him another on the open market with the attendant premiums now, is probably not. If he had to sue to get that done, there wouldn't be any premium (and probably even a significant discount to MSRP) by the time the case was settled.

PogueMoHone

This more than anything could put a "dent" in the Carrera GT sales.

ben in lj

why? some guy decides to learn how to drive (with a clutch known that possess a learning curve for many) his car on a very busy street known to have high commercial truck traffic, and some bonehead hits it from the rear. hell, my little brother stalled my 993 at an intersection the first time he ever drove it too. no bonehead hit him and 993 sales didn't miss a beat. oh, and my brother still has a hard on over that car.

Nick

What is puzzling, Pioneer always delivers its cars with a full tank. I believe Porsche has a mandate about that. Is it possible there is an exception with respect to the CGT i.e. not wanting any employee to drive it to the station as they do now?

Did they give any indication regarding the length of time for the repairs? I suspect getting materials and parts from Germany will be a problem particularly with the CGT composite materials.

It really is a sad story. This car is forever tarnished. I suppose he could walk away from the lease or hopefully he had gap insurance.

Moogle

agree with what you said ben, except the part about the discount for CGTs 'down the road'. that will never happen, at dealeres or in the secondary market. there will always be a premium over MSRP for this car except for the people who are on the initial 1500.

NSXTC

The service mgr didn't indicate how long the repair was going to take. He did tell me that the gentlemen waited for 4 years (did they unveil the concept back in 2000?) and only was able to drive it for 10 minutes. It is sad indeed.

ben in lj

"agree with what you said ben, except the part about the discount for CGTs 'down the road'. that will never happen, at dealeres or in the secondary market. there will always be a premium over MSRP for this car except for the people who are on the initial 1500."

that would be both very nice and unprecedented, but i "highly" doubt it. i expect to sustain a $100 to $200k hit within 5 years of ownership.

PogueMoHone

5 years of ownership = 50% hit. It's nearly an immutable law, and I've concluded that 1500 cars is way too many so the depreciation will be large (IMO). The speculators will all be heading for the "exit" at the same time. Have you seen the residulas and MF on these cars, lower and higher respectively by a very significant factor and limited at the moment to one Company.

The cost of owning this car only begins with the purchase price, as the Pioneer incident demonstrates. If you can stomach the potential subsequent costs..then I think most buyers will want an original specimen. The "bargain hunters" will require serious discounts to be induced to accept the subsequent ownership risks, and even then it may just not be in their nature. People keep referring to the Enzo..but they built a lot less cars.

Having spent 4 months battling the Insurance Co over my Cayenne TT I can tell you that this guy is facing a mighty headache. Even though the Insurance Company eventually totaled out my car (for $25K of damage) I can see where his circumstances are completely different, and I wouldn't want to be in his shoes. Because he leased, with Gap insurance he has no diminished value claim (the leasing company might)..it's complicated already. Who's going to sue whom? ..further complicated. After repair he can drive and simply turn it in at the end of the lease (so what is his real loss?, useage and warranty coverage!). The only good thing is there just might be enough $ involved to attract the lawyers

The other aspect of this is that Pioneer (whom I know well and like, having bought many cars there) may be inadvertantly caught up in the damage claim for a myriad of reasons.

If I were in this particular situation I wonder what I would do..after I stopped crying. I know nothing less than a new car would satisfy me, but from every angle I can currently conceive (that doesn't mean there aren't any) the deck has been stacked against him and he has little chance...however unintentional it may have been.

sweanders

ben in lj

"Because he leased, with Gap insurance he has no diminished value claim (the leasing company might).."

our lease on the TT Cayenne states they can come after us for diminished value at lease end. in addition to this, i would think the lessee has a claim for diminished value as (s)he has a purchase option at lease end.

btw, after seeing those pictures, whoever said that was $200k in damages is on crack. i would be shocked if it is even close to $100k. also, it's highly unlikely that car is going to be totaled. i'd be out enjoying it today myself while the long wait for parts runs its course.

PogueMoHone

It the car is fixed to Porsche standards, there is no diminshed value at the end of a lease. Sub-standard repairs are an entirely different matter and presumably outside the scope of this discussion and particularly in the context of a CGT as opposed to the everyday "run of the mill" Porsche.

I'm not a lawyer so I'm not getting into "specifics" about "generalties" at this time, the "facts" are sure to change as the dicussion progresses.

I have had a great deal of recent experience on this issue, and because the potential loss was only $50K no lawyers were intereested in getting involved, though a number did give me direction and wording to "battle" on my own. FYI I got a Cayenne TT totaled and the damage was $25K.

The conclusion I came to, without a long complicated explanation, was that a lease versus ownership provides best protection against potential diminished value issues.

ben in lj

"a lease versus ownership provides best protection against potential diminished value issues."

that along with the lack of sales tax on the residual (and any remaining months should it be terminated early) were the primary reasons for our leasing the TTC vs. buying it. this is why i was surprised at the language in the lease which spoke specifically about the lessee being liable should diminished value occur owing to substantial damage which was repaired. i don't have a copy of the lease yet (just got the truck) but will repost the relevant language when i get my copy. we once had a $50k car that sustained $12 to $14k worth of damage which was repaired at the best place in town (does all dealer repairs for that make) and diminished value was in the $15k range just the same. unfortunately that was not a lease so i had to fight with the other guy's insurance company for nearly a year before they finally cut the check. they paid for the damage at the time it was repaired and i forget why in the end i got a $26k check too and they retroactively totaled the car which had been sold thru auction nearly a year earlier.

Aaronr

so...... does this $200,000 accident change insurance specs on the only other few CGT's out there at the present time since there are so few on the road (making this a larger percentage than a normal car accident)?

pig4bill

15 grand? That sounds out of line. That is saying that a car that would normally be worth 50 grand, like a low mileage 996 or 993 C4S, would sell for only 35 grand even after it's been properly repaired. I think a lot of people wouldn't mind buying a car like that.