Following the extensive hail damage to vehicles in the ACT recently, the insurance companies have been processing claims like a sausage factory.
In most cases they are assessing the car against market value and I understand they work off a “bible” that gives the market value for that vehicle.
Here’s a hypothetical: Two exact same vehicles – same model, same year – are assessed for hail damage to the body work. One is a tatty, run-down vehicle; the other has been kept in almost mint condition. Does the assessor attach the same value to both vehicles? To my mind, had the better vehicle been sold before the hail damage, it would have commanded a better than average price, certainly better than the poorly kept vehicle.
Can one dispute the assessor’s assessment even to the point of saying that it shouldn’t be written off, it should be fixed. Are such avenues open to the owner?
Insurance claims can be a mine field when one has a policy at ‘market value’ and their vehicle is low mileage in pristine condition. Regardless of how good it might be, the market value will not usually exceed the upper bound for the make and model as shown in the Redbook. That would be your first stop to see how their offer is against that amount.
/edit: for clarity market value is usually that which a dealer will pay you, eg wholesale or trade value, not what you might get from an enthusiastic private party./
Yes, check your policy PDS. You can first ask the assessor or your rep to review your own evidence and claim of value, and if they decline you can lodge a formal complaint.
Depending on the vehicle make and model determining ‘market value’ can be done wildly differently. Eg there is a lot of data on a Holden but not so much on a classic Citroen, and a bit on a period Jaguar if that makes the point. If there were no sales of the make and model in the past [6 months?] it can get into dispute territory fairly quickly.
As for not being written off, any time a repair is estimated to approach or exceed market value it is their business decision to write it off and pay the customer; in many cases the customer has a path to buy the written off vehicle back, but the rego is forever tainted as having been written off, noting some are ‘repairable writeoffs’ meaning it was deemed non-economic. Getting it re-registered can be problematic as the repaired vehicle has to be assessed as roadworthy and meeting applicable standards.
To add to what the @PhilT said, if you have objective information to support your case of the higher than average quality of your vehicle before the hail; things like recent detailed photos and service records, it is easier to argue for any payout to be at the higher/highest end of the market value.
Also, you can urge the insurer to have it repaired rather than written off. Perhaps you can negotiate to pay the cost of repair over and above the amount they are willing to pay. This may avoid having the vehicle written off, and having the stigma and loss of value of a repairable write off. (Repairable write offs always sell for far less than the usual market price.)
One little point, related to what TheBBG said. My car, insured by NRMA, was written off for hail damage. I couldn’t buy a similar car for what they would give me for it but the value was comparable to what was in the Redbook, so I asked to buy the car from them. That was easier said than done but it happened in the end. I also asked that they filled out an inspection waiver (the car was registered in Qld and that’s possible here) which they did - eventually. So while the car is now officially a repairable write-off, I didn’t need any inspection. As it turned out I got a new bonnet and one can hardly see the dents in the roof and guards unless one looks closely. Such a good decision to buy it from them.
Yes still insured with NRMA but third party property only. They wouldn’t give any comprehensive insurance for a written off vehicle. And considering the cost of the comprehensive insurance, the excess, and that the car is only worth around $4000 now, I don’t think I’d want the comprehensive anyway.
