Low Valuation - Insurance write off
Discussion
All noted, thank you for the help here guys.
Cracking cars indeed, we love it and it has been good to us. I have never had a car with miles this high but this has been too good to rid of.
Thanks again
This is my first draft, I don't want to press any buttons to make the recipient think I'm a knob but I want to stand my ground. Not sure I should use the ombudsmen line just yet.
Any advice on points I should include or remove?
I hope this email finds you well. I appreciate your efforts in assessing the valuation for my 2008 Porsche Cayenne GTS following the recent accident. However, after careful consideration and market research, I believe that the offered value of £8,500 does not accurately reflect the true market value of my vehicle.
Whist the examples provided may be 59 Plate vehicles with slightly lower mileage, it is crucial to recognise that my Porsche Cayenne GTS stands out due to its factory optioned specification which would have resulted in a higher value, more desirable vehicle along with it’s exceptional condition with meticulous maintenance. These factors contribute significantly to its overall value, distinguishing it from the lower specification and lower maintained vehicles used for comparison. The single-year difference does not necessarily justify a circa 20% reduction in value and makes little to no difference to someone buying one of these. If I were to market the vehicle, it would be for £12,500.
The valuation should enable me to buy another similar condition, optioned car, please find me an example for £8.500 which resembles mine.
I understand that Glass's Guide and CAP are widely used tools in the industry. While they provide valuable insights into general market trends, they do not fully account for the individual characteristics that contribute significantly to the value of my vehicle and special edition models, which going by the guide, shows a value below £7,850, there have never been any Cayenne GTS’s similar to mine going for a 4 digit value.
I have attached evidence of a similar 2008 model in white with a strange colour interior, not as well optioned as mine and shows a value well above the offered amount to me. My car has been meticulously maintained and is in immaculate condition, factors that contribute significantly to its overall value, something these traders guides do not factor in for above average market condition.
The black £9,990 example is clearly not in a great condition, as confirmed by a call to the dealer selling, it visibly has a missing jacking point cover, filthy/worn buttons photographed, moisture filled headlight, yet being 1 year newer with 6k less miles makes it a case to drop the value of my car. The price reflects it’s condition as the seller told me and it “needs some love”. Autotrader also lists as currently being £800 below the market average. If that’s the market average, mine should be on the higher side. I’d welcome any inspection.
I kindly request a thorough review of the valuation, taking into account the provided evidence. I believe a fair and equitable settlement should be in line with the current market value for my vehicle. I simply want my car repaired or the same car which can be purchased for the valuation being given.
If necessary, I am prepared to escalate this matter to the Financial Ombudsman Service for a third-party review. I trust that we can reach a mutually agreeable resolution before considering such steps.
Thank you for your understanding.
Sincerely,
Cracking cars indeed, we love it and it has been good to us. I have never had a car with miles this high but this has been too good to rid of.
Thanks again
This is my first draft, I don't want to press any buttons to make the recipient think I'm a knob but I want to stand my ground. Not sure I should use the ombudsmen line just yet.
Any advice on points I should include or remove?
I hope this email finds you well. I appreciate your efforts in assessing the valuation for my 2008 Porsche Cayenne GTS following the recent accident. However, after careful consideration and market research, I believe that the offered value of £8,500 does not accurately reflect the true market value of my vehicle.
Whist the examples provided may be 59 Plate vehicles with slightly lower mileage, it is crucial to recognise that my Porsche Cayenne GTS stands out due to its factory optioned specification which would have resulted in a higher value, more desirable vehicle along with it’s exceptional condition with meticulous maintenance. These factors contribute significantly to its overall value, distinguishing it from the lower specification and lower maintained vehicles used for comparison. The single-year difference does not necessarily justify a circa 20% reduction in value and makes little to no difference to someone buying one of these. If I were to market the vehicle, it would be for £12,500.
The valuation should enable me to buy another similar condition, optioned car, please find me an example for £8.500 which resembles mine.
I understand that Glass's Guide and CAP are widely used tools in the industry. While they provide valuable insights into general market trends, they do not fully account for the individual characteristics that contribute significantly to the value of my vehicle and special edition models, which going by the guide, shows a value below £7,850, there have never been any Cayenne GTS’s similar to mine going for a 4 digit value.
I have attached evidence of a similar 2008 model in white with a strange colour interior, not as well optioned as mine and shows a value well above the offered amount to me. My car has been meticulously maintained and is in immaculate condition, factors that contribute significantly to its overall value, something these traders guides do not factor in for above average market condition.
The black £9,990 example is clearly not in a great condition, as confirmed by a call to the dealer selling, it visibly has a missing jacking point cover, filthy/worn buttons photographed, moisture filled headlight, yet being 1 year newer with 6k less miles makes it a case to drop the value of my car. The price reflects it’s condition as the seller told me and it “needs some love”. Autotrader also lists as currently being £800 below the market average. If that’s the market average, mine should be on the higher side. I’d welcome any inspection.
I kindly request a thorough review of the valuation, taking into account the provided evidence. I believe a fair and equitable settlement should be in line with the current market value for my vehicle. I simply want my car repaired or the same car which can be purchased for the valuation being given.
If necessary, I am prepared to escalate this matter to the Financial Ombudsman Service for a third-party review. I trust that we can reach a mutually agreeable resolution before considering such steps.
Thank you for your understanding.
Sincerely,
It's ridiculous - hope you get a decent offer in the end OP, either a proper settlement or buy back and repair, or even as someone upthread said, cash payment in lieu of repair.
The insurer you mentioned gave exactly the same runaround to a mate, but this was after Copart had left it on a verge for two weeks so vandalisation meant it wasn't worth buying back even if they'd offered the option.
In the end they raised the offer by a paltry amount, he went to the ombudsman and they sided with the insurer. His problem was that cars in the condition his was in with low mileage were rare, so very difficult to find similar.
I think it's part of their business model: try lowballing, raise the offer slightly, some will accept, some will go to the ombudsman, a certain percentage of those will go against, but overall they lose less on payouts. There was an article in the Indy (I think) on the subject a few months ago and your insurer was one of those mentioned as being among the worse for this.
As someone else has said, it's an idea to look at agreed value cover with good older cars. I've no idea how much more expensive this is.
Good luck
The insurer you mentioned gave exactly the same runaround to a mate, but this was after Copart had left it on a verge for two weeks so vandalisation meant it wasn't worth buying back even if they'd offered the option.
In the end they raised the offer by a paltry amount, he went to the ombudsman and they sided with the insurer. His problem was that cars in the condition his was in with low mileage were rare, so very difficult to find similar.
I think it's part of their business model: try lowballing, raise the offer slightly, some will accept, some will go to the ombudsman, a certain percentage of those will go against, but overall they lose less on payouts. There was an article in the Indy (I think) on the subject a few months ago and your insurer was one of those mentioned as being among the worse for this.
As someone else has said, it's an idea to look at agreed value cover with good older cars. I've no idea how much more expensive this is.
Good luck
Mark, pretty good draft although possibly needs to hit a balance between more facts and slightly less “ chat “.
Also they have already upped their offer based on previous information so this needs to be built in.
Don’t tell them what they already know but perhaps highlight the fact that the 5 highest value cars ( none of which are as good as yours in your opinion ) have that average “ value “ of x and then if x is less than the Porsche valuation of £13k add that into the average too.
What you want to achieve is therefore a range from that £8,500 to ( say ) £13,000.
I would retain the line about the ombudsman.
Leave off any suggestions that this is your final request ie leave doors open.
All in my humble opinion.
Also they have already upped their offer based on previous information so this needs to be built in.
Don’t tell them what they already know but perhaps highlight the fact that the 5 highest value cars ( none of which are as good as yours in your opinion ) have that average “ value “ of x and then if x is less than the Porsche valuation of £13k add that into the average too.
What you want to achieve is therefore a range from that £8,500 to ( say ) £13,000.
I would retain the line about the ombudsman.
Leave off any suggestions that this is your final request ie leave doors open.
All in my humble opinion.
Quick edit - your average of cars mentioned is just under £12k which includes that Porsche valuation at £13k.
On reflection use therefore a range of their increased offer of £8,500 to that average £12,000 ( and state this is the average ) and then chuck in the Porsche valuation by number as back up.
Of course none of this guarantees a thing but it will show that you aren’t to be fobbed off so easily.
If they come back and say no change in their offer then that then leaves door open again for your “ punchier but still polite “ next attempt.
On reflection use therefore a range of their increased offer of £8,500 to that average £12,000 ( and state this is the average ) and then chuck in the Porsche valuation by number as back up.
Of course none of this guarantees a thing but it will show that you aren’t to be fobbed off so easily.
If they come back and say no change in their offer then that then leaves door open again for your “ punchier but still polite “ next attempt.
OP - even though you don't have an agreed valuation policy, did you input a valuation for the car when you took out the quote?
Often the comparison sites ask you to give an approximate value of your car. This does not usually actually get factored into the insurer pricing, nor is it a guarantee for they will honour the value.
However, If you put in £13k as the value, you can plead ignorance re the valuation process and it will assist with any FOS case. On the flip side, if you put in £8k valuation at the time of quote then it undermines your argument and any subsequent complaint.
Often the comparison sites ask you to give an approximate value of your car. This does not usually actually get factored into the insurer pricing, nor is it a guarantee for they will honour the value.
However, If you put in £13k as the value, you can plead ignorance re the valuation process and it will assist with any FOS case. On the flip side, if you put in £8k valuation at the time of quote then it undermines your argument and any subsequent complaint.
One thing insurance companies rely on is that you need to replace the car so they can afford to take their time while waiting for you to accept their lowball offer.
When I crashed my Skyline R33 GTR in 2012 i was initially offered £3.5k after about 4-5 months I eventually got them up to £14k and I still think to this day they did well to get off that lightly.
When I crashed my Skyline R33 GTR in 2012 i was initially offered £3.5k after about 4-5 months I eventually got them up to £14k and I still think to this day they did well to get off that lightly.
alscar said:
Quick edit - your average of cars mentioned is just under £12k which includes that Porsche valuation at £13k.
On reflection use therefore a range of their increased offer of £8,500 to that average £12,000 ( and state this is the average ) and then chuck in the Porsche valuation by number as back up.
Of course none of this guarantees a thing but it will show that you aren’t to be fobbed off so easily.
If they come back and say no change in their offer then that then leaves door open again for your “ punchier but still polite “ next attempt.
Good point on the average, thank you!On reflection use therefore a range of their increased offer of £8,500 to that average £12,000 ( and state this is the average ) and then chuck in the Porsche valuation by number as back up.
Of course none of this guarantees a thing but it will show that you aren’t to be fobbed off so easily.
If they come back and say no change in their offer then that then leaves door open again for your “ punchier but still polite “ next attempt.
porterpainter said:
OP - even though you don't have an agreed valuation policy, did you input a valuation for the car when you took out the quote?
Often the comparison sites ask you to give an approximate value of your car. This does not usually actually get factored into the insurer pricing, nor is it a guarantee for they will honour the value.
However, If you put in £13k as the value, you can plead ignorance re the valuation process and it will assist with any FOS case. On the flip side, if you put in £8k valuation at the time of quote then it undermines your argument and any subsequent complaint.
This has zero to do with the argument. They usually pay over what is entered - it's a guide at the time of taking out the policy. Often the comparison sites ask you to give an approximate value of your car. This does not usually actually get factored into the insurer pricing, nor is it a guarantee for they will honour the value.
However, If you put in £13k as the value, you can plead ignorance re the valuation process and it will assist with any FOS case. On the flip side, if you put in £8k valuation at the time of quote then it undermines your argument and any subsequent complaint.
BUG4LIFE said:
Sheepshanks said:
Hmmm...the full term in ours, with LV= says:
"Market value: the cost of replacing your car with the same make, model and specification. Age, mileage and condition will be taken into account. We’ll ask an engineer for advice, use motor trade guides and other sources to determine the market value at the time of the accident or loss. We’ll consider the amount you could have reasonably got for your car if you sold it immediately before the accident, loss or theft and not the price you paid for it."
So it's somewhat contradictory as first it talks about replacing the car, then goes on to talk the value if you sold it.
Exactly, those LV T&C's make so sense...the 'person' isn't looking to sell a car, they need to buy/replace the one that's just been written-off!!!!"Market value: the cost of replacing your car with the same make, model and specification. Age, mileage and condition will be taken into account. We’ll ask an engineer for advice, use motor trade guides and other sources to determine the market value at the time of the accident or loss. We’ll consider the amount you could have reasonably got for your car if you sold it immediately before the accident, loss or theft and not the price you paid for it."
So it's somewhat contradictory as first it talks about replacing the car, then goes on to talk the value if you sold it.
However the Ombudsman's guidance used to be explicit that an insurance company should pay the price that the customer should expect to pay for the car at a "reputable dealer" - not the private sale price.
http://web.archive.org/web/20140628144925/http://f...
However the current guidance on its website doesn't explicitly say which version of the "market value" should be used. Not sure whether this is because of a change in policy or whether it's just because they don't have as much information on their website as they used to, but my guess would be the latter as the general trend has been for more consumer protection over time, not less.
TwigtheWonderkid said:
Just because cars are advertised for sale at a certain price, doesn't mean that's the price they will eventually sell for.
This is very true - the seller might accept a lower offer, or the car might sit on Auto-Trader for weeks attracting no interest until the seller readvertises it at a lower price.Also worth noting that overpriced cars will tend to take ages to sell while underpriced cars will usually be snapped up quickly. So on any given day, there will be more cars advertised for sale at above the market value than below it.
That said there are two points in the OP's favour here:
(1) The Financial Ombudsman's guidance suggests that in the current climate cars are tending to sell for closer to asking prices than they perhaps once did, and as a result the Ombudsman is more willing to consider adverts as evidence of value than they used to. ( Linky)
(2) For an old Porsche the prices in the trade guides are inevitably going to be based on fewer sales than for (say) a three year old Yaris, so there's more uncertainty about the market value. The OP needs to persuade the insurer (or the Ombudsman) that the guides have got it wrong in this case - that is hopefully easier with an older rarer car which is presumably poorly covered by trade guides.
Aretnap said:
......so there's more uncertainty about the market value. The OP needs to persuade the insurer (or the Ombudsman) that the guides have got it wrong in this case - that is hopefully easier with an older rarer car which is presumably poorly covered by trade guides.
Exactly this. In my mate's case they at first gave the trade guides excuse then had to admit that his car wasn't covered by the guides as it was too old. This was a 2002 car, not sure what the actual cut off is and whether relevant to the OP's case but worth checking These days, what a motor dealer has to charge for a car is 'the retail value of the car' plus the implicit cost of consumer rights.
When you buy an old Porsche from a dealer he has to factor in a fair chunk to cover the risk of you bringing it back.
Hard to put a number on that, but it's a lump of value which the OP's car didn't have pre-accident.
There are valid reasons for agreed value policies coming with strings attached and hoops to jump through.
Unfoirtunately when a car gets written off, every little fault it had previously is mysteriously forgotten.
When you buy an old Porsche from a dealer he has to factor in a fair chunk to cover the risk of you bringing it back.
Hard to put a number on that, but it's a lump of value which the OP's car didn't have pre-accident.
There are valid reasons for agreed value policies coming with strings attached and hoops to jump through.
Unfoirtunately when a car gets written off, every little fault it had previously is mysteriously forgotten.
How long have you had the car? It explains why GAP insurance is so essential. Just paid for 4 years cover on a £40k car and it was just over £400 - back to invoice price including my excess.
Op is the payout offered actual cash after your excess or has that to be deducted? What excess do you have as you must take that into account in the valuations.
Op is the payout offered actual cash after your excess or has that to be deducted? What excess do you have as you must take that into account in the valuations.
Gassing Station | Speed, Plod & the Law | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff