You don't need to be an 'investor' to invest in Singletrack: 6 days left: 95% of target - Find out more
Long story short.
Someone drove into the back of my parked car, to which my bike rack and Santa Cruz Hightower LT were attached.
The bike racks itself is very badly damaged and is beyond economical repair.
The bike "only" has visible damage to the saddle and rear wheel with some scrape marks on the rear triangle. Due to the mounting method, there's a good chance a high impact twisting force will have been placed on the headtube.
The drivers insurer has admitted liability. My LBS is recommending complete replacement of bike as it's very difficult to determine whether there is internal damage to the carbon and the way carbon fails. The insurer accepts the LBS evaluation. All good so far as it doesn't impact my insurance in any way.
However....
The insurer is only offering what I paid, which is about $1000 less than what it will cost me to replace.(I got a good deal when I bought the bike 18 months ago but it's been superseded by a new model which is approx $500 more expensive).
The sweetner is that I get to keep the old bike and old rack. In theory, I could get the bike repaired at a local carbon repair shop at my cost and not buy a new bike (=profit?) or sell the repaired bike then buy a new one (=profit?).Or I could save myself some repair related hassle and just sell the whole bike as-is (buyer would be informed of history) or strip it down and sell components.
Anyone of these four options potentially results in some profit for me, though frankly, selling any used stuff is usually a time-wasting pain-in-the-arse
So, WWSTWD? Is this a good settlement offer or is there something I'm missing? I believe it's generally thought a good idea to turn down an insurer's initial offer as they try to low-ball. Is this actually true?
BTW: I've already lost three weeks summer riding so I'm not keen on dragging this out for a minor bump up in offer...
You mention dollars, so in US?
Under UK law, you get compensated for what you actually lost - so if your bike is 2 years old they offer you a value for a 2 year old bike, not the cost of replacing it. Obviously, that valuation can be negotiated round, if it's a small portion of a bigger claim the actual value of the offer of the bike is less vital
Insurance has to put you back n the position you were in before the crash. If they can replace the bike for less than the cost of a new one thats fine. What they cannot do is give you a supposed second hand value for it if no second hand ones are available
Is this their first offer? Simply reject it as not good enough and ask for a revised offer. Point out that the bike cannot be replaced for the money offered. Ask them to show it can be.
Insurance companies will allways low ball on first offer. Keep on fighting is what I would do. an extra £500 or £1000 is peanuts to the insurance company
Under UK law, you get compensated for what you actually lost
Depends on your policy and the basis of insurance - indemnity vs reinstatement
To the OP, if your the first owner of the bike, why not look at SC’s crash replacement policy and use the pay out to fund a much reduced new frame?
When this happened to me a year ago I got back the full cost of buying a replacement at (then) current new bike prices, not what I’d paid for the bike. This seemed fair to me but this was in the uk and not the US.
Having said that, the only way I managed to claim for the cost of the bike was with it listed as a related loss on an injury claim. I didn’t have the right legal cover on my own insurance for them to want to chase anything other than direct damage to the car and the other party didn’t seem interested if asked about it (without backing from lawyers who know their way around the rules).
Take offer (don't know if they come as frameset only?) , buy new frame and swap components?
As above, if 1st offer refuse and renegotiate.
Never take the first offer. It's procedure at an insurance company to lowball. Go back twice.
Is it just the frame you need?
Can you get a crash replacement from SC n use that to cover the shortfall
You could try for full replacement bike, but I'm sure the whole bike wasn't damaged. I'd get a quote from the LBS to replace frame and damaged parts, plus their rebuild costs and take that amount.
If the insurance scumbags are willing to replace the whole bike, then they need to pay out the amount for buying a new bike!
This happened to us with a car insurance claim. We explained that we couldn't find a replacement for the amount they had offered, but if they could source a suitable replacement we'd be happy to accept, otherwise we wanted the full value of the claim. They sent us the full value after that.
If you read the OP, he is not claiming off his own insurance, he's claiming off the other driver's insurance, so it's a civil claim for negligence, not a claim under his own insurance.
Fairly long standing fundamental of UK civil law that you cannot profit from an incident, so if you have lost a 3 year old bike, you get compensated for a 3 year old bike. How you negotiate that value is a separate issue.
More cash - its also a principle of uk law that the insurance must put you back in the same position you were in before the clam - so what you say is right if and only if there are second hand bikes of that type available. If its rare or unusual bike you are perfectly justified in asking them to replace with new or find a second hand replacement. When no secondhand replacement is available then they have to replace with new
I understood that bikes were different to cars when valued. Cars are valued at current value, bikes were valued at new replacement value. that's clearly a very layman view, and I suppose the approach might vary depending on what items are damaged i.e. if they broke a saddle they offer the cost of a new saddle, where does it change?
its also a principle of uk law that the insurance must put you back in the same position you were in before the clam
Do you have a source for that, TJ? My understanding is that insurance is a contract between you and the insurer and it's ruled by that contract. It might be new for old, it might be current value, it might have a big excess or a maximum amount, etc.
Fairly long standing fundamental of UK civil law that you cannot profit from an incident, so if you have lost a 3 year old bike, you get compensated for a 3 year old bike. How you negotiate that value is a separate issue.
So, claiming off your own insurance, you get new for old*... Claiming off someone else (who has caused you the grief and inconvenience) you get old for old?
Really?
*you do and I have done.
There is no contact when claiming of someone elses insdurance
I cannot find anything definitive. However as the basic principle is that you must be put back in the same situation as you were in before the claim you must be able to get a replacement bike for the settlement. If its a common bike say boardman then there will be a secondhand market for the bike. However if its rare or custom built there is no secondhand market so you cannot be put in the same position by a payment of less than the new cost. IN theory that is betterment so you can be charged for that but unlikely.
What I would be doing if my rare bike was written off is I would be asking them to provide evidence that I can replace my bike for what is offered. If they cannot then I would be on to the ombudsman
Found a couple of ombudsman case studies where the insurance company gave an ex gratia payment to up the settlement from secondhand value to new cost.
What is being mentioned above is the principal of indemnity which states the claimant is returned to the same position they were immediately before the loss. However indemnity is modified by the contract of insurance eg new for old / reinstatement. I’d check your policy and see if there is any cover you can claim under, see what the basis of indemnity is and then get your insurance to subrogate against the liable parties insurance
For clarity, this is Canada not the UK and this is not my insurance company I'm claiming from (therefore I have no contract wording I can check).
Also, I bought the Santa Cruz specifically for the lifetime manufacturers warranty - if the insurance company somehow sourced a suitable s/h bike, I would no longer have that warranty.
Incidentally, it's an LT model and is no longer made. It was also in XXL size so the chances of them finding a replacement bike is virtually zero.
Regarding the SC crash replacement program....as I understand it, that's around 15% saving over the cost of a new frame so not exactly a bargain.
The insurer is already offering me more than than the s/h value anyway.
I'm curious as to what STW think about keeping the old bike and either selling as-is (very cheaply for someone willing to take the risk, or they could repair it).
Last thing I want to do is drag this out for a relatively small improved offer but have nothing to ride for the next xx weeks.
(Generally I ride 2-3 times per week so I'm getting angsty already!)
I wonder how much a specialist carbon repairer would charge to x-ray or otherwise inspect the head tube.