I sent an e-mail out today to Stacey David of TV's "Gears". I'm hoping he can help create a much needed auto insurance product - Enthusiast Insurance. Here is the "meat" of that e-mail:

quote I have seen Jim Grundy on your program and I wonder if you have his "ear"? There is a gaping hole in insurance coverage that someone like Jim Grundy could understand and bridge. There are policies for collector cars that are cheap but very restrictive in how the car can be used. There are policies for daily drivers but in the event of an accident, we are at the mercy of the company because we don't have "agreed value". What most car guys need is "Enthusiast Insurance"! We love our cars and want to drive them - in many cases, DAILY drive them! We have put our time, money, and talents into making these cars what we want them to be so we are extra careful with them on the road. We care for these cars to a much higher degree than the average commuter. That's why we need special insurance. Take my car for example, it is very nice but it's not museum quality. It wasn't expensive so it SHOULD be driven. However, if it is totaled, I'll be lucky to get half of what it would cost to replace it with a similar-condition car. I believe that is the case with many car guys, they have a cool older car but it isn't pristine. We are stuck with either not getting to fully enjoy our cars or risk a major loss if we drive them. If priced between the two extremes, this is a product that would be wildly successful and valuable to the company that sells it. Would you please pitch this idea around to anyone who will listen? Cars and owners across the nation would rejoice if this became reality!! Thanks and Merry Christmas!! Jonathan Cross Kingsport, TN

It is my New Year's resolution to bug as many people as I can to make this happen.

------------------
Jonathan
23K mile '85 notchie - Still under construction
https://www.fiero.nl/forum/Forum2/HTML/121056.html
I'm not a mechanic but I play one in my garage - me
Power tends to corrupt, and absolute power corrupts absolutely - Lord Acton
Those who hammer their guns into plows will plow for those who do not - Thomas Jefferson
The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time, with the blood of patriots and tyrants - Thomas Jefferson

[This message has been edited by Boostdreamer (edited 01-02-2013).]

Excellent idea!
I wish you success.

I, for one, would be all over it.
Heck... I'd even be willing to pay regular rates, if I could get agreed/appraised value.

[This message has been edited by Raydar (edited 12-24-2012).]

Good luck with the attempt. If you want to daily drive your Fiero, you get insurance for that, if you want a collector car insurance, you can get agreed on value policies (not from Grundy) without a lot of driving restrictions. I have collector's car insurance on three Fieros with agreed on value and the garage storage is the only restriction. I do not drive them on a daily basis but do put 3000-8000 miles on them in a years time (except for my V8 Fiero).

To get good insurance on Fieros, you need to do a lot of research on the products out there.

Right now, even having a garage restriction is too much. We only have a one car garage and my '85 Fiero project car is in there all torn down.

Jonathan

So what exactly are you hoping for? I really don't get it. Agreed value is available, but it costs more because you are acknowledging that you want a bigger check if anything happens.
Do you think an insurance company should give you a lower price because you like cars yet you have the exact same risk for unattended damage as those who park them outside. Do you think you should get a better rate because the insurance company knows you will not be happy with the typical body shop and will most likely submit a claim for the smallest door ding and demand the entire side of the car or more gets repainted? Do you think your enthusiasm really means you know how to drive so you should get a better rate even though your car has a much higher chance of being hit by a teenager, grandma or commuter reading his email on his phone while being driven every day.

Let's say you are the insurance company writing this policy. What are you going to use as a standard to write a policy. No tickets, wrecks or claims in the past 10 years. Do you think a 16 year old driver can be an enthusiast? 18? 20? 70? 80? Will people with prior crashes get a better rate since they know it happens and it makes them safer drivers? Will you cover cars that are used on race tracks? Will you cover cars parked outside in New York City, Newark, NJ or Detroit, MI?

I think a much better idea is to insure a license plate on a predetermined list of vehicles. Then you could use the econobox for longer commuting, the pickup for towing the race car, the RV for camping and the sports car for cruise nights without having to insure 4 separate vehicles when you can only use one at a time.

Agreed value insurance for a daily driver will be expensive. But if you're a true enthusiast, I guess you'll pony up the cash.

you know you can delcare the value of your car with insurance companies right? it may have to be inspected to confirm the value but if you have reciepts with and understandble mark up in labor there shouldnt be a problem.

I have agreed/stated value insurance for 40K on my V8 GT and it is $530 per year with another car as the main insured vehicle. I do not know what it would cost if it was my only car or if they would even insure it for stated value if it were my only car. American Family was the only company I could find that offered stated value car insurance without restrictions, it is just like my other cars only it is a second car insured with them. I do have homeowners and an umbrella policy so that could make my rates a little lower, but I do not think it is by much. I did have to take all my receipts and the car to the agent so he could verify what I spent and the condition of the car but that was it. I do not know if they offer this insurance in all states as states have varying insurance laws and that might affect where they offer this type of coverage, but you could check into it.

quote Originally posted by SCCAFiero: So what exactly are you hoping for? I really don't get it.

I want replacement value if my car is totaled. I want to be able to use my car any way I see fit excluding abuse such as off-roading or racing. I want the insurance company to look at my car and my research of similar cars and see what it would cost to replace my car in order to "make me whole" again after a wreck.

I don't expect to pay a premium on a policy for a $6000 car. I have my car and want to drive it because it IS cheap. No matter how you slice it, a full payout for a total is crazy small vs. ANY new(er) car.

quote Originally posted by SCCAFiero: Agreed value is available, but it costs more because you are acknowledging that you want a bigger check if anything happens.

Available where? Not with Allstate, Not with State Farm. I want "enthusiast" insurance to be a widely available product so I don't have to go to a "specialty" insurance company if I don't have to. I would prefer to keep my multi-policy discount if possible.

I don't think ANY car insurance policy should be a bigger/smaller check haggle-fest. You tell them what kind of car you drive, they tell you full coverage costs $X. If I pay for the coverage, I EXPECT the coverage! Not to get rich or to scam the company but just to be "made whole". To replace the car I had with the closest thing possible, the next nicer thing, or the money to buy either at my choice. I don't understand why the general public has accepted this crap for so long! We pay what the companies demand then THEY get to say what they will pay us. To me, this is no different than shipping a built engine to your builder and he returns the car "finished" with a different engine. You paid your money, he put an engine in your car, you got a running car but HE got to decied if he wanted to give you the good engine or not. Heads or tails? Sorry, you lose. Wanna try again?

quote Originally posted by SCCAFiero: Do you think an insurance company should give you a lower price because you like cars yet you have the exact same risk for unattended damage as those who park them outside. Do you think you should get a better rate because the insurance company knows you will not be happy with the typical body shop and will most likely submit a claim for the smallest door ding and demand the entire side of the car or more gets repainted? Do you think your enthusiasm really means you know how to drive so you should get a better rate even though your car has a much higher chance of being hit by a teenager, grandma or commuter reading his email on his phone while being driven every day. Let's say you are the insurance company writing this policy. What are you going to use as a standard to write a policy. No tickets, wrecks or claims in the past 10 years. Do you think a 16 year old driver can be an enthusiast? 18? 20? 70? 80? Will people with prior crashes get a better rate since they know it happens and it makes them safer drivers? Will you cover cars that are used on race tracks? Will you cover cars parked outside in New York City, Newark, NJ or Detroit, MI?

It's not about liking cars. Most Americans like cars. They are a necessity. I'm talking about people who LOVE cars. People who call their car their "baby". People who will look out their window if they hear a strange noise near their cars. People who will park at the end of the parking lot. People who don't turn the stereo up louder when their car starts making a strange noise. People who want to KEEP their car, keep it nice, and keep it on the road.

Should an insurance company charge extra for covering people like this? I don't think so. If "collectors" get super low rates, enthusiasts should probably have LOWER rates. Would home insurance be higher for the owner to live in it or for a renter to live in it, assuming similar value on contents? Not sure but I bet the coverage would be lower for the owner. Why? Because they have a vested interest in keeping the house up.

I don't claim to know what specifics might define an "enthusiast" to a potential insurance company. That could be a shopping point between companies. As far as all of your senarios, which owners, vehicles, or insurance compainies are exempt from these things? In areas where problems are more likely, aren't rates adjusted upwards? That's not a problem. No reason not to do that here.

quote Originally posted by SCCAFiero: I think a much better idea is to insure a license plate on a predetermined list of vehicles. Then you could use the econobox for longer commuting, the pickup for towing the race car, the RV for camping and the sports car for cruise nights without having to insure 4 separate vehicles when you can only use one at a time.

To the best of my knowledge, this option is not available in Tennessee. I wonder how many places it IS available. It wouldn't work for me anyway, we have three running vehicles and three drivers and frequently all three are in use at the same time.

The bottom line Jonathan, is that you are paying a third party to assume the risks you take by driving your car. You don't get to define the conditions under those circumstances... you either accept what they offer or look elsewhere. If there was a market for the type of coverage you're seeking, and it was profitable for a company to offer it, it would exist.

You're by no means a complete prisoner to their methods though. Other options include having a high deductible and/or remove the comprehensive coverage and place the savings you earn off the premium in the bank in case you ever do need repairs. If you are as careful as you suggest, then the likelihood of ever needing to dip into the account would be small and you would be ahead of the game. If you argue that this is unfair, then surely you can undersatnd that the same argument could be spun around and used by the insurance companies to argue why they don't offer the type of coverage you seek.

quote Originally posted by Bloozberry: The bottom line Jonathan, is that you are paying a third party to assume the risks you take by driving your car. You don't get to define the conditions under those circumstances... you either accept what they offer or look elsewhere. If there was a market for the type of coverage you're seeking, and it was profitable for a company to offer it, it would exist. You're by no means a complete prisoner to their methods though. Other options include having a high deductible and/or remove the comprehensive coverage and place the savings you earn off the premium in the bank in case you ever do need repairs. If you are as careful as you suggest, then the likelihood of ever needing to dip into the account would be small and you would be ahead of the game. If you argue that this is unfair, then surely you can undersatnd that the same argument could be spun around and used by the insurance companies to argue why they don't offer the type of coverage you seek.

To me the bottom line is I am forced by law to have insurance on any vehicle I operate on public roads. I have no problem with that. The insurance company knows where I live, how many vehicles I have, how many drivers are in the household, whether or not they are kept in a garage, what the crime level is in my area, what my driving history is, etc. They use that information to charge a certain price to "insure" me against loss in the event of an accident. If they don't pay enough to replace my car with something of equal value, they really are not protecting me from loss as they claim.

Am I claiming to be extra careful? I don't know how to answer that other than I obviously don't think of cars as being disposable. I think that may be the biggest difference mentally between the average commuter and an "enthusiast".

Also, comprehensive coverage is not my big beef. It mostly centers around totaling a car due to a collision. I understand the mentality of "totaling" a car that has damage that would cost over half the value of the car to repair. I have no problem with that. It is the value that they assign to your car after the accident. Most newer cars are depreciating, ours are pretty stable if not increasing in value. With cars that are depreciating, it will cost progressively less to replace with a similar unit. That is not the case with Fieros or Mustangs or Trans Ams or Camaros or Corvettes, etc.

No, I still don't understand why this type of coverage isn't offered. I mostly don't understand why consumers have allowed this to go on for as long as it has. Apparently, it has gone on so long that it seems rediculous to expect an insurance company to protect what it agrees to insure. What a wacky idea!

Jonathan

[This message has been edited by Boostdreamer (edited 12-26-2012).]

I just carry liability and drive the wheels off my modified Fieros...

In the end, I would prefer the car be totaled vs. the “agreed value” being high enough to support a significant repair... mainly because I am rather finicky about the chassis integrity and even if they would pay to "fix it" I wouldn't want it fixed. I would much rather start over with a rust/collision free 88 chassis and swap over all the upgraded parts myself than to be handed back a car repaired by someone trying to turn a profit on the job.

Sure there is risk in my choice, but there is also a great deal of freedom. The vast majority of the “costs” in my Fieros are drivetrain and brake related, so barring a fire/flood, the vast majority of these upgrades can simply be transferred to another fiero chassis without significant loss. Plus when you carry only liability, your insurance agent can’t total the car, so there is a 50/50 chance you can keep the car and all its upgrades without any hassle/additional expense from dealing with the insurance company. If someone hits you, then you are in a much better position to negotiate your claim as well as retaining the vehicle and its parts.

Now if you had a rebody or extensive body mods that are not easily transferred to another fiero chassis, then you might want to have more coverage and be willing to incur more restrictions in usage.

quote Originally posted by fieroguru: I just carry liability and drive the wheels off my modified Fieros... In the end, I would prefer the car be totaled vs. the “agreed value” being high enough to support a significant repair... mainly because I am rather finicky about the chassis integrity and even if they would pay to "fix it" I wouldn't want it fixed. I would much rather start over with a rust/collision free 88 chassis and swap over all the upgraded parts myself than to be handed back a car repaired by someone trying to turn a profit on the job. Now if you had a rebody or extensive body mods that are not easily transferred to another fiero chassis, then you might want to have more coverage and be willing to incur more restrictions in usage.

I currently carry liability and comprehensive. No collision. I don't see the point in it. I agree with you about letting someone work on my Fiero. There are too few to trust and none of them are in NE Tennessee. I started down this path BECAUSE of my last Fiero getting "fixed" after being hit. That driver didn't have insurance so my Uninsured Motorist was supposed to cover the repairs. They went the "bread and water" route on my car and did very little work on it. In fact, when I picked it up, the guy said, "It needs an alignment". Correct me if I'm wrong but wasn't this car just in an accident and you guys "fixed" it yet you acknowledge that is has alignment problems? I barely got that car home and it has not left our street since. It is currently on jack stands and has become a parts car. How many weeks of fighting were wasted in this process? Too many, that's all I know.

Now guess exactly why I see a need for a better insurance product? Again, why would I want to agree to ANY restrictions? Isn't this America? The land of the free and the home of the brave? Why would I want to allow an insurance company to tell me when, where, and how I can drive my $6000 car? I have no plans to make this car a museum piece so why shouldn't I drive it daily and enjoy it?

Jonathan

quote Originally posted by Boostdreamer: Here's another senario that won't work for me. We have three vehicles here but also three drivers. I would need a fourth vehicle to state as being my primary car in order to get agreed value on my Fiero. Why? The repairs or replacement won't cost any less when it is hit no matter how many cars I own. Again, Fieros are cheap even when totaled with their full value. Most are worth less than 10K. That is cheap in the world of totaled cars. So what's the problem? Fair isn't fair enough to insurance compainies? It has to be skewed in their favor at the expense of properly compensating their customers? And we're supposed to smile about it and be happy they will accept our money! Jonathan

I do not think you need to have more than one car per person to get the coverage I just think that is why it is so cheap at less than $100 per month I am sure if I dove the Fiero every day and it was my only car the price per year would be at least double. I could still get the stated value policy I would just pay a lot more for mine as I have so much money in it, you have a much less expensive Fiero so the price for your policy would likely reflect that.
I was telling you a company that offers the type of coverage you want. I told you about my other policies because I am unsure of what the insurance company requires and I wanted you to know I had another car also insured so you would not think the price of $530 a year was for my only daily driver car. You cannot know if the company or type of insurance I am referring to applies to you unless you check into it with the insurance company. As I said before I do not know if the company offers the same coverage in your state or any of the possible coverage options you could get. I have two drivers in my house and we have 4 cars total between us and the other driver has a few tickets and two claims the others cars are insured for full coverage and the two claims we made were paid and the compensation was fair. One Fiero was totaled and had no mods or anything, it was stock kind of beat up and had 100K plus on it. The insurance company paid us $2800 for the damage and we kept the car and sold it to a Fiero club member for $850, we paid $675 at the auto auction for it and put about $1500 in repairs in to it. So we came out good in it. The other claim was on the formula and it is a much nicer car than the first one, it was in a front-end collision and had $2700 in damage and they happily paid to fix it and never tried to total it as we had receipts and proof the car was worth around 8K. You should check with a bunch of insurance companies to see what they offer, will never know if the insurance company has what you want unless you check with them. It took me hours of time and weeks of looking to find the company and coverage I wanted, I bet you can find what you need but it will take time and you will have to make calls as the internet quotes were nowhere close to what I found talking to a real person at the said Ins. Company.

[This message has been edited by Christine (edited 12-26-2012).]

Vehicle insurance can be thought of in a triangular diagram. On one end you have basic liability, which is there basically either to protect yourself against another individual hitting you or taking care of the other person if you hit them. Cheap, but obviously wont't take care of the car. Then you have full coverage, which will replace/repair your car, but often at a value you do not agree with. Then you have - as mentioned - agreed value which is essentially full coverage but incurs higher premiums to ensure you get what you believe you would need to replicate/repair a car should it get damaged.

What you essentially want is an insurance that works like agreed value full coverage, with premiums similar to standard full coverage, but that also has no drivig/storage restrictions in place. I do not think you will ever see anything like this in place simply because it is not profitable for the insurance companies (which remember, is the ultimate goal of these companies - to make money).

For one, it would incur a heavy toll on insurance companies due to them having to define "what" is "enthusiast." I consider my beat up '86 Fiero GT no different than somebody whom owns a widebody with a drivetrain swap - they're both Fieros. However, between that you have a VERY WIDE spectrum of potential value that such an insurance company would have to determine. That is something they simply cannot do on an independent driver basis - it's too much to figure out, and then have the resultant party to agree upon, thus too much manpower wasted.

Another serious issue one has to consider is that many insurance companies will simply pay out to total a car, rather than even make attempts to fix. So many issues arise with repairing a car that it can be very problematic and costly to the comapny - you yourself having pointed one out. What shop does the car go to? What gets repaired? How? In what manner? Obviously such issues warrant just paying out the value of the car under full coverage to the owner, simply to avoid having to deal with re-repairs or issues that may arise that are not deemed "satisfactory" to the vehicle's owner.

Finally - and you did acknowledge this and it is very much true - vehicles are very "disposable." Ultimately a vehicle can be "replaced," and it may be replaced by a different vehicle, but the fact is there will always be new vehicles built and available. Most of the world's populace and insurance companies see this. They do not think of vehicles being replaced in the literal sense of replacing a vehicle for the same vehicle, but that a vehicle can be replaced because there will always be an influx of vehicles available. That thought may be sad to some, but it's the current state of the free world in societies largely driven by materialism.

You do have a sound idea though and honestly I myself would like to see particular changes in insurance policies and how they are executed, but unfortunately in the current state of things you are either at the mercy of particular companies or you go elsewhere - often with undesireable results.

quote Originally posted by Christine: I was telling you a company that offers the type of coverage you want.

I appreciate it. Unfortunately, American Family is not available in Tennessee. I did quite a bit of searching before I began this. I also asked here. The general jist of things was that in order to have agreed value there were restrictions. Either mileage, type of usage (not for work, school, groceries), had to be locked in a garage over night, could only be used during certain months, had to have another vehicle which would be the Primary vehicle, etc. Every instance of agreed value had one or more of these restrictions.

My question is, why should a collector get his full investment back if he wrecks his car but not the average joe? Not only does the collector get his full investment back, he gets MUCH lower insurance in the mean time! Sure it's not going to be on the street as much but it is still a matter of paying for something to be insured and the company living up to that contract. This is a perfect example of an owner who will EXPECT more than NADA. In fact, he's guaranteed to get the amount that he has listed with his company.

Give me that deal and let me throw in a few extra bucks to let me use the car as I see fit.

Jonathan

I have my 88 Formula insured through CHROME. I saw them at the Hot Rod Power Tour, and got hooked up with one of their agents. They took great care of me and helped me throughout the process. I went through an appraiser in town and got the car appraised for $30,000 without any receipts really. The agent does custom cars all the time and insures big commercial properties so I know it was an accurate quote, plus I got a full booklet of my car with all pictures as well. I then took the appraisal and gave it to my CHROME insurance representative and they processed it and got it all setup. I'm limited to 10,000 miles a year and anyone is into custom cars knows 10,000 miles is quite a few. I've put 30,000 miles on my Fiero in 11 years so I'm not too worried. The insurance rate is $50.50 per month and that's full stated value if anything happens to the car, stolen, wrecked, anything it is fully covered. They were way better than Haggerty or Grundy or some of those places. I emailed one gal back and forth, never had to see my car and it was all very smooth.


-Amir

------------------

I might as well be on a different planet as our car insurance is purchased through the government. We get our insurance at the same place we get our plates, stickers and even pay traffic tickets. We are also raped on price but we at least have good coverage. For a person with a perfect driving record its right around 1300 per year per car to insure and my Goldwing is 1500 per year. I don't have it, but I plan to get agreed / declared value insurance on my V8 5spd Fiero. It will cost me about 10 bucks a month more but have no restrictions on driving it, I can daily drive it to work or whatever I want. The catches are I have to get it appraised and once its gone through the appraisal processes if I do any major mods I have to have it re-appraised. If you are curious www.icbc.com Insurance Corporation of British Columbia a Crown Corporation.

------------------
857GT Part 85GT Part 87GT Part Caddy, 93 Eldorado 4.9, 5spd Dual O2 Custom Chip, Custom Exhaust. MSD Everything Now with Nitrous. Capt Fiero --- My Over View Cadero Pics Yellow 88GT 5spd Full Poly Suspension, Lowered 1/2" in front, Corner Carver.

quote Originally posted by Capt Fiero: I might as well be on a different planet as our car insurance is purchased through the government. We get our insurance at the same place we get our plates, stickers and even pay traffic tickets. We are also raped on price but we at least have good coverage. For a person with a perfect driving record its right around 1300 per year per car to insure and my Goldwing is 1500 per year. I don't have it, but I plan to get agreed / declared value insurance on my V8 5spd Fiero. It will cost me about 10 bucks a month more but have no restrictions on driving it, I can daily drive it to work or whatever I want. The catches are I have to get it appraised and once its gone through the appraisal processes if I do any major mods I have to have it re-appraised. If you are curious www.icbc.com Insurance Corporation of British Columbia a Crown Corporation.

Canada knows when they have a captive audience, don't they? Yes, you are getting raped! With 3 cars under that plan, my insurance would be $325 a month! Were at $240 right now and that's with a 16 year old primary driver!

I would have no problem with getting the car appraised. In fact I want to. Not only to protect my car but just because it would be cool to have it, to show off, etc.

Jonathan

[This message has been edited by Boostdreamer (edited 12-27-2012).]

I have an agreed value policy with Grundy on my Chop Top Fiero. The only restriction is that is is garaged "most" nights and not a daily driver. I asked for written clarification on what a daily driver is operationally defined as; they responded that there are NO mileage limitations, with my policy, that I should not be driving it to work daily, but they had no way of determining if I did or not (having 8 cars reduces it being driven daily anyway). My agreed value for my car is $17,000. No appraisal was needed. My policy includes uninsured motorist, theft and actual cost of repairs (unless totaled, then I get the agreed value).

The policy for the Chop Top car is only $260 for a YEAR. It seems that would cover your need, aside from being garaged. However, the term "most nights" is very hard to prove if something happened on a night when it was outside.

If you have any questions, hit me up with a PM (I am terrible about posting and not reading responses). I am happy to share my policy details if you would benefit from them.

-Scott

The biggest problem with agreed value is that the car can easily be over insured way beyond its value. Just because I put a $4,000 engine and a $10,000 paint job on a $500 Fiero does not make it $14,500 car to anyone. The insurance company will not pay more for anything that anyone off the street would pay for it. It seems pretty obvious to me. Sinking a ton of money in old cars is not a very good investment in most cases and most of us really don't care about the investment potential of older cars.

The replacement cost of a car is the smallest part of a claim. A few thousand difference is nothing compared to $10,000 helicopter rides, $100,000 surgeries and lifelong medical expenses for bad injuries. So from the companies perspective, would you rather insure a bone stock Toyota Camry with an AM radio or a "Hot Rod" with thousands of dollars in go fast parts, commonly stolen stereo equipment, and a much higher potential to be driven recklessly, crashing and exposing millions to a possible "bad faith" claim due to insuring a vehicle that may not even be street legal anymore. Just removing the cat will make it illegal to drive on the street.

As a business owner, and someone with a lot of uncommon sense, I don't see how you could think that your vehicle should be insured for less cost just because you spent more money on it than the next guy did, and because you lover it. I wish it did. I have 4 insured cars with 2 drivers with higher rates than some of those posted. One is a collector policy and the other 3 are daily drivers. I guess Grundy has different policies in different places as well (or they changed them recently), because the policy they showed me had unrestricted mileage "for car show related events" and things like that. Daily driving it was specifically prohibited. Totally different than what the agent thought the policy said.

@ psychosurfer
I can't follow those restrictions. I have my '85 project car in my one-car garage. It won't move out of there for a long time. I have a 2-car carport but my wife's car is under it along with one of my parts cars. No room for me. I will also have to use my car as a daily driver. I start school in January and I will prolly be looking for part-time work when I get settled into my routine. Even if my Fiero didn't get used much, we have three cars and three drivers so an insurance company will view it as a primary vehicle no matter what.

Besides, the whole point is that I WANT to daily drive it. It's not like I'm putting a Shelby Mustang at risk. This is a Fiero that looks like so many others. Yes, it is very nice and very original but I still only put a current value on it around $6000. A $6K car takes up a whole bunch of room if it has no daily use value. This car should be used. It should be used daily. I feel I'm being MORE responsible by driving a nice older, cheaper car than buying a new anything.

But this isn't just about my one car. It's not just about Fieros. It really should extend to all cars, all years, all conditions. Other terms of car insurance are defined. The totaled value should be also. I'm just using hobby cars as a vehicle to get this sort of coverage started.

Jonathan

quote Originally posted by Boostdreamer: You just stated EXACTLY why I should be able to pay less. If a "collector" can get full coverage with an agreed value AND pay MUCH less, why can't I pay a little less? Again, it comes down to replacement value. If you lower it, it WILL cost more to replace the car. That needs to be in the policy. And why not? If you wreck your Shelby or Boss Mustang, will the insurance company only agree to replace the engine with the base model V6? Of course not! What's the difference? If you disclose your mods and their cost, and give the company the opportunity to adjust their billing, there should not be a problem. Jonathan

My 1970 Plymouth costs about $250 a year for the same liability coverage as my daily drivers with an agreed value of $15k. That "collector" coverage is inexpensive because I am over 25, have a clean driving record, park it indoors every night, am restricted to 3,500 miles a years primarily for car related activities, I have to have at least one daily driver for every licensed driver in the house and I am the only insured driver for it. I am also sure I drive my old Plymouth a lot more conservatively than you probably drive your Fiero. The odds of me wrapping it around a telephone pole or getting whacked by grandma is a small fraction of the odds that my, or your, daily drivers are exposed to. Therefore your theory of having a daily driver insured for less cost than daily driver rates does not add up to a realistic product for an insurance company to offer. As the owner of a collector car, I accept the restrictions I have, allow me to have better insurance for a car that I drove on the street about 6 times last year for a total of less than 100 miles. If I drove it to work and got hit at 9am Tuesday morning on a road leading to an office complex I work at, I would have a tough time explaining to them I was actually going to a car show. People who tempt fate and buy the wrong insurance do get caught, the hard way.

From the insurance companies view, they do not expect a 16-20 year old driver, driving a $6,000 car every day during rush hour and parking it unattended for hours on end to have the same level of risk as "collector" cars do. I would NEVER leave my Plymouth unattended in public without having it in sight or being able to check on it every few minutes. I would assume you leave your Fiero unattended more often than not, especially without a garage.

As far as the agreed value goes, the problem is that there are far more people than you probably realize who see insurance as a way of making money on false claims, staged crashes and imaginary injuries. Far more than the average person realizes. It is because of these people that the rest of us have the problems we do since otherwise regular claims may be scrutinized more than you think they should be. When you try to insure something for more than its "worth", red flags get raised as to why, since there is no obvious reason. What you think something is worth is pretty much meaningless if someone else won't buy it or sell it to you, or insure it for you.

quote Originally posted by SCCAFiero: My 1970 Plymouth costs about $250 a year for the same liability coverage as my daily drivers with an agreed value of $15k. That "collector" coverage is inexpensive because I am over 25, have a clean driving record, park it indoors every night, am restricted to 3,500 miles a years primarily for car related activities, I have to have at least one daily driver for every licensed driver in the house and I am the only insured driver for it. I am also sure I drive my old Plymouth a lot more conservatively than you probably drive your Fiero. The odds of me wrapping it around a telephone pole or getting whacked by grandma is a small fraction of the odds that my, or your, daily drivers are exposed to. Therefore your theory of having a daily driver insured for less cost than daily driver rates does not add up to a realistic product for an insurance company to offer. As the owner of a collector car, I accept the restrictions I have, allow me to have better insurance for a car that I drove on the street about 6 times last year for a total of less than 100 miles. If I drove it to work and got hit at 9am Tuesday morning on a road leading to an office complex I work at, I would have a tough time explaining to them I was actually going to a car show. People who tempt fate and buy the wrong insurance do get caught, the hard way.

Collector car insurance works for you because you fit the profile. Most people don't. Ask yourself, does it really make sense to take a $6000 car out 6 times a year for a total of 100 miles and keep it in storage the rest of the time? No. It doesn't. That is, unless you have excess garage space, money, and multiple vehicles. Why else would you even hold on to a car like that?

quote Originally posted by SCCAFiero: From the insurance companies view, they do not expect a 16-20 year old driver, driving a $6,000 car every day during rush hour and parking it unattended for hours on end to have the same level of risk as "collector" cars do. I would NEVER leave my Plymouth unattended in public without having it in sight or being able to check on it every few minutes. I would assume you leave your Fiero unattended more often than not, especially without a garage.

I agree with the age thing. I wouldn't expect a 20 year old to qualify for the "enthusiast" rate. For the record, I'm 44, married, clean driving record, non-smoker, etc. I also live in a smaller city of just under 50K people. I live in one of the nicest neighborhoods on a cul-de-sac road. Leaving cars outside is typically not a problem. More people leave their cars in the driveway in Kingsport and use their garages for storage.

quote Originally posted by SCCAFiero: As far as the agreed value goes, the problem is that there are far more people than you probably realize who see insurance as a way of making money on false claims, staged crashes and imaginary injuries. Far more than the average person realizes. It is because of these people that the rest of us have the problems we do since otherwise regular claims may be scrutinized more than you think they should be. When you try to insure something for more than its "worth", red flags get raised as to why, since there is no obvious reason. What you think something is worth is pretty much meaningless if someone else won't buy it or sell it to you, or insure it for you.

I don't doubt that people try to scam insurance companies. That is a fact of the industry and it doesn't stop other forms of insurance policies from being sold. Like I said before, all I'm after is fair replacment value that is guaranteed. In what world is that not fair? They charge us, we pay. When an accident happens, I want something to show for the money I spent other than just having the legal bases covered to operate my car on the road.

Of course agreed value has to be agreed upon. That's where the name comes from. If the company agrees to pay you 30K for your Fiero, congratulations. That's not what I'm after. I propose that sales searches be done, receipts be shown, inspections performed, and photos taken. All this in an effort to come to an AGREED value.

People can bring up all sorts of reasons why this will never work. Fortunately, none of the reasons are valid. For every exception, all the company has to do is what they are already doing now, bump the price up. We all know they like doing that!!

So, what's the problem? Why can they not state what they will pay for our vehicles? Why the secrecy? Why is this practice acceptable to seemingly so many? This is really an honesty for consumers issue. It affects every driver on the road. If it is so important to know the nutritional values of every food product we consume, isn't it important to know the value of the insurance we pay for every month?

Jonathan

quote Originally posted by Capt Fiero: I might as well be on a different planet as our car insurance is purchased through the government. For a person with a perfect driving record its right around 1300 per year per car to insure and my Goldwing is 1500 per year. I don't have it, but I plan to get agreed / declared value insurance on my V8 5spd Fiero.

A Government Insurance Plan is always "sold" to the public as being broad based, covering everyone, and cheaper than private insurance companies (the sales pitch to get the public to "go along") - UNTIL they get their monopoly, after which they can dictate all terms and gouge the public who has no recourse.

When I lived in B.C., I remember paying $1200/year insurance on a $800 car.

Alberta has private insurance companies - not government run insurance.

Both my Fieros at appraised value with full coverage "collector insurance" (5000 miles a year restriction) cost $350/year for the pair.
My Goldwing, full coverage of $1 million liability and $100 deductible is $600/year
My daily driver 2006 Grand Caravan, no-restriction, full-coverage $500 deductible is $900/year

AND if I decide I'm not happy or am paying too much, I CAN shop around for better rates.


------------------
My World of Wheels Winners (Click on links below)

3.4L Supercharged 87 GT and Super Duty 4 Indy #163

[This message has been edited by fierosound (edited 12-28-2012).]

quote Originally posted by Boostdreamer: So, what's the problem? Why can they not state what they will pay for our vehicles? Why the secrecy? Why is this practice acceptable to seemingly so many? This is really an honesty for consumers issue. It affects every driver on the road. If it is so important to know the nutritional values of every food product we consume, isn't it important to know the value of the insurance we pay for every month? Jonathan

I would guess some of the secrecy is that the day they insure the car it would look and run a certain way. When the claim is actually filed, the car most likely has a lot more miles, dings, rust and mechanical problems that means it is no longer worth what was agreed upon. The bigger problem is how do you fix that issue. The company would have to police its policies with periodic inspections to make sure the car is still worth the agreed value. That would require more employees and more hassle for customers. In reality, most of the time, only true collector cars will hold their value because they don't get driven and they are protected from the environment. Therefore, having an agreed value policy in effect for any length of time on a daily driver, like your Pinto example, becomes a huge liability for them as they know the vehicle is more likely to end up as stolen, burnt to a crisp, intentionally hit by a phantom vehicle or otherwise totaled vehicle since it has a much lower resale value.

My Plymouth was "inspected" with a set of photos when I applied for the policy 12 years ago, including a photo of it in the garage. With the exception of last year when I checked the "under restoration" box when I renewed, since I am repainting it, they have safely assumed the car still looked like it did in the photos. In the same time I have purchased and completely worn out a few daily drivers that were not worth anything near what I paid for them when they were originally insured.

Good luck with your quest. I would be interested in a better way to get insurance.

quote Originally posted by SCCAFiero: I would guess some of the secrecy is that the day they insure the car it would look and run a certain way. When the claim is actually filed, the car most likely has a lot more miles, dings, rust and mechanical problems that means it is no longer worth what was agreed upon.

quote Originally posted by SCCAFiero: The company would have to police its policies with periodic inspections to make sure the car is still worth the agreed value. My Plymouth was "inspected" with a set of photos when I applied for the policy 12 years ago, including a photo of it in the garage. With the exception of last year when I checked the "under restoration" box when I renewed, since I am repainting it, they have safely assumed the car still looked like it did in the photos.

In Canada, insurance companies require the owner of any "agreed value car" to have the car assessed by a qualified auto appraisal service to establish the value before any policy is put in place, and it must be redone and re-submitted every five years or else you lose your coverage. I'm surprised it's not the same in the US since most of the same companies serve both countries.

For Boostdreamer: You stated earlier that you don't carry collision insurance on your vehicle...

quote Originally posted by Boostdreamer: I currently carry liability and comprehensive. No collision. I don't see the point in it.

And yet you also state you are most concerned about totalling the car in the event of an accident:

quote Originally posted by Boostdreamer: Also, comprehensive coverage is not my big beef. It mostly centers around totaling a car due to a collision.

These are two contradictory rationales. If your biggest concern were "totalling your car entirely due to a collision", wouldn't you want to have collision coverage, if not to replace the entire value of your vehicle, then at least to recover the lion's share of it's value at the time of the accident? Doesn't that send the exact opposite message to your insurance company about your "enthusiast" mindset and how much you care about your car? That may not be your intent, but in the eyes of an insurance adjuster it is the message.

Besides, settlements that insurance companies offer are negotiable. They're based on Kelly Blue Book prices as evaluated by the insurance adjuster following the accident. You can always contest the adjuster's valuation of the pre-accident condition with the insurance company and through the courts if necessary, but you must be prepared to invest the money before any accident if you want to give yourself a chance at negotiating a settlement to your satisfaction. Maintain a current appraisal by an independent appraiser before an accident, since it's going to be difficult for anyone to judge the pre-accident condition of your car after it's totalled. It will cost money to keep a current appraisal, but it is every enthusiast's burden.

I have my Finale insured with Grundy with hardly any restrictions, no shopping trips (LOL) and no to and from work, that's about it. They required photo's of the vehicle from all angles, interior etc and I asked for an agreed value of $35K. It is definitely not a daily driver and those that know the car, and the time and effort I (and my pal Jay) put into it,can easily see that value. My quote from Grundy was/is a very reasonable $300 A YEAR!!!! I guess you only know what they really consider the worth of your vehicle should the worst happen, but until that day enjoy your driving.............

Interesting facts about the Canadian insurance system.

I am a bit curious how both systems work when both Canadian and U.S. vehicles are in the "other" country and a (serious, injury producing) collision occurs. Is it the country the vehicle was insured in or the country where the collision occurred that determines how things get settled? Does Canadian insurance require a minimum level of liability and any idea what that might be? I believe it varies by state in the U.S.

quote Originally posted by SCCAFiero: I am a bit curious how both systems work when both Canadian and U.S. vehicles are in the "other" country and a (serious, injury producing) collision occurs. Is it the country the vehicle was insured in or the country where the collision occurred that determines how things get settled?

I don't know for certain, but I suspect the insurance companies deal with each other in the same way regardless of the country of origin of the cars. Heck, we even have major differences across Canada since insurance is under provincial legislation. For example, we have some provinces with "no fault" insurance where your insurance company pays to repair your own vehicle regardless of who is to blame. Blame is only assessed to determine rate hikes. So I'm pretty sure most companies have international policies to deal with instances of differing local laws. Always best to check though before assuming anything!

quote Originally posted by SCCAFiero: Does Canadian insurance require a minimum level of liability and any idea what that might be? I believe it varies by state in the U.S.

Yes... in Canada it's $1M minimum for third party liability, though all the companies have been pushing clients to purchase $2M coverage for years now.

I believe the minimum in BC is 200,000 however they pester you for maximum coverage, and make you feel guilty if you don't buy it. I think I have 1 million or 2 million coverage on my policy, plus all the extra's. Collision, theft, Roadstar and Roadside Assistance Towing Package's. The Roadstar package saved our bacon when our Blazer was broken into, as it covered everything from the rental car to the new alarm system installed into the blazer without any deductible at all.

Also in regards to being inside the US with a car, http://www.icbc.com/autoplan/travel I travel to the US at least once a month and every few months I end up going down for at least a month at a time. If you have full coverage on your car, you are pretty safe. As ICBC pays us out regardless then sends their team of lawyers to deal with the US insurance company. If it is your fault and you don't have full coverage, you had better buy a jar of lube, as you are going to take it up the butt, unless you have a good lawyer.

I don't know for a fact but I heard that boarder states are harder on Canadian drivers than they are on local drivers as they know it’s not likely for a Canadian to come back through customs just to fight a ticket. I have on the other hand been let go by an Oregon cop when a friend and I were doing some very obviously illegal things in our cars. We were cough, uhm, drag racing, and chasing each other, we got pulled over, and the cop ran his lisc, shook his head at me as he could not run my Canadian plates or lisc, and then told us both to be careful and cool it, then let us both go.

[This message has been edited by Capt Fiero (edited 12-29-2012).]

quote Originally posted by SCCAFiero: I would guess some of the secrecy is that the day they insure the car it would look and run a certain way. When the claim is actually filed, the car most likely has a lot more miles, dings, rust and mechanical problems that means it is no longer worth what was agreed upon.

"Collector" type cars, the cars that are kept and fixed up and treasured and longed after are the very cars that are holding their values if not appreciating. In high school, I bought my first car, a 1969 Mach I Mustang. I paid $2700 for that car. It was complete other than it had a different engine in it and it needed some body and paint work. Cars in MUCH worse condition than my old car, total basket case cars, can easily bring $10K. When these cars are restored, they can bring $40-60. In some cases much more. So with so many cars between those two extremes, why not drive them? They aren't losing their value, the insurance company doesn't have anything to "lose" through depreciation. So why not drive them?

quote Originally posted by SCCAFiero: The company would have to police its policies with periodic inspections to make sure the car is still worth the agreed value. That would require more employees and more hassle for customers.

Why? Has it been a problem for Haggerty?

quote Originally posted by SCCAFiero: In reality, most of the time, only true collector cars will hold their value because they don't get driven and they are protected from the environment.

Not true. There are many cars and motorcycles that you could buy now, drive them as much as you wanted but took care of them, then re-sell for what you paid.

quote Originally posted by SCCAFiero: Therefore, having an agreed value policy in effect for any length of time on a daily driver, like your Pinto example, becomes a huge liability for them as they know the vehicle is more likely to end up as stolen, burnt to a crisp, intentionally hit by a phantom vehicle or otherwise totaled vehicle since it has a much lower resale value.

You cannont discuss this topic without understanding the concept of AGREED value and REPLACEMENT value. I believe people are more likely to vandalize a perfect car than an old daily driver car. For instance, a worker at Walmart here has a '67 Mustang coup that she drives to work and parks in the lot. People will look at it because it is an old car but it won't attract thieves and vandals because it doesn't scream "THIS IS TOO NICE FOR YOU!!"

quote Originally posted by SCCAFiero: My Plymouth was "inspected" with a set of photos when I applied for the policy 12 years ago, including a photo of it in the garage. With the exception of last year when I checked the "under restoration" box when I renewed, since I am repainting it, they have safely assumed the car still looked like it did in the photos.

This goes against your worry that inspections will be too frequent, too expensive and time consuming for the agents. I could easily agree to a thorough inspection with a "follow-up" inspection every few years.

quote Originally posted by SCCAFiero: I would be interested in a better way to get insurance.

That's all I'm after!!

Jonathan

It sounds like you've made up your mind that insurance companies can give you anything they want for the replacement value of your car, and you can do nothing to find out what that value is beforehand, nor contest it successfully regardless what they give you after the fact. This simply isn't true no matter how many different ways you want to spin it. Your insurance company can tell you today, right now, how much they will give you for your car if you total it. Nothing... because you don't have collision coverage. If you do buy collision insurance, they not only would be able to tell you how much they'd give you for it if you totalled it tomorrow, but they must be able to tell you. They do this by using the industry standard for used car values in the Kelly Blue Book. It's that simple.

If you want to ensure you get the fairest possible outcome under replacement value coverage, then get the car appraised independently as I've mentioned before. If you're unwilling to do that, then you cannot complain when an adjuster appraises your totalled car for less than you thought it was worth. The truth is, that a 25 year old Fiero maxes out around the $12K mark for a fully loaded, unmodified, perfect condition, low mileage car in the Blue Book. Values drop off exponentially for anything that doesn't match that description. Just look at all the examples of how little money people are spending to buy Fieros in good condition right here on PFF.

For those that believe their car is worth more, there is "agreed value" coverage which is the maximum possible amount the company will give you immediately after the latest independent appraisal is submitted to them. Supplemental Endorsement Form 19 (or SEF 19) is a condition called Limitation of Amount that comes into force under most if not all "agreed value" insurance policies. It basically states that the Insurer shall not be liable for any amount in excess of the actual cash value at the time the loss or damage occurs, or in excess of the agreed value whichever is the lesser. So your perception that "agreed value" policies are any better than replacement value policies is misguided. Agreed values can and do depreciate with car usage, changes in condition, and other market forces. Anyone that believes that a 12 year old appraisal will hold any water with an insurance company would be well advised to read their policy more closely.

That insurance companies can and do apply restrictions to driving a car with an "agreed value" is entirely their prerogative since they get to determine how much risk they want to accept on your behalf, for the money you are paying them. They also apply a whole gamut of restrictions on replacement value policies as well, such as not running a taxi service, not racing, etc. You must accept any risks that come along with driving your car that an insurance company either doesn't need to by law, or won't because it simply doesn't pay dividends to do so. It just doesn't make sense that it would be any other way.

(Edited for spelling)

[This message has been edited by Bloozberry (edited 12-30-2012).]

quote Originally posted by Bloozberry: Anyone that believes that a 12 year old appraisal will hold any water with an insurance company would be well advised to read their policy more closely.

For the record, My car was never actually appraised and it has always been insured for way less than its "worth". I have it insured for more money than I have invested in it and way less than market value. If it gets "totaled", the odds are it will still have some residual value, and if I survived, I will probably even rebuild it. Every year at renewal, I have to state that there were no major changes and it still looks the same. Considering I have agreed value insurance of $15k on it and I have seen one on ebay not hit a reserve at $82k, I am sure the insurance company would have no issue with our agreed value. Cars with agreed value under a certain amount do not require an appraisal with this company (J.C. Taylor). I read policies for Hagarty, Grundy, State Farm and others and they were more restrictive with less liability amounts than I found with J.C. Taylor. That may have changed recently as I have not shopped around for 2-3 years for a comparison.

My point was that they are not too concerned about the value of my car due to what it is, compared to the average Fiero which will not be worth anything near the $12k mark. But, I think you knew that.

http://automotivetribune.com/?p=3172