Bingle - Accident at fault asking Car (Repairable) Write off

ca4cpa on 23/10/2018 - 14:00
Last edited 23/10/2018 - 15:13

I am having a dispute with Bingle Insurance.

Story: Accident on free way - airbag opened. Car towed to yard. told me it is write off.

I have previous insurance quote with agreed value of 17000, while Bingle only do at "Market Value".
I have told to take a cheque for 6800 (less Rego and other things)

I asked what is the repair quote from repairer - they said it is $7000.

I am sure insurance company can bargain with repairer and only give 60%-70% of total repair cost.

What is my legal rights to fight and repair the car.

Thanks.

==== Updated
Insurance company has sent out claim letter stating wrong car. (Neo) instead of (Maxx Sports)

as per PDS
** Market value **
Your car is covered for its market value. Your car includes keys, options, accessories, or modifications that are permanently fitted to your car. Market value means the amount we assess your car to be worth on the road in your local area. We’ll consider your car’s make, model, age, condition and kilometres travelled in assessing its market value. We may use recognised industry publications to assist us in determining its market value. Market value includes costs of registration and compulsory third party insurance and any stamp duty and transfer fees. Depending on the age of your car, our New for Old option might be available to you on this policy. Refer to ‘New for Old’ on page 5 (below).

Automotive

Related Stores

bingle.com.au
bingle.com.au

Comments

  • toniyellow on 23/10/2018 - 14:11
    +1

    http://mva.financialrights.org.au/ and http://mva.financialrights.org.au/factsheet/your-vehicle-has… Will outline your rights.

    What your previous insurer did is not relevant. What is relevant is what your policy with Bingle says.

    • Scrooge McDuck on 23/10/2018 - 15:30
      +1

      Market value means the amount we assess your car to be worth on the road in your local area.

      Sorry OP, you're screwed!

      • HighAndDry on 23/10/2018 - 15:35

        I mean, it really just means redbook value less on-roads and other estimated costs of sale. It's fairly standard, they're not going to rip OP off (by any significant margin, their numbers are just going to be more conservative), and it's on OP to get "agreed value" cover if they wanted it.

        • Scrooge McDuck on 23/10/2018 - 15:50
          +2

          they're not going to rip OP off

          Are you kidding? That's practically Insurance 101.

          • HighAndDry on 23/10/2018 - 15:54
            +4

            @Scrooge McDuck: Okay, let me clarify: they're not going to illegally rip OP off. They're insurance companies, they basically make a profit by sticking to their PDS.

            • Scrooge McDuck on 23/10/2018 - 15:55
              +1

              @HighAndDry: This is why I always advocate minimal insurance. Insurance is a bet that an adverse event will happen, at poor odds and with a profitable edge for the insurer. Then if an adverse event does occur, you often have to fight to get what you've been paying for.

              Unless you're terribly irresponsible, you're better off saving those premiums and investing them — self-insuring. That way you're purely incentivised to be responsible, you keep the profits and you control the payouts.

              • payton on 23/10/2018 - 16:11
                +2

                @Scrooge McDuck: Agreed, first investment would have to be a dashcam front and rear. Had two close calls last month, other party at fault both times - idiots not giving way as req by law

              • HighAndDry on 23/10/2018 - 21:43
                +1

                @Scrooge McDuck: Partly yes, partly no.

                The partly yes is: For a lot of people, it's paying for someone else to deal with the headache and work involved with chasing up not-at-fault claims. I'm pretty sure I can do that myself too without an insurance company, but I've done that before and it's not an enjoyable process and I would happily pay a few dollars for someone else - with more clout and experience too - to do that for me.

                The partly no is: In certain situations, even if you're not at fault you can't pursue any claims realistically because the other party is unknown (drive offs), have no assets or money, or the amount involved isn't worth the court process.

                The second partly no is just to cover yourself for when you might be at fault. I like to think I'm a good driver but honestly the hassle and worry for my physical well-being of a potential accident is enough to incentivise myself to drive safely, and I have enough on my plate I can't guarantee that I'll always be a flawless driver 100% of the time.

                • Scrooge McDuck on 23/10/2018 - 22:37

                  @HighAndDry:

                  I've done that before and it's not an enjoyable process and I would happily pay a few dollars for someone else - with more clout and experience too - to do that for me.

                  Wait! Let me get this straight: Are you saying you don't like arguing?

                  the hassle and worry for my physical well-being of a potential accident is enough to incentivise myself to drive safely,

                  This is exactly why insurance doesn't really provide one of their loudest selling points, peace of mind. Responsible drivers are still concerned, as they should be.

              • gyrex on 24/10/2018 - 22:42
                -2

                @Scrooge McDuck: Great logic until you have an accident with a $300K+ car and the insurance company takes your house. By minimal insurance, I suspect you mean third party property which is a minimum in my book. If you drive an expensive car, comprehensive insurance is part and parcel of the expense of owning a car.

                Personally, I'd like to see insurance companies looking after responsible drivers who don't have accidents. Watching dashcam owner's Australia makes you realise that responsible drivers are few and far between.

  • EFC94 on 23/10/2018 - 14:18

    I'd argue previous quotes are invalid and whatever payout you get would be based off what your bingle insurance certificate states.

  • [Deactivated] on 23/10/2018 - 14:20
    +1

    I doubt they can give them only 60-70%. Because even if it only cost them 90%, that would be $6,300 which is less than they want to pay you. Do you think the insurance company is trying to pay you more than the repair cost they'd have to pay?

    So the question is, what would it actually cost you to buy a replacement car like yours of similar age and kms ?

    You can try and argue that their market value is undervalued. Though you have no leg to stand on if they told you what their market estimate was when you got your renewal / policy.

    Alternatively if their value is fair you have to take it pretty much. Betting you don't get to keep the scrap when they write it off so it's going to be hard for you to get a repair.

  • Presence on 23/10/2018 - 14:25

    I am sure insurance company can bargain with repairer and only give 60%-70% of total repair cost.

    What does this mean?

    Written off cars are rarely worth much. Second hand parts cost a lot of labour to sell.

    • ca4cpa on 23/10/2018 - 14:28

      One of my friend works in smash repair and he said insurance company always bargain to settle the claim. eg. if quote if 10000, they pay 7000.

      • HighAndDry on 23/10/2018 - 15:36
        +1

        That's if they want to bargain. They're not obliged to bargain, and the price is still the price.

        If you think the value is bad - get the payout, ask how much to buy the car back from them and repair it yourself.

  • chumlee on 23/10/2018 - 14:26

    Have you read the PDS?

  • bobbified on 23/10/2018 - 14:28

    This is why I would never go with these budget insurers.

    Some of them are happy to take your premium payment every month/year, but when it comes time to paying out, they will try every trick in the book to pay as little as possible.

    Cheapest insurance policy isn't necessarily the best.

    • ca4cpa on 23/10/2018 - 14:31
      +1

      Lesson learned.

      • bobbified on 23/10/2018 - 14:33

        You haven't mentioned whether you're the party at fault or not. This may make a difference to the settlement/payout. If another party was at fault, they maybe able to recover the payout from the other party or their insurer - so they may be willing to pay out more. If you're at fault, then it's out of their pocket and hence, they'll probably attempt a smaller settlement.

    • JimmyF on 23/10/2018 - 14:33

      Cheapest insurance policy isn't necessarily the best.

      No BUDGET insurance policies are not the best.

      They are cheap for a reason, they have more clauses and limits than more costly insurance policies for sure.

      • bobbified on 23/10/2018 - 14:38
        +1

        A lot of people don't seem to know this and most people probably don't even read the PDS.

        They'll get a few quotes across the different companies and just pick the cheapest one. They're all "comprehensive" policies, right? Only at the time of a claim they realise the policies are not built the same.

        • JimmyF on 23/10/2018 - 15:11
          +1

          A lot of people don't seem to know this

          Yeah I agree. They pick these new 'cheap' and cheerful policies based on price and then get shocked that its not as comprehensive as a policy that costs twice as much!

          Bit like those that fly budget airlines the first time and scream blue murder that there is no free food or booze or IFE! Oh darling, you're flying jetstar, not first class on a full service airline!

    • HighAndDry on 23/10/2018 - 15:32
      +1

      I mean, "you get what you pay for" is a fairly universal rule. Whether that's in terms of coverage, customer service, stricter checks/requirements, etc - they're obviously doing something that lets them offer lower premiums.

  • JimmyF on 23/10/2018 - 14:32
    +3

    Car towed to yard. told me it is write off.

    Its not up to the tow company, but they have a good 'feel' of the outcome.

    I have previous insurance quote with agreed value of 17000

    previous insurance quotes mean nothing, its all about what the policy you took out says and that was market value.

    Bingle only do at "Market Value".

    So thats what you purchased, not some 'quote' for fixed value you didn't take out.

    I am sure insurance company can bargain with repairer and only give 60%-70% of total repair cost.

    hahhaha it doesn't work like that. You do know the repairer doesn't get paid if they don't go ahead with the job. They don't have 70% 'fat' in there.

    What is my legal rights to fight and repair the car.

    As per your policy terms and conditions.

    Bingle is a BUDGET policy, you get a CHEAP policy and it has limits. Your car is only worth $7k in market terms. They get to choose if its fixed or written off.

    As the repair costs is more tha 80% of the cars market value, they will pay it out.

  • brendanm on 23/10/2018 - 14:34
    +1

    What is the car? What is the general "market value" when you look for a similar vehicle on carsales? Insurer will always give a low "market value" to start with, you have to prove that you can not be "made whole" with this amount, and actually need X amount to purchase the same car in the same condition.

    I've been through this before, ended up with double the insurers initial off, then purchased the car back from them, then sold it for twice what I payed them. Ended up working out nicely.

    • ca4cpa on 23/10/2018 - 14:36

      2011 Mazda 3 Maxx Sport Automatic

      • brendanm on 23/10/2018 - 14:37
        +1

        From a guess that is worth more than they are offering. Get some evidence via carsales, and contact the insurer, telling them their offer is not "market value".

        • ca4cpa on 23/10/2018 - 14:50

          Received letter and they classified car as NEO (Base model) instead of Maxx Sports.

          Carsales : 25000 km more = $12000 Private
          Carsales : 60000 km less = $14000 Private

          • pantsparty on 23/10/2018 - 15:03

            @ca4cpa: I don't think Bingle is using private seller prices to help calculate their market values. I imagine they would be using a similar rate to what you could sell your car for if you traded it in at a dealership.

            Although it is true that you can sell your car for more privately, this takes more work and is not what Bingle is in the business of doing. It does not seem unreasonable that a car you can sell privately for $12k would sell for $7k if you sold it to a dealer.

            • ca4cpa on 23/10/2018 - 15:12

              @pantsparty: They says your car market value is $X.
              I could not able to buy a similar car for $X. I need to pay $1.6X to buy a car.

          • JimmyF on 23/10/2018 - 15:12

            @ca4cpa:

            Received letter and they classified car as NEO (Base model) instead of Maxx Sports.

            What is listed on your policy? Did you pick a lower base model for a cheaper price?

            • ca4cpa on 23/10/2018 - 15:15

              @JimmyF: Initially, was 2010 - then converted to 2011 after accident (received a refund).
              Model was Maxx Sport and updated policy model is Maxx Sport too.

          • HighAndDry on 23/10/2018 - 15:33

            @ca4cpa: Did you account for how much time and money it'd cost to sell the car, keep it registered, etc? Private Sale prices don't mean very much.

      • tomclancy on 23/10/2018 - 16:01
        +1

        2011 Mazda 3 Maxx Sport Automatic according to Redbook is $6,700 - $8,400 for trade-in price.

        • [Deactivated] on 23/10/2018 - 16:50

          Looks like OP may receive a cheque for a few hundred dollars more. Not the 1.6x correction but it's something.

        • Scrooge McDuck on 23/10/2018 - 16:56

          I don't see how using the trade-in price is fair. I think they've used the lowest extremity of the private price for the cheapest model they could find, the Series 1 Neo Auto. Typical scummy insurer behaviour:

          2011 Mazda 3 Neo BL Series 1 Auto MY10 - Private Price Guide $7,000 - $8,600

          OP, you should assert that the valuation for the correct model is used:

          2011 Mazda 3 Maxx Sport BL Series 2 Auto - Private Price Guide $9,300 - $11,000

          2011 Mazda 3 Maxx Sport BL Series 1 Auto MY10 - Private Price Guide $8,800 - $10,400

          Start with what it will cost you to actually replace the car. You will have to argue with them and assert yourself. Insurers are professional bullies and low-ballers. Given that they've already admitted the repair cost was only $7,000, you should have them where you want them.

          • [Deactivated] on 23/10/2018 - 17:07

            @Scrooge McDuck: Don't forget to deduct cost of transfer, stamp duty… And they don't have to use Redbook.

            "Market value means the amount we assess your car to be worth"

            "Market value includes costs of registration and compulsory third party insurance and any stamp duty and transfer fees."

            Never a fan of market value because of these blurry lines.

        • brendanm on 23/10/2018 - 17:23
          -1

          Trade in has nothing to do with op. He isn't reading in,he has to buy a car. He can't buy one for trade in price. If you fight them they will give you the actual value of buying a similar car, as the whole point of insurance is being made whole. This annoyance is why I have agreed value.

          • HighAndDry on 23/10/2018 - 17:55

            @brendanm:

            the whole point of insurance is being made whole.

            Actually no, that's the point of a lawsuit if OP isn't at fault. Insurance is hedging - you can totally insure for a value that's below replacement value.

            • brendanm on 23/10/2018 - 18:32
              -1

              @HighAndDry: Being "made whole" in this context means that the OP gets market value for his car. Market value is generally defined as the approximate price you could buy that same car for "in the market", eg within a reasonable distance from OP, similar KMs, age, spec level. Not what he would get as a trade in. It goes down with time, KMs etc. Agreed value stays at the value specified regardless of age or KMs, if that's what you want.

              • HighAndDry on 23/10/2018 - 18:43

                @brendanm:

                Market value is generally defined as the approximate price you could buy that same car for "in the market"

                No, it's not. You're confusing torts (where the victim is "made whole" - i.e. gets however much they need to buy a replacement good), with insurance (where market value is however much the insured object will sell for in the market).

                Easy way to check: In the first one, you would add all transactional costs because OP would incur them in buying. In the latter, you deduct those same amounts because OP would lose them on selling.

                • brendanm on 23/10/2018 - 22:55

                  @HighAndDry: I'm not talking about a legal definition, I simply mean that the insurance company must pay "market value", not some other amount.

  • chumlee on 23/10/2018 - 15:17

    Read the PDS for the dispute resolution process

  • Randxyz123 on 23/10/2018 - 16:29

    I have previous insurance quote with agreed value of 17000, while Bingle only do at "Market Value".
    I have told to take a cheque for 6800 (less Rego and other things)

    How old is the $17,00 quote ? From when you bought the car or?

    As others have said it’s irrelevant. You insured with a budget insurer and they are going on market price.

    • ca4cpa on 23/10/2018 - 17:13

      That was a renewal of my policy (Jul 2018) and price was up by $500; so I shop around - and found Bingle.

      I was with my previous insurance since 2011 and premium was around $375 at one stage…then started tor rise and last year was 700 and this year was 1200+.

      Now I understand why it is cheaper. LOL

      • Randxyz123 on 23/10/2018 - 19:54

        Now I understand why it is cheaper. LOL

        Well not to pin the blame but you didn't read the PDS. You thought "$500 cheaper sounds great!"

        Congratulations for having car insurance though. Many people on here see it as a luxury and claim to not be able to afford it and then get hit with a $7K repair bill.

  • plmko on 23/10/2018 - 19:03

    This is another 'more to the story' typical OzB post that OP is letting on.

    100% this does not reflect the insurer experience.

    $7k is a great outcome for an at fault claim.

  • John Kimble on 23/10/2018 - 19:42

    ==== Updated
    Insurance company has sent out claim letter stating wrong car. (Neo) instead of (Maxx Sports)

    Did you insure a Neo or a Maxx?

  • Cat nut on 23/10/2018 - 21:03
    +3

    It’s not the same situation but I have managed to get a bit more than I was first offered for market value. It involved getting a range of ads for similar cars (closest matches available) and providing them to the insurance company. And being a bit persistent. It ended up being about $800 more which was worth the hassle to me.

    • John Kimble on 23/10/2018 - 21:12
      +2

      I did the same

    • Mythreesons on 24/10/2018 - 08:19
      +1

      My mum did the same thing when her car was written off in a hail storm. She than bought the car back from the insurance company for $895 (she got $7000 payout for the car). She now drives around in her hail damaged car, but only has insurance to cover her if she damages anyone's car. (Her car isn't covered).

  • kiitos on 24/10/2018 - 09:19

    I have market value in my car, never really looked at agreed value. What is a rough difference between the two premiums? I presume it's better to go agreed value for new or expensive cars, and maybe downgrade to market value as it ages?

    • John Kimble on 24/10/2018 - 11:45
      +1

      Depends. Each situation is different and each person has their own risk appetite.

    • miwahni on 24/10/2018 - 21:58

      It does make a difference in premium, at least with the companies I tried; I was looking into it when I bought my current car and ran comparisons, and with each insurer I tried it was more expensive to have agreed value cover. The amount of the difference would really depend on the value of your car, I would imagine. A few insurers have a policy that will replace a new car within the first two - three years if it's written off or stolen and not recovered; if you have that cover in your policy then market value is all you'd need for the first couple of years.

Login or Join to leave a comment
Login Join