View Full Version : Lid/gear compensation question???
ASM-Forever
20-06-07, 05:06 PM
Long story short i have recieved a cheque for my gear that got wrecked in the crash, but they have only paid out 75% of the agreed costs of the items as it "allowed for wear and tear and depreciation".
Most of the gear was new anyway, but surely the whole point is to enable me to get like for like replacements, which won't be possible unless i chip in myself. Just seems a bit of a **** take to me...am i wrong? Or is this normal?
The lid was the only item that was not really new, circa 1 year old, but surely as it was in good condition prior to the accident they should make good my losses and allow me to get one of similar value/spec. This also leads me on to another question...i paid £300 in a sale for it, but to replace it would cost more like £400...how much should i get...what i paid or what it will cost to replace?
Lots of Q's but hopefully some of you with the experience/knowledge can shed some light on the subject:smt100
Cheers Mark
Long story short i have recieved a cheque for my gear that got wrecked in the crash, but they have only paid out 75% of the agreed costs of the items as it "allowed for wear and tear and depreciation".
Most of the gear was new anyway, but surely the whole point is to enable me to get like for like replacements, which won't be possible unless i chip in myself. Just seems a bit of a **** take to me...am i wrong? Or is this normal?
The lid was the only item that was not really new, circa 1 year old, but surely as it was in good condition prior to the accident they should make good my losses and allow me to get one of similar value/spec. This also leads me on to another question...i paid £300 in a sale for it, but to replace it would cost more like £400...how much should i get...what i paid or what it will cost to replace?
Lots of Q's but hopefully some of you with the experience/knowledge can shed some light on the subject:smt100
Cheers Mark
Good question. I'd be interested to hear any answers as I'm just about to make a v similar claim too.
ASM-Forever
20-06-07, 05:25 PM
In an unusual about turn from my usual flippant attitude to such things i want the whole 100% as that 25% reduction equates to £300-400.
The lid was the only item that was not really new, circa 1 year old, but surely as it was in good condition prior to the accident they should make good my losses and allow me to get one of similar value/spec. This also leads me on to another question...i paid £300 in a sale for it, but to replace it would cost more like £400...how much should i get...what i paid or what it will cost to replace?
You bought a an almost $800 helmet?! Holy crap. I'd want to get full compensation too!
I don't get anything for ruined gear in a crash (the insurance company isn't liable for it). I'd be happy with 75%.... but not if I had a helmet with as much as your's. I'd just pray my ass off if I were you and hope for the best.[-o<
I hope it all works out!
You bought a an almost $800 helmet?! Holy crap. I'd want to get full compensation too!
I don't get anything for ruined gear in a crash (the insurance company isn't liable for it). I'd be happy with 75%.... but not if I had a helmet with as much as your's. I'd just pray my ass off if I were you and hope for the best.[-o<
I hope it all works out!
I don't think ASM is trying to claim from his insurance company, I think he's claiming from the person who knocked him off his bike
ASM-Forever
20-06-07, 05:37 PM
I don't think ASM is trying to claim from his insurance company, I think he's claiming from the person who knocked him off his bike
Indeed.
ASM-Forever
20-06-07, 05:40 PM
Completely off topic and at odds with my protracted legal wranglings...i have just checked my premium bonds online as i found some paperwork whilst searching my room and since 1994 have won 3 times!
Huzzah etc :)
Completely off topic and at odds with my protracted legal wranglings...i have just checked my premium bonds online as i found some paperwork whilst searching my room and since 1994 have won 3 times!
Huzzah etc :)
good work, congrats
Ceri JC
20-06-07, 05:52 PM
The principle of the law is to put you back in the position you were in, before the accident happened. It's open to interpretation, but I'd argue that means the same kit (or as near as damn it) as you had before. If you bought it in a sale, but it's now not in the sale, you need what it costs now to replace it. I got my textiles for £300 (sale and a deal on top of that and prior to a price rise) the exact same suit costs £500 now. If I was not in an accident I would still have the use of it. If I was in an accident, why the hell should I have to have a (vastly inferior) £300 suit?
To those who would disagree. What if you won your £400 lid in a competion. Should you get £0 for it when some numpty decides to pull out without looking?
phil24_7
21-06-07, 03:58 AM
Do you have any reciepts for your newer clobber? This would show them that wear and tear/depreciation would be negligable.
In my opinion you should get what it would costs to replace on a like-for-like basis.
I'm sure someone will come along to give you the legal low-down.
You could put it to them this way: As you have only paid me for 75% of the value of my equipment I have only been able to replace 75% of it. Could you please advise me on which you think is the best way for me to spend your money:
Ride with full leathers & gloves, but no crash helmet or boots.
Ride with both helmet and boots, but see if I can find some leathers - perhaps with an arm and a leg cut off.
Ride with 100% of my body protected, but with substandard equipment that will leave me less protected against the next driver who doesn't look where they are going.
I had the same thing a few years ago and it is common for them to take "deprecation" into account. The only way I found of combatting this is to trawl the internet looking for your lid, jacket etc etc at the most expensive price you can find. Send these examples to the insurance company and hopefully they will use this as the starting point when concidering depreciation.
Once you have the cash you then go real shopping to find it as cheap as possible.
Please note I do not condone this action as it could be interpreted as fraud!
I think Swiss has the answer, but I would add a helmet has a finite life of 5 years (some maybe just 2/3 years) you accept your lid is not new so it is only reasonable to expect you to chip in as you will benefit from the extra life.
Would you prefer that they sourced secondhand gear for you?
SVeeedy Gonzales
21-06-07, 11:53 AM
Yes, they always do that.
However they will also accept a note from a dealer showing similar gear if you no longer have receipts.
So if you were to go to a dealer and they weren't the cheapest one around and you found yourself with prices 25-50% higher than the value of what had been damaged you'd just have to hand that in to them instead.
Remember that for the next time.
Biker Biggles
21-06-07, 06:31 PM
When BB junior made a similar claim they paid full replacement with new equivalent gear.I think we used J&S prices as a guide,so not taking the ****,and they coughed up.You wouldn't buy a second hand lid,so why should you be out of pocket?
andyaikido
21-06-07, 08:14 PM
I had the same thing a few years ago and it is common for them to take "deprecation" into account. The only way I found of combatting this is to trawl the internet looking for your lid, jacket etc etc at the most expensive price you can find. Send these examples to the insurance company and hopefully they will use this as the starting point when concidering depreciation.
Once you have the cash you then go real shopping to find it as cheap as possible.
Please note I do not condone this action as it could be interpreted as fraud!
That's the way to do it! In my eyes (and I suspect more than a few others too), what the insurance companies do could also be interpreted as fraud.
ASM, is this an offer the 3rd party's insurer is making? If so, don't accept it. I don't think it unreasonable that any bitem under 12 months old should be paid out at full value.
Sid Squid
21-06-07, 08:30 PM
The principle of the law is to put you back in the position you were in, before the accident happened.
Not exactly. The law allows that you are able to recover your losses from the person that caused the loss. If they are insured against that loss then the recovery is from the insurer as per the contract that the other party, (if they are at fault), has with their insurer. If they are only insured RTA, (Road Traffic Act - the minimum that the law actually requires), for instance, then the only thing that the insurance is liable for is injuries to third parties, and if material losses have ocurred then recompense would have to be sought from the at fault party directly.
As an example: What ASM lost is a second hand lid, thus what is being offered is the value of such an item - at the time of loss, (whether you agree with their valuation is a further issue). The insurance company have no contract with ASM, and as their insured is at fault are paying ASM's losses, they have no liabilty for replacement of anything.
vBulletin® , Copyright ©2000-2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.