Hi all,
The night before Christmas Eve, I totaled my daily driver Focus SVT on my way home from work. Which sucked. I'm going back and forth with the insurance company now, and I'm hoping one of you insurance gurus can help me out.
The valuation they're giving me (which I understand is done by a separate company, not my insurance) is using several non-SVT cars as comps, and the options listed for my car don't seem to be correct. For instance, the report says no ABS, when all SVT foci had it, it lists a 5 speed manual transmission, the engine just says 2.0 so I don't know if that's correct or not.
How can I rectify this? They've already reviewed it once, and my assessor said "The representative who assisted me advised that the SVT is not listed as a separate package but is included in the valuation by the options included in the package". Does that seem right? Everything I've found online lists the SVT as a separate package.
This was a super clean car with piles of maintenance records that I bought 3 months ago, so I'm almost definitely losing money here, it's just a question of how much.
Javelin
MegaDork
1/11/16 11:27 a.m.
Keep fighting, the SVT is actually classified as a completely different vehicle when you insure it (you pay more every month) so they have to treat it the same when they pay out. I suggest getting some pricing from Hagerty, NADA Collector Cars, etc and using that as a baseline.
I'm currently fighting the same fight only my "valuation company" decided my car had manual windows, locks, steering, and brakes, among other more ridiculous claims.
Sounds like you need to keep fighting it. I know that my bank originally said no when I wanted to finance my 94 Miata M-Edition. However I pulled some examples and once they factored in the factory hard top I was able to get financed. I went through this same scenario when my aunt got her Prius Touring totaled out. I told them to remind the appraiser that it was a touring trim, I pulled examples of Manheim and sent over information from KBB/Edmunds/Nada with the difference in price from a base model to Touring and got them an extra couple thousand because of some effort.
Without actually seeing the valuation, it's impossible to tell exactly what the issue is. Unless I'm wrong, the VIN should decode it as an SVT, so I'm a bit confused. Only thing I can think of is that they can't find any other SVTs in the area to compare it to, but I doubt it.
Wish I had more specific advice, but it's hard to say without seeing. Ask to speak to a total loss supervisor, review the report with them. Find comparables yourself.
In reply to Klayfish:
I'm happy to send you the valuation if you're willing to take a look. I'm not having much luck finding comparables either, so I understand that they may not find the exact car within the area, but it seems out of line to assign value based on the normal hatchback.
And, if they have compensated for the differences correctly and the value is in fact correct, that's fine. I'm not trying to squeeze the insurance company for more than they owe me for the car.
You haven't mentioned what year of SVT but I suspect older than 2009.
I just went to www.autotrader.com and if you use the advanced search features you can choose Ford - Focus - SVT in your search.
Choosing the option of "any distance" returns 45 SVTs older than 2009 in the US.
Now, go pick three that have similar miles and condition as yours. Present those to Ins. Co.
As others have said, keep fighting. Remember their evaluation must be based upon the cost to replace the vehicle with a comparable one.
I went through this same thing 6 years ago when my 2001 Saab 9-3 2 door was totaled. They compared my car with 4 door cars, because they could not find any 2 door models. I pushed back on the basis of a large value difference between a 2 door and a 4 door. At the time there was only 1 other non-viggen 2 door for sale in the country.
The result was an additional $3000 on the estimate.
So... keep fighting.
By law the insurance company has to deal with you in good faith. In fact if they don't and you sue them they can have extra damages. On my Miata accident from Sept we went back and forth until late December. They did similar things but when I started dropping hints about them lying to me and not dealing with me in good faith they called back 15 min later with a magically higher valuation. There'll want it over quick because the longer it goes the higher the likely hood of you getting an attorney. Use that to your advantage.
JohnRW1621 wrote:
You haven't mentioned what year of SVT but I suspect older than 2009.
I just went to www.autotrader.com and if you use the advanced search features you can choose Ford - Focus - SVT in your search.
Choosing the option of "any distance" returns 45 SVTs older than 2009 in the US.
Now, go pick three that have similar miles and condition as yours. Present those to Ins. Co.
You can definitely do this. If there are no comparables in the local area, then they may have to use "base" model cars as the closest thing locally available. However, the valuation of the SVT should compensate for the difference between them. That said, finding like for like is always a better argument.
Feel free to PM me and I'll see what I can do.
Stampie wrote:
By law the insurance company has to deal with you in good faith. In fact if they don't and you sue them they can have extra damages. On my Miata accident from Sept we went back and forth until late December. They did similar things but when I started dropping hints about them lying to me and not dealing with me in good faith they called back 15 min later with a magically higher valuation. There'll want it over quick because the longer it goes the higher the likely hood of you getting an attorney. Use that to your advantage.
Seriously? Do you even know what "good faith" and "bad faith" really is and how it works in auto insurance? From your post, you clearly don't. I love when people just throw out buzzwords that don't have any relevance...
Thanks for all the replies. Klayfish, I sent you a PM, I really appreciate you reaching out. The car is an '03 Focus SVT with about 130k on it. I really don't think the insurance company is trying to pull anything on me, and my adjuster has been really nice and easy to deal with. I just want to make sure that the valuation report, which they outsource, is in fact correct.
Looks like I'm listing a bunch of Focus SVT parts for sale and driving a Miata this winter!
Keep fighting, I had the same issue with one of my old trucks. Find comparables yourself and print out the adds. I had a $600 offer the first go around, ended up at $2600. My adjust was happy enough to go back and forth until we got a fair value, it sounds like yours is willing to work on it also.
Well Klayfish how about you enlighten us? Throwing out that someone doesn't know what it means then not backing it up is useless information as well.
So what is the difference of "good faith" in the auto insurance compared to medical insurance or say a contract dispute? Is there some magical dimension that changes it's meaning? I'd really like to know how it works from you're point of view.
In reply to brad131a4:
Just drop it, this E36 M3 always comes up in insurance threads.....those of us who actually participate frequently on here already know Klayfish's answers before he gives them anymore.....
In reply to Klayfish:
Actually my attorney said that what I did was perfect and it worked for me so pfffff.
In reply to brad131a4:
Please don't overlook the fact that Klayfish has offered to provide cmcgregor continued, private, professional assistance on his matter.
Just because you do not see Klayfish's continued conversation does not mean that he is not helping.
WOW Really Paul? wrote:
In reply to brad131a4:
Just drop it, this E36 M3 always comes up in insurance threads.....those of us who actually participate frequently on here already know Klayfish's answers before he gives them anymore.....
Wait...how am I supposed to interpret that? Should I be insulted? 
Ok that's nice to know he is giving him information privately. I commend him on that.
I being a newby don't know Klayfish or what he does so my first impression was not very positive. Weather or not I'm a newby I won't accept a negative comment unless they can explain themselves as to where there knowledge of the subject comes from. Just the way I'm built and how I try to do it in my work and life.
I'll just say in my case I'd have a conversation where they'd agree to remove all automatics from the valuation then next conversation say that they couldn't do that. Or tell me that they usually have 20 vehicles for the valuation but only could find two so sure I could submit some. Three conversations later they say that the ones I submitted were added but the first two they had were the only ones that affected the valuation. When I questioned why a lower optioned Miata was valued only $1 lower they said that they didn't have my optional equipment in the computer even though it was listed on the valuation. I had so many flip flops that I finally told them that I no longer wanted to talk on the phone and that everything had to be done in writing.
As for Klayfish .. Whatever. I now remember comments from other insurance threads. Take anyone's advice with a grain of salt.
Klayfish wrote:
WOW Really Paul? wrote:
In reply to brad131a4:
Just drop it, this E36 M3 always comes up in insurance threads.....those of us who actually participate frequently on here already know Klayfish's answers before he gives them anymore.....
Wait...how am I supposed to interpret that? Should I be insulted?
Sorry, was too busy making Aussies feel very uncomfortable......they don't know what The Blues Brothers are evidently.
I'd take it as a compliment, and a service retaining your sanity.
Klayfish gave me some great advice, and I ended up getting significantly more money for the car thanks to his help.
Here's the car listed at IAA, if anyone's interested. I have a very detailed service history if anyone wants the drivetrain, including oil analysis from the last 4 changes.
https://www.iaai.com/Vehicles/VehicleDetails.aspx?itemID=21086865&RowNumber=0&loadRecent=True
