Yea, sounds like we agree more than disagree. Sorry if I seemed argumentative before - I just want to make sure I don't get taken to the cleaners on this. Mercury has historically been very good to us in the past, but it only takes on idiot adjuster to turn it into an unpleasant experience and ruin everything as far as their reputation.

Hey now... out of respect for Jeff's pain I wasn't going to start picking the car apart yet...

But will the swaybars off a 951 fit a 1984 944? ;)

I think the Fuchs are fine although the front right one had the tire blow because of proximity to the fire. I suspect the wheel itself is okay but haven't been able to get down to look at it up close. The other three are fine. If they're okay and I can end up buying the car back, I may or may not keep them for my other car.

At this point I'm seriously considering getting out of 944s altogether and into something else, but I'm weighing that.

Any update here, Jeff? Mercury has my cars and home. Curious to see how they treat you.

To their credit Mercury has been relatively professional about this, although I'm less-than-thrilled with the overall outcome thus far. They are predictably looking to screw me out of "fair market value" for the car (which would be in the $8.5k-$10k range, and I have the documentation to back that).

Since the final resolution to this is still pending, I can't really comment on specifics, but in general I will say to EVERYONE here - CHECK YOUR POLICIES. The insurance companies are now "slipping" older vehicles into a "stated value" category (whether you know it or not) to avoid "fair market value" assessments to determine any payout amount.

Look for something on your policy called an "exclusion" (I think it's a "U-137 exclusion"). This is causing me a bit of consternation at the moment (since the value stated is considerably less than the vehicle's actual value), but there are some "work-arounds" that I'm discussing with Mercury that might allow me to walk away from this reasonably satisfied.

In general, make sure you check your policy to see if there's a "dollar value" assigned to your vehicle on it. Mine had one and let's just say it's a good 50 cents on the dollar less than the fair market value of the car. Needless to say, I'm less than thrilled about this, but there is also a little "wiggle room" to make sure I don't get (what in my mind would be getting) screwed up the ass with a rusty steak knife. The outcome of this "creative solution" is still pending, but they're going to get back to me on it - more later.

There will definitely be a detailed story on this whole fiasco when the dust clears from this - I promise you all that. . . Just right now isn't the time, since I can't control who reads this.

Wise to not discuss something still in negotiation. Remember that you can refuse a settlement and take it to small claims. The max now is $7500. Sounds like that's tailor made for you. At least a summons would let them know where you stand. They might come up a bit just to make you go away.

BTW, if they cancel you, good riddance. Lots of ins cos out there. None are much better than the next these days. I've even heard of some people going into the assigned risk pool voluntarily and saving money.

One more thing: a 50K bond only costs a few hundred dollars a year. They only have to pay out if you default, they are not an insurance company. Of course, you couldn't have any serious assets if you went this route. I wouldn't buy insurance if I wasn't AAA+++ preferred. I'd find another way.

Hmm, so you signed a stated value policy that had exclusions and a dollar value assigned to your car that you now believe is less than the fair market value of the car?

But you signed a contract agreeing to that low value, and paid lower premiums based on that value. That was the deal you agreed to.

And now that you have a claim, you are trying to "redo" the deal and are claiming to get "screwed" because they want to pay you the stated value you agreed to in your contract?!?! I.e., the top value YOU agreed to when you signed the contract?

I think I like this (see below) Jeff better:

and

As we agreed in that other thread, accountability is such a quaint notion.

Actually I didn't sign anything - that's the rub. But I really can't discuss that right now. They simply sent me a policy with a number on it.

They sent you a policy, you took it, you paid the premiums on it, it had a number on it (or they later sent you additional riders or exclusions, which you accepted, you could have canceled your policy and gotten another one from another company if you didn't like them), but now that it's time to collect, you don't like the number.

Anyways, good luck trying to "wriggle out" of the terms of your agreement.

"Wriggle out"? Who said anything about "wriggling out" of anything? Are you f*cking blind and unable to read the above posts or just a presumptuous ********* by nature?

Much as you love the mental masturbation exercise of trying to paint someone in a disparaging light, you don't have a leg to stand on here. All I'm asking is that (1) the insurance company PROVE (by pointing me to the appropriate place in the insurance code) that the stated value was agreed upon by me (in which case I'll accept it) and (2) to independently verify the claims of their adjuster. This is simple prudence. The adjuster does not represent me. It's like having a salesperson (with an obvious ulterior motive) claim "this is the best widget in the world!" Would you believe that, coming from them? I'd hope not. Same here. I just want independent verification - that's all. Any talk of lawyers, lawsuits, courts and what-not is just rubbish. They're not doing anything improper that would lead me to go that route - at least I'm not aware of it. . . It seems like they're operating by the book, but I just want some independent verification of it before I roll over and take their offer.

The negotiation I'm having with them is for some of the higher-value items in the car, such as my RSA seats, the stereo, the MAP kit and the Fuchs. If I'm able to recover those, then I'll consider their payment, plus the value of those pieces pretty close to fair, based on the resale market value of the parts (or I suppose I could keep them and use on my other car, haven't decided yet). Alternatively I can accept their amount with a provision to buy back the remains afterwards. I'm just waiting to hear.

I don't really fault Mercury on this at all. I'm merely stating to everyone here (if you'd bothered to read my post) that they should READ THEIR POLICIES. Apparently here's how it works now in CA: You get "fair market value" for "newer" vehicles. I'm still waiting for them to clarify what exactly is meant by "newer" (whether it's a year, a certain number of miles, or whether it's determined by individual make/model). For "older" vehicles, they apparently just assign a value to it and that's that. Supposedly you can negotiate this, but I wasn't aware of that and didn't do so, so that one's on me - that's why I'm telling everyone else to check their policies so if their "number" isn't representative of their vehicle's value, they can check into getting it updated/changed before they end up getting burned (no pun) by it.

So that's the deal - my options as I see it are either (1) just take the check, (2) take the check, but recover some of the stuff off the car first (to the extent permitted), or (3) take the check and buy back the remains, part it or keep some stuff and scrap/part the rest.

Obviously the question I'm trying to get answered here is "what am I REQUIRED" to provide the insurance company with in exchange for their check? Heck, if I could hand them the VIN plate and a key, I'd do that, part everything else and maximize my return, but I'm not certain I can do that. At the very least I'm looking for the items listed above, which would put me close to the "fair market value" of the car if I add their check amount to the value of those bits.

Christ man, who pissed in your Cheerios this morning?

Nice surliness!

I try. :)

Nice manners babe!

Nice rescue. After all, this is a family show.

Well, except for the random pic thread. :p

Glad I can't see the's posts (ignore list). Sounds like he's on another roll.

Hang in there, Jeff. You've got positive support here from the rest of us.

Boo!

FWIW, I had a similar run-in with the insurance bozos when I totalled my 911 (freshly rebuilt transmission, complete suspension rebuild, the works -- definitely not an average condition car). I showed market value based on finding a collection of similar cars for sale at various dealers within 50 miles of the zip code. I also showed market value based on the condition of the car, detailed by a maintenance log and photographs. The insurance company quoted book value for an "average condition" car and refused to budget.

So I wrote to the insurance commissioner for the State of Washington, who asked the insurance company what was going on and requested that he intervene. They said I was being ornery, and that I wasn't happy taking book value for my car which was not in "average" condition, and he wrote back and said, "Here's what the insurance company says about your claim," as if I hadn't already contacted the insurance company.

Lesson learned: if your car is in better-than-average condition, or you'd like better-than-average return in the event of a total loss, get it in writing with your insurance company. An appraisal seems like the right way to get that done, but I'm not banking on it. If it isn't in writing, it didn't happen.

I just got my renewal from Mercury today. For the first time they provided a separate sheet with a stated amount for my 1986 Buick Grand National at $10,268. Before they verbally assured me that NADA values would be used. The NADA value on this car in average condition is $13,000 and it is about average or a little better.

The $10,268 is the stated amount they "won't exceed". Evidently lowballing me is okay, just not higher. They never discussed this with me, so I guess I'm on the phone Monday just to find out why my car isn't average and how much extra it will cost me to get the additional coverage if I decide I want it.

Total bs...if anyone tries to consistently "wriggle out" of their agreements, it's the insurance "racket". You cast a pretty wide net with your assumptions about people and insurance laws from state to state. I'll be the first to admit that I haven't read every single line of my policy (who has :)?), but when I insured my 911, I explicitly asked my agent about "fair market" replacement coverage, and he explained that "in NC", replacement value was a "given". Do I trust my ins. agent, trust my interpretation of the policy's "fine print", or potentially get screwed when it really matters? I've got a question for ya...do you think many of the Katrina victims (some totally insured to the max), are getting a "fair shake" in their settlements?

Yeah, they are a lot like mortgage applications and loan agreements that way.

Doesn't matter if I read them or not, I'm not legally trained to interpret the "fine print" any better than most, and I'm no dummy. Of course, the "fine print" is very succinct, straight forward, and designed to help the "layman" understand his policy, but that's another subject. About those Katrina victims... :(?

The strange part of this is that a "stated value policy" is normally something that's done in conjunction with "collector car" insurance, which in turn limits you (severely) on the usage. I believe it's something like 3,000 miles a year. I looked into this on the 951 and decided the mileage restriction was ridiculous. Same with my other 944 which has a similar "normal" policy on it, and I'm now looking to get appraised so I don't get screwed this way again - I checked the policy and guess what? Yep, another "made up" number assigned to the car. No notification, no nothing. I'd LIKE to get it appraised and assign a value to it (and am willing to pay whatever the premium is for the coverage in that amount), but it's apparently not an option without "collector" coverage.

So effectively, what are the options to get REAL, "FAIR MARKET VALUE" coverage on one's "older" vehicle so that they can actually drive it, instead of keeping it in stasis in a bubble?

I have to do some checking on this, but it appears it's getting difficult to find. Your choices are either (1) get "assigned" a value by some insurance company (who knows how they come up with this number - it's WILDLY different from both KBB and NADA values for the 951). If something happens, you're likely to get that number, which will almost certainly be below "fair market value", or (2) get a "collector" policy and never drive it.

This reinforces my belief that the insurance companies, banks, government and automakers are in cahoots with the goal of forcing everyone to buy a new car every 3-5 years. I think if the insurance companies could say "we won't insure anything older than 10 years at all", they'd do it in a heartbeat. That's where things seem to be heading. . .

This whole incident is only galvanizing my cynicism about the whole insurance racket. Again, I don't fault Mercury specifically, but that's like saying I don't fault a particular Nazi SS officer for the entire Holocaust. They're all part of the problem, IMO.

There are insurance companies that will give you an agreed value policy (so you never have any valuation issues if the car is totaled), and have no mileage restrictions, or very reasonable mileage limits.

You can find one that suits your needs next time around (when you wise up and finally get that 911!), investigate and shop around.

I specifically asked my ins. agent about an "agreed upon value" policy, and that's when I got the spiel about it not being necessary in NC...blah, blah, blah. Now, I can surely go home and read the "fine print" of my policy, but I'm still not going to be sure that I'm adequately covered regardless of what the policy states. What to do, what to do...any other NC pelicans have advice? I have no problem paying whatever premium is fair, just insure my freakin' car so it can be replaced :)

Get a different insurance agent or just can him and do your own research and get your own agreed value policy directly from an insurance company.

But you should first read and understand the policy that you have.

Stated value means nothing. It's like declared value and replacement value. It's a value THEY put on your car through whatever means they want to use. If you want your cars worth in your terms, it has be agreed value. You are compensated the amount that was agreed upon and you pay premiums based on that amount.

Collector car insurers deal with agreed value. Along with agreed value you can get hit with all the limitations of usage.

Stated value = insurance stated the value

Declared value = insurance declared the value

Agreed value = mutually agreed to a value

Mercury and most other common carriers will never provide an agreed value policy.

Thanks for the clarification - yes, that's what I'm looking for - an "agreed upon value" of $X for my car, but with terms of use that make it usable, not just a garage adornment. Anyone know of a place that will do this?

Try starting with Haggerty.

Good deal - I'll check into it.

Of course this whole issue might become moot if I decide to abandon the Callaway conversion project or if I decide the whole Kalifornia Smog-Nazi crap ain't worth it (making it an "off-road-use only" vehicle) but we'll see. At least I've got somewhere to look.

I tried the second part, and couldn't :( ....My policy is soon to expire and I like the first bit of advice...

ps: My current policy states: "Actual cash value less $500" (my deductable). Anyone care to interpret what that means :)?

I use an insurance "rep" rather than an agent. He does all my business ins as well. What I mean by rep is that he shops everything available and has no allegiances.

Not sure how normal this is, but I couldn't be happier with my 15 years with him. I'm not sure how common this non-denominational:) "agent" thing is but I like it.