Update on my Avalon

[ShiningArcanine]

It has been 34 days since my car accident. Geico originally wanted to scrap my car, but they decided to pay for its repairs and $30 a day for a rental car, which only my mother was allowed to drive by the rental car company. It took 22 days for the repair shop to get the parts and repair it. They did a good enough job that my mother cannot tell the difference, but I can tell as the reflection of light is slightly different on right side of the car than its mirror image on the left, the corner end of the hood is not properly aligned with the car body and a very small piece of paint is missing from the area where the hood meets the surface of the car.

It was a $3200 repair and Geico paid for it, minus a $500 deductible. The rental car costs were $660, so in total Geico paid $3360. If they had been willing to pay for it in total without paying for the rental car instead of the arrangement we had, they would have paid $3200 and my families' expenses would have been lower, as I would have went to school in my mother's Avalon, which gets better fuel economy (I estimate the cost difference to be $140) and we would have been spared the extra $5 +/- $1 per day that were required for the rental car. Unfortunately, car insurance companies adopt business policies that have imagined frugality.

Last Thursday, 30 days after the car accident and 8 days after the repair, the check engine light went on. On Friday I received a ride from my father and my mother took the car to dealership. It took them two hours to find the problem, which appears to be a fuel injector hose that was leaking gasoline due a crack. They charged $94.50 per hour and $19.95 for the a 50-cent hose. My mother had a $25 coupon that they accepted, which made the repair cost about $180 if I recall what she said correctly. I think they waived the cost of the hose, as my mother said that they "wanted to charge $20" for it and the math ((2 * 94.50 - 25) * 1.08625) does not work unless you remove the $19.95 charge for the part. In total, I believe they charged $178.15, but I have not seen the recipt.

Taking all of this into account, the car accident cost my family approximately $930. That figure is of course missing the additional expenses resulting from the higher insurance rate, but I imagine that they will be substantial, as Geico will want to get back the money that it paid. I expect that the new rate will be lower than it would have been if my car had been scrapped as Geico wanted it to be because Geico will not be able to simultaneously raise the insurance rate because of the accident and a new car purchase.

 

[ekpolk]

How old is this Avalon, and what is it's current value? While it varies by state, most states have some percentage of value above which the car is deemed "automatically" totaled (and if it's then repaired, it must be issued a salvage title.

When my 02 Camry was T-Boned, the estimated repair job was just below the "total" threshold. I argued in vain with my insurance company to just call it a loss and move on, but they insisted upon fixing it. I even specifically warned them that the probability of further supplements was high, but they stuck to their guns.

Weeks later, the job was done, and it actually looked pretty good (I could discern no irregularity in the massive repainting). I went to the shop to do my "turnover" inspection, and low and behold, when I turned the key, the airbag warning light came on and stayed lit. Turns out that on top of everything else, during the course of the deployment (probably), the airbag computer had managed to fry itself, and boom -- add another $1,900 to the repair bill. And the car was then an instant, freshly painted, TOTALED car!

To their credit, the insurer did not fight me any further, and just wrote the check and was done with it. You do have to watch them closely, however, as some carriers will try to put one over on you if they think you don't know the rules.

 

[01rangerxl]

Yeah, insurance companies are a pain to deal with.

We had a bad experience with Nationwide a couple years ago. My mom was driving our pristine 1998 Contour when an uninsured, unlicensed kid in a Cherokee rear ended her at about 40-45 MPH. Though the unibody was a mess, and Contours are not worth much, Nationwide, the insurance company of the Jeep's owner (not the tool driving it), decided to fix the car. It went to one of their "preffered" shops or some such thing which completely botched the job. The gaps between the trunk and quarter panel were completely off. Some fenderwell parts were also missing, brake lights would not work, the suspension clunked, and we found a severed wiring harness beneath the trunk mat. My parents called Nationwide, who refused to return their phone calls! They would not answer the phone! Finally, my parents sent a letter threatening to report them to the state insurance commissioner, and they got real friendly after that. The Contour was finally totalled and sent off to an auction where some unlucky person picked it up. It was a shame, because we really liked that car, but they are NEVER the same after a wreck. Especially unibody cars. That Contour had perfect paint, a very clean interior, no mechanical issues etc... before the wreck, but afterwards it was nothing but trouble and downright unsafe to drive.

 

[ShiningArcanine]

Originally Posted By: ekpolk
How old is this Avalon, and what is it's current value? While it varies by state, most states have some percentage of value above which the car is deemed "automatically" totaled (and if it's then repaired, it must be issued a salvage title.

When my 02 Camry was T-Boned, the estimated repair job was just below the "total" threshold. I argued in vain with my insurance company to just call it a loss and move on, but they insisted upon fixing it. I even specifically warned them that the probability of further supplements was high, but they stuck to their guns.

Weeks later, the job was done, and it actually looked pretty good (I could discern no irregularity in the massive repainting). I went to the shop to do my "turnover" inspection, and low and behold, when I turned the key, the airbag warning light came on and stayed lit. Turns out that on top of everything else, during the course of the deployment (probably), the airbag computer had managed to fry itself, and boom -- add another $1,900 to the repair bill. And the car was then an instant, freshly painted, TOTALED car!

To their credit, the insurer did not fight me any further, and just wrote the check and was done with it. You do have to watch them closely, however, as some carriers will try to put one over on you if they think you don't know the rules.


It is a 1995 Toyota Avalon XLS. The current value as far as my parents and I are concerned is approximately $35,000, which is how much it cost to purchase my mother's 2008 Toyota Avalon Limited (which made the 1995 Avalon exclusively mine). Geico (and perhaps the state) seems to have a different idea of what the car is worth. Geico's idea of what it was worth coincided with roughly what they paid for the repairs, excluding the rental car expenses. Anything beyond that my parents were responsible for paying. Ironically, prior to the cracked hose being discovered, the portion of the cost of the repairs my parents were responsible for paying was roughly equal to the $500 deductible that the collision insurance has.

I probably should write to someone in the state government giving him a piece of mind regarding what cars in collisions are deemed to be worth, but that is for another day.

Originally Posted By: 01rangerxl
Yeah, insurance companies are a pain to deal with.

We had a bad experience with Nationwide a couple years ago. My mom was driving our pristine 1998 Contour when an uninsured, unlicensed kid in a Cherokee rear ended her at about 40-45 MPH. Though the unibody was a mess, and Contours are not worth much, Nationwide, the insurance company of the Jeep's owner (not the tool driving it), decided to fix the car. It went to one of their "preffered" shops or some such thing which completely botched the job. The gaps between the trunk and quarter panel were completely off. Some fenderwell parts were also missing, brake lights would not work, the suspension clunked, and we found a severed wiring harness beneath the trunk mat. My parents called Nationwide, who refused to return their phone calls! They would not answer the phone! Finally, my parents sent a letter threatening to report them to the state insurance commissioner, and they got real friendly after that. The Contour was finally totalled and sent off to an auction where some unlucky person picked it up. It was a shame, because we really liked that car, but they are NEVER the same after a wreck. Especially unibody cars. That Contour had perfect paint, a very clean interior, no mechanical issues etc... before the wreck, but afterwards it was nothing but trouble and downright unsafe to drive.


It depends on the repair shop that repairs your car. My Avalon was taken to a repair shop that had repaired my father's car a decade ago after a truck driver decided to sideswipe his corolla and my mother's car the decade before that. The shop restored both of the cars to their previous conditions and they had no problems from the collision after the repairs (I recall my father's corolla going through a few starters, but that was not caused by the collision) until my parents sold them at which point, my family lost track of their histories.

So far, I cannot tell a difference between my Avalon when I drive it from how it performed before the collision and how it performs after the collision. Even when the check engine light went on, it did what it always did, which was to continue going until it was brought to the dealership. I say that because it had two somewhat significant repairs this year prior to the collision, involving the power steering in both incidents (in the first incident, if it had not been for an oil leak, my family would not have learned about a power steering leak) and it kept going until it was brought to the dealership for repairs.

I guess that is another reason that Geico wanted to scrap my car, which was that it had performed nearly flawless throughout its lifetime, requiring no monetary assistance from Geico due to the $250 mechanical breakdown deductible (it went through two radio antennas), until this year when its repairs required that Geico adhere to the terms of the mechanical breakdown insurance that my parents have had on the car for 12 years (13 next May). I guess that they foresaw additional repairs that would be needed in the future and that they wanted to avoid paying for them. I estimate that Geico has spent at least $6000 on the car this year, including the costs of the collision, which pales in comparison to how much my parents have paid them in more than a decade, but I do not think they were as enthusiastic about writing checks as they were about receiving checks.

 

[Shannow]

Originally Posted By: ShiningArcanine
It is a 1995 Toyota Avalon XLS. The current value as far as my parents and I are concerned is approximately $35,000


Did you try to insure it for that, with a specialty insurer and pay the premiums for that level of insurance ?

Mate, you are as out of touch on this as you are engineering

 

[chrome]

Originally Posted By: ShiningArcanine
It is a 1995 Toyota Avalon XLS. The current value as far as my parents and I are concerned is approximately $35,000, which is how much it cost to purchase my mother's 2008 Toyota Avalon Limited (which made the 1995 Avalon exclusively mine).


Am I missing something here? That statement somehow doesn't compute... you can't really insure a 1995 Avalon based on what you expect to pay for a brand new 2008 Avalon??

 

[ekpolk]

Shine:

Alas, you view as to the value of the car is not one that would ever be backed up in the market, or perhaps more critically, in court. Insurance companies won't generally cover property for more than its market value. For very special cases (antique or unique vehicles for which market data has no meaning) can be insured through specialty carriers for a stated value (in most jurisdictions). I expect, however, that you'd have a hard time buying what would amount to "life insurance for a car" for a 13 year old Avalon. From the insurer's view, such policies present an extreme risk of fraud, and from yours, the policy would be prohibitively expensive. You just have to realize that as with a cherished pet (or, gulp, ourselves as we age) once you reach a ripe old age, you're on borrowed time. This does of course, create a perverse incentive to NOT take good care of old cars, but again, that's just the way things are.

Incidentally, we're facing this exact dilemma at the moment, in slightly different form. My son's 1987 Cadillac Seville (a "time warp" car I've described here before) is down with a seized water pump. To replace it, purge the oil from the cooling system, and take care of the now-ailing radiator will cost almost double what the car is worth on the market. But this is a car with only 60k miles (yes, age 21 and only sixty thousand miles), good paint, great interior, etc. It's worth a great deal to us as a functioning car, but I just don't see pouring big bucks into an old car that may simply eat this money, demand more next month, all without the prospect of ever getting any of it back.

 

[PF52]

Originally Posted By: Shannow

Mate, you are as out of touch on this as you are engineering


No doubt! This guy must know where every penny he's ever spent wound up.

 

[ShiningArcanine]

Originally Posted By: Shannow
Originally Posted By: ShiningArcanine
It is a 1995 Toyota Avalon XLS. The current value as far as my parents and I are concerned is approximately $35,000


Did you try to insure it for that, with a specialty insurer and pay the premiums for that level of insurance ?

Mate, you are as out of touch on this as you are engineering


That is the replacement value, which matters to my parents and me much more than whatever the market value is, as we brought the highest model Toyota Avalon in 1995 and to do the same today costs $35,000.

 

[ShiningArcanine]

Originally Posted By: ekpolk
Shine:

Alas, you view as to the value of the car is not one that would ever be backed up in the market, or perhaps more critically, in court. Insurance companies won't generally cover property for more than its market value. For very special cases (antique or unique vehicles for which market data has no meaning) can be insured through specialty carriers for a stated value (in most jurisdictions). I expect, however, that you'd have a hard time buying what would amount to "life insurance for a car" for a 13 year old Avalon. From the insurer's view, such policies present an extreme risk of fraud, and from yours, the policy would be prohibitively expensive. You just have to realize that as with a cherished pet (or, gulp, ourselves as we age) once you reach a ripe old age, you're on borrowed time. This does of course, create a perverse incentive to NOT take good care of old cars, but again, that's just the way things are.

Incidentally, we're facing this exact dilemma at the moment, in slightly different form. My son's 1987 Cadillac Seville (a "time warp" car I've described here before) is down with a seized water pump. To replace it, purge the oil from the cooling system, and take care of the now-ailing radiator will cost almost double what the car is worth on the market. But this is a car with only 60k miles (yes, age 21 and only sixty thousand miles), good paint, great interior, etc. It's worth a great deal to us as a functioning car, but I just don't see pouring big bucks into an old car that may simply eat this money, demand more next month, all without the prospect of ever getting any of it back.


New cars cost much more than old cars. Making decisions based on whatever people consider to be a car's market value is an excellent way to lose money, as the initial cost of a new car, which would probably see the same throw-away fate in 5 years, is far more than the cost of repairing an old car. And that is not to mention the new car's much higher TCO (total cost of ownership) over that five year period than an old car's. The insurance rates go through the roof (which probably makes the insurance companies happy), the fuel economy is always low at the beginning and the car needs extra oil changes in its early life. All of those things cost money.

In your situation, I could understand how you feel that the car will probably need another repair the following month. Knowing GM, it probably will. If it were me, I would not have had a vehicle made by GM in the first place because of that, but assuming you have mechanical breakdown insurance, it should be cheaper to repair it, because the insurance company will pay for most of it, which will make it more affordable and if something minor happens the next month, all you would have to pay is the deductible. Given what I said above in the previous paragraph, repairing his car will be worth it. On the other hand, if you do not have mechanical breakdown insurance, it might be better to start over with something made by Toyota, Honda or Nissan and get mechanical breakdown insurance for it, as it would be abnormal for one of GM's vehicles not to fail and you will not have any help from the insurance company when it does. Your concern about it failing again demonstrates the abnormality of a GM vehicle not failing.

 

[01rangerxl]

Originally Posted By: ShiningArcanine
Originally Posted By: Shannow
Originally Posted By: ShiningArcanine
It is a 1995 Toyota Avalon XLS. The current value as far as my parents and I are concerned is approximately $35,000


Did you try to insure it for that, with a specialty insurer and pay the premiums for that level of insurance ?

Mate, you are as out of touch on this as you are engineering


That is the replacement value, which matters to my parents and me much more than whatever the market value is, as we brought the highest model Toyota Avalon in 1995 and to do the same today costs $35,000.

That is not how it works. The replacement value is what it would cost to buy an identical 1995 Avalon with similar miles. What it costs to buy a car that is 12 years newer is completely irrelevant.

A 2007 Avalon is NOT a direct replacement for a 1995 Avalon. The 2007 Avalon has 0-100 miles on it, a warranty, no wear and tear, and is a NEW car. To expect the insurance company to replace a 12 year old car with a brand new one is just rediculous. It doesn't matter that the 1995 was bought new either. It was new in 1995. It isn't now. It's current direct replacement is another 1995 Avalon.

 

[PF52]

One of my ancestors bought a brand-new Model T Ford in 1918 for $250. Would $25,000 for a 2008 Taurus be considered an appropriate replacement value?

 

[c502cid]

Is shine the same guy we went round and round in explaining driver error to? I see a pattern here.

 

[XS650]

Originally Posted By: c502cid
Is shine the same guy we went round and round in explaining driver error to? I see a pattern here.



None other.

Somehow the world just doesn't conform to his vision of it.

 

[ShiningArcanine]

Originally Posted By: 01rangerxl
Originally Posted By: ShiningArcanine
Originally Posted By: Shannow
Originally Posted By: ShiningArcanine
It is a 1995 Toyota Avalon XLS. The current value as far as my parents and I are concerned is approximately $35,000


Did you try to insure it for that, with a specialty insurer and pay the premiums for that level of insurance ?

Mate, you are as out of touch on this as you are engineering


That is the replacement value, which matters to my parents and me much more than whatever the market value is, as we brought the highest model Toyota Avalon in 1995 and to do the same today costs $35,000.

That is not how it works. The replacement value is what it would cost to buy an identical 1995 Avalon with similar miles. What it costs to buy a car that is 12 years newer is completely irrelevant.

A 2007 Avalon is NOT a direct replacement for a 1995 Avalon. The 2007 Avalon has 0-100 miles on it, a warranty, no wear and tear, and is a NEW car. To expect the insurance company to replace a 12 year old car with a brand new one is just rediculous. It doesn't matter that the 1995 was bought new either. It was new in 1995. It isn't now. It's current direct replacement is another 1995 Avalon.


What someone considers something to be worth is what he defines. I have defined the value of cars in my mind differently than you have in your minds. Any knowledge of this brings forth preconscious feelings of doubt with your definition of what cars are worth that you have attempted to bury. To suppress these feelings, you attempt to erase anything inconsistent with your definition of how things are, so that they will remain preconscious and you will not have to deal with them.

It is necessary that you face your feelings and learn to accept that others might have values different than your own. You also must realize and acknowledge that squabbling over what someone regards his property to be worth when no financial exchange is being made between you and him is pointless.

Note that I am using the plural form of the second person pronoun to address those who feel that how I value my car must be corrected. This works because the mob mentality requires that everyone who forms part of a mob feels the same on the reason for which the mob is formed. This results in a certain conformity, which makes an analysis of one individual an analysis of all participating in the mob.

 

[rationull]

Originally Posted By: ShiningArcanine

New cars cost much more than old cars. Making decisions based on whatever people consider to be a car's market value is an excellent way to lose money, as the initial cost of a new car, which would probably see the same throw-away fate in 5 years, is far more than the cost of repairing an old car. And that is not to mention the new car's much higher TCO (total cost of ownership) over that five year period than an old car's. The insurance rates go through the roof (which probably makes the insurance companies happy), the fuel economy is always low at the beginning and the car needs extra oil changes in its early life. All of those things cost money.

In your situation, I could understand how you feel that the car will probably need another repair the following month. Knowing GM, it probably will. If it were me, I would not have had a vehicle made by GM in the first place because of that, but assuming you have mechanical breakdown insurance, it should be cheaper to repair it, because the insurance company will pay for most of it, which will make it more affordable and if something minor happens the next month, all you would have to pay is the deductible. Given what I said above in the previous paragraph, repairing his car will be worth it. On the other hand, if you do not have mechanical breakdown insurance, it might be better to start over with something made by Toyota, Honda or Nissan and get mechanical breakdown insurance for it, as it would be abnormal for one of GM's vehicles not to fail and you will not have any help from the insurance company when it does. Your concern about it failing again demonstrates the abnormality of a GM vehicle not failing.


On paragraph 1: That's one way to look at it. The other way is that spending, say, $3000 to fix mechanical problems on a car with a market value of $2500 is an even better way to lose money. Note that this means you can (supposedly) buy a direct replacement vehicle for about $2500. How is it bad to make decisions based on market value again?

On paragraph 2: Wow. The fact that the car is a GM is kind of beside the point. A 20+ year old car is going to have problems occasionally, no matter who made it. When considering repairs on a car of that vintage it's only reasonable to wonder how much ongoing time and/or money you're going to have to spend repairing it.

 

[rationull]

Originally Posted By: ShiningArcanine

Note that I am using the plural form of the second person pronoun to address those who feel that how I value my car must be corrected. This works because the mob mentality requires that everyone who forms part of a mob feels the same on the reason for which the mob is formed. This results in a certain conformity, which makes an analysis of one individual an analysis of all participating in the mob.


I don't think anyone's saying you can't hold whatever value you want for your car. What we're saying is that you can't expect the insurance company to view it the same way. It's no secret that insurance valuations (aside from specialty/classic insurance as discussed above) work on market value, not every individual owner's sentimental value or the cost of a brand new car of the same class.

Succinctly: I don't think anyone faults you for holding a high value to your car, but you're being *very* unrealistic to think for even a second that the insurance company should replace your 13 year old car with a brand new one.

 

[01rangerxl]

I'm sure Geico would like to hear all about it. Why don't you call them up and tell them you need $35,000 to replace a 12 year old car with over 100,000 miles on it?

If your Avalon is worth $35,000 to you, that is great, but don't expect anyone to actually pay you $35,000 for it based only on what you feel it is worth. The market value of that car is the same as it is for another similar 1995 Avalon, and that is what you would get from the insurance company if they were to total the car.

My Explorer was around $29,000 in 1995. Right now, in 2007, it is 12 years old, has 154,000 miles on the odometer, and has been up and down all of the East coast and seen miles and miles of hunting trails. However, I really like the thing, and it WAS $29,000 in 1995. If it gets totalled, should I be beating down the doors at Geico for $29,000+? Heck no. It has depreciated. It is no longer new. It is used, old, depreciated, and worth nowhere near its original, new value. Nor is it worth as much as a brand new 2007 Explorer with say 50 miles on the odometer and no previous owners. All I would expect and demand is enough money to buy a similar 1995 Explorer. A similar 1995 Explorer would be a fair replacement for my current 1995 Explorer. That is the way the real world works.

 

[ShiningArcanine]

Originally Posted By: rationull
Originally Posted By: ShiningArcanine

Note that I am using the plural form of the second person pronoun to address those who feel that how I value my car must be corrected. This works because the mob mentality requires that everyone who forms part of a mob feels the same on the reason for which the mob is formed. This results in a certain conformity, which makes an analysis of one individual an analysis of all participating in the mob.


I don't think anyone's saying you can't hold whatever value you want for your car. What we're saying is that you can't expect the insurance company to view it the same way. It's no secret that insurance valuations (aside from specialty/classic insurance as discussed above) work on market value, not every individual owner's sentimental value or the cost of a brand new car of the same class.

Succinctly: I don't think anyone faults you for holding a high value to your car, but you're being *very* unrealistic to think for even a second that the insurance company should replace your 13 year old car with a brand new one.


I do not expect the insurance company to agree with my definition of what constitutes a loss, but unless the cost of repairing my care exceeds the cost of a brand new one, I do not consider the car to be a loss.

 

[PF52]

Originally Posted By: rationull
Succinctly: I don't think anyone faults you for holding a high value to your car, but you're being *very* unrealistic to think for even a second that the insurance company should replace your 13 year old car with a brand new one.


Imagine if they did however! "Lifetime Full Replacement Coverage!". My 318,000-mile Beretta which was wrecked at age 13 when some 18-year-old kid rear-ended it at high speed would have been replaced by, say, a nice new 2004 Malibu or Grand Am or whatever I deemed to be a comprable model since the original was out of production by then. After all, the car cost $11,000 brand new, and after taking inflation into account, maybe a nice new $16,000 car would have come my way.

However I would predict a LOT of fraud would rise from this policy. Sure, my car's getting a little old; maybe if I ram some lady on the cloverleaf the insurance company would buy me a BRAND NEW one!