Ferrari is the worse brand ! Ferrari Stolen From Newport !

just bumping this as you have not answered.

also, just curious, what would have made you happy?
$20K off a new 488 convertible?
$50K?
$100K?
and why would you be happy buying another Ferrari, knowing that they have inferior technology?

 

I think it would be terrific if Insurance Companies would pay you the original cost of your used car when it gets totaled.
But maybe that could only be possible with an "heirloom" car.

 

.

Hi Randy, an interesting post about “Agreed Value” versus ACV. If you were to try to get Agreed Value, do I take it the goal would be to essentially agree with the insurance company up front on the depreciated value of the car rather than haggling over it later?

I assume that Agreed Value could not be the original undepreciated cost of the car otherwise there would be an incentive for owners to “lose” their cars.

 

I'm sorry the owner had to go through all that, and hope going forward they enjoy their beautiful Lamborghini!

Happy New Year to everyone!

 

FYI the comparative spelling of worse is WORST... :=)

nothing has been mentioned about diminished value... by the damage the theft caused...

which is in addition to any depreciation...

there are lawyers that specialize in recovering diminished value, an average lawyer doesn't have the depth of knowledge / experience in successfully litigating for diminished value

especially important with high value cars that take a value hit when damaged those values can be significant and insurance companies will defend aggressively... that's why a pro litigator in this area is a must

 

forgot to add there is insurance coverage for diminished value

 

They do in certain cases, "agreed on value" or like in my case, when my 991TTS was only 3 weeks old and had less then a 1k miles.
Paid full MSRP and even the tax credit I received for trading in my CLS63.
(I paid full sticker on special order car delivered in December 2013, first new TTS in the city)

 

Yes is the short answer. Usually you need to demonstrate to the insurance company why it is that you are wanting to insure at a particular value. Usually there need to have been some sales near the value you want to insure. Most companies offering agreed value have knowledgeable underwriters on exotic cars so they are not over insuring the vehicle which is their main issue so you don't have a motivation to "sell" them the car with a "fortuitous " accident.

If the car has appreciated beyond it's origional cost that value may be insured. Agreed value is not always a depreciated value. I have a 77 Porsche 930 which cost originally about 40k and my insurance company and I have "agreed value" of 150k. But keep in mind obviously the premium is higher the higher the agreed value. Even if the value fluctuates below the agreed value during the term of the policy if the car is totaled you will receive the agreed value. Of coarse if your agreed value is to low at the time of total loss you only get the agreed value. The other reason to use agreed value is that most insurance company offering agreed value will use OEM parts to repair damage when less than a total lost is involved.

Many companies insuring on a ACV basis will only repair cars with the least cost of a similar part not necessarily an OEM part.

 

Sounds to me like the typical "I bought the cheapest insurance because what are the chances of anything happening" case...Even at agreed value, you can't always get it insured at the price you want it, buying a car brand new off the lot always involves taking a hit. Glad the OP got it off her chest, but quit bitching, there was no negligence or villians here, just a crappy situation..

 

On new cars many companies will offer "new car replacement" for cars only a couple years old. It would also seem that the OP's relative did not elect new car replacement or agreed value for their own personal coverage. Like you said got the cheapest coverage as what could happen to a car rarely driven?


Sent from my iPad using FerrariChat.com mobile app

 

It’s a little more complex than that doctor; this is a bailment for hire and it creates a higher standard of care. Based on the facts as I understand them to be, and I don’t have the dealership side the story, but we do know their insurance carrier paid the claim, the dealership was negligent. Their negligence; however, was ordinary negligence not gross negligence. If I owned the dealership I would’ve gone out of my way to make the customer happy, perhaps offering a 488 at cost might have been the appropriate gesture. And I certainly would not have chided the customer for driving the loaner too many miles.

 

But we dont know if that really happened...

based on the series of posts here, I cant believe anything the victim says

 

That would be an interesting thing for her to make up, but it’s certainly possible. Like I said in my post I haven’t heard the dealer’s side and nothing would surprise me. Interesting choice of the word “victim” and not putting it in quotes.

 

I gotcha. I gotcha... also bear in mind that this is "the boyfriend" (or whatever he is) posting. He is NOT the actual owner of the car as I understand. If I owned a dealership I would of course treat my customers well. The ones that I didn't (if I would treat people less than white gloves) I would rather not have as customers. From what I've read here... I'd rather not have this client as a customer. I wouldn't be surprised if this led to the treatment reported.

Just note.. as you said.. we've only heard one side of the story. And that regarding that side of the story I tend to agree with Annunnaki. It lacks credibility IMHO based on what I've read here.

 

Well there is a difference between making something up and greatly exaggerating it. Our politicians have made an art from leaving enough grains of truth that they cant be called a liar.

This woman is a victim. It wasnt her fault the car was stolen. At the same time, based on everything we have seen here, its hard to believe that everything coming out of that camp isnt full of exaggerations.

 

Well I think all reasonable people will agree that we haven’t heard both sides and we certainly haven’t been presented with any dispositive evidence one way or the other. I guess I’m a little Sympathetic to the complaint because I just recently took my 1900 mile one owner 92 348 tb in for service and it came back with a scratch and a dent and the service center denies that they did it. Not a big deal, they are minor blemishes that are barely noticeable and can be remedied, but I sure would’ve liked to have heard them say I’m sorry and fess up.

 

I think you nailed it. A personal call and apology from the owner of the dealership would have gone a long way, then discuss negotiations to make the customer whole. You’ll never get that customer back and they’ll everyone they know about their experience. I’m amazed that some biz owners are still arrogant


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

U would Be surprised. OJ got away with murder in this country so, if i were u, i would not assume that the truth alone wins it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

Thanks ! Good Customer Service Goes a Long Way !

 

We don't know that such an apology wasn't made.

 

OP Sorry for your loss and associated frustrations.

Something that keeps coming up and I feel being overlooked... that the Dealership was willing to part with a NEW 488 for MSRP

The way the game is played, THAT translates to a significant discount in itself....

Just ask the many owners here who purchased XYZ Ferrari for whatever inflated cost in order to be able to spec a 488...

So, the OP is able to buy at MSRP , as wel as skip the line , and get into a current model... there is value there, that IMO is being overlooked.

Just my opinion


Also, does the Dealership have to provide the loan car or does the insurance company? I’m pretty sure it the insurance company via Enterprise , SIXT, etc

So the fact that the Dealership offered a Cali T also has value. Though we the members are not privy to the parimeters of that agreement... ie: 100 miles per day or???

Tough situation , but we are as others have stated, only hearing 1 side of the story

A

 

Lawyer up

 

Maybe its a bit too late for that? Sounds like its water under the bridge now.

 

No point...No case.

"Oh your Honor it was a two year old family heirloom!!!!" Seriously......that's the argument the OP wants to make in court? I also forgot to add another stunning argument: "but I'm also related to someone who raced for Ferrari in the 1960s!!!".

Are you kidding?