David mentions one of the reasons I moved to Hagerty. I had State Farm insure my 69 E-Type and after I was rear ended by a Nationwide driver State Farm had no contact with them other than to report I was insured for less than the repair estimate. State Farm did not understand (or want to understand) the collector aspect of the car and only wanted to pay me what I had paid for the car 3 years prior despite the stated value being higher and all the parts I had put into it. My State Farm agent, who I am still with for my other cars and I really like, explained they could not help me with Nationwide due to repair cost being higher than their insured value. He encouraged me to get collector car insurance though one of the regulars.
I guess I am one of the few that have been refused insurance by Hagerty. They have a rule that there must be a “daily driver” car for each licensed driver in the household. As I only have (or need) one daily driver for my wife and myself they refused to insure my 67 OTS E Type (for some reason they said my 55 MGTF did’t qualify as a daily driver). However, after some discussion my present insurer (Hartford/AARP) agreed to increase the max. ACV to $150K. I realize that this is not the same as “agreed to”, but my past dealings with them make me comfortable with the situation. Also , as regards Hagerty, I was uncomfortable with the possibility of getting into an accident where I was exposed to considerable liability, and Hagerty being able to use some of the use exclusion language to deny responsibility. Most of this thread only addresses property damage.
-
Establishing ACV has always been an issue. Best defined as “willing seller to willing buyer”. Blue book only an indicator. Seeking comparables in sales adds is flawed. Asking price is rarely sales price. In my early days, I had a friend that worked as the Used car sales manager. Small family dealer. He the only used car salesman. I usually visited with him to get some guidance. Other factors
aided in developing an ACV I could “sell”. -
It is not unusual for insures to work things out when two clients and two companies are involved. The collision carrier pays their insured. Then “subrogates” against the liability carrier of the responsible party, Usually, just pay 'em. Easy. OTH, at times, liability is not agreed on. Or value. When negotiations fail, some carriers belong to an industry organization. The “Claim managers Council” meets and mediates. I did that a bit. The reward was a nice lunch afterwards !! "Done!!!
I*n the case at bar. it seems SF and N’wide has a reasonable dispute. -
HO insurance values are guided by the cost to build i8n the area. Fluctuates as to demand. .
-
Very early in my career, my boss handed me a bunch of files reflecting settled “collision claims”. Meet the city attorney for El Paso. he has claims for damaged city vehicles caused by our insured’s. negotiate !!!
Hans was the older brother of a class mate!
My claims first. Knocked off a third “just cuz”!!! Then came his !! More numerous in number and value than mine ! Same deal !!! Hans got a kick out of that !! Done.
Much later it turned out that Hans became a Judge and the local Navy reserve CO. My brother became his XO!!!
-
Rarely did my superiors complain that I paid too much. As l9ong as it was within my authority and I had the documents to support it was fine. I let that be my guide as I supervised the work of others…
-
Individuals and offices are partly judged by “turn over rate”. Move the files. They rarely diminish in settlement value. to the contrary, the value increases.
Reserves are one of the life lines of any insurer. Adequate, but not excessive.
Carl
I am glad to hear to Hagerty has stepped up and taken care of potential claims by its insureds when another driver is at fault. But I would counsel against relying upon that occurring in all situations. The likelihood of a dispute arising with the other guy’s insurance company goes up as the value of the car increases and the range of possible outcomes widens. For example, Hagerty would value a car like mine, a 1969 Series 2 roadster at $168,000 for concourse, $120,000 for excellent, $69,000 for good and $40,000 for fair. Even pulling the concourse level car out of the equation, there is an $80,000 gap between excellent and fair. Insurance companies love to use this type of uncertainly to their advantage. All I am saying is that the best defense to a low ball offer from the other guy’s insurance company is detailed documentation and lots of good quality photographs.
Bob,
I must be missing the point? This is exactly the reason you have Agreed Value policy (with Hagerty, or another company that offers such policies)? It doesn’t matter a bit what the other insurance company values your car at. Your policy pays what you agreed. The problem of dealing with the other driver’s (at fault) party’s insurance belongs to Hagerty, not you…
You have three parts to your insurance coverage: liability, collision and comprehensive. If someone runs into your car and they are 100% at fault, none of your insurance coverage is triggered. Instead, you are relying upon the other driver’s liability coverage and their insurance company’s evaluation of your damages. Your “agreed value” insurance will have no impact on the other company’s valuation. If the car is repairable, the issue will be the reasonable cost of repair and the level (quality) to which the repair is completed. If the car is totaled, the responsible driver’s insurance company may still have another opinion as to the car’s value than the one agreed upon by you and Hagerty. There may be some provision in the Hagerty policy, or in its business practices, which varies from these general principles. My suggestion, which you can take or leave, is that you be prepared to document the value of your car on the wide spectrum of possible values if its “agreed value” is ever challenged by another insurer. On the other hand, if you are at fault for damage to your own car (heaven forbid), it will be insured under your collision coverage and the agreed value provisions will apply.
I agree documentation can be your best friend. and of course, a recent appraisal would be better.
But. …If the other guy’s insurance falls short and one hasd full coverage with Hagarty, would Hagarty not be on the hook for the difference between what the other company is willing to pay and your agreed value with Hagarty. I don’t know the answer which is why I’m asking.
John,
I believe the answer is yes. It is beyond belief to me that, if you have an Agreed Value insurance policy and someone else causes an accident which results in a total loss of your car, it is in your best interests to claim the accident was your fault to ensure that you get paid. That said, I appreciate Bob questioning our belief, because if we are indeed wrong, many other followers of this thread will be equally surprised as I am. I just did a quick review of my Hagerty Policy document, and could find no indication that my (full coverage) policy takes into account who’s fault the accident is. My understanding therefore is that my coverage is independent of who caused the accident. In the event that the other driver was at fault, I presume that Hagerty then try to recover as much of my payout as they can from the other driver’s insurance, and bear the loss of any resulting shortfall. Can anyone comment with authority if this is true/false?
-David
1 Like
I will fall on my sword on this one and admit a mistake. While some policies tie collision coverage to fault, the Hagerty policy does not. Accordingly, its “Guaranteed Value” provisions in the Collision and Other than Collision coverages (i.e., comprehensive coverage) apply irrespective of fault. If the other driver is at fault and his insurance company disputes the value of the car, it would be up to Hagerty to fight it out with them to recover what it paid to you. I would note that vermin damage is excluded in the Hagerty policy. My car was previously insured by my father with another company whose policy covered rodent damage. That was fortunate as a rat (or two) took up residence in the trunk, ate all the wool carpeting down to the backing and pissed all over everything. The result was a new interior paid for by insurance. The car was garaged and under a car cover, so it was a surprise when we pulled it out and discovered the damage.
1 Like
Not an issue at all.
I think this is a very useful topic. We are all learning useful information.
I was planning to call Hagarty, run the scenario by them, get their answer and report back. David and Bob, saved me the trouble.
2 Likes
No problem. I love this forum so much because I learn something new every time I log in.
Good point! I found that exclusion when I was checking the policy document yesterday. I’d never really thought about it, but it’s a notable exclusion given how these cars can be left unused for periods under covers.
I agree with a lot of the summaries above on Stated Value policies. Another way to look at it is that if you have stated value coverage, you should be prepared for some negotiation in the event of a total loss.
Years ago, my uncle had a very nice MGB destroyed by a distracted driver, and the insurance company made him what he felt was a low ball offer. He came back with photos and receipts, and basically said “If you think my car was only worth $X, then YOU find me an equivalent one at that price.”
They actually had him go look at 3 or 4 cars until he found one he was happy with, and then the insurance company paid out for it. This was in the late-80’s when they weren’t that hard to find…nowadays, I can’t imagine them going through a similar exercise.
The important point is, with Stated Value, have your documentation in order, and be ready for some back and forth. But ultimately, if you’re being reasonable, you should be made whole in the end.
A closer reading calls for some further clarifications. My policy has an Enthusiasts Essentials Endorsement which removes damage by insects or vermin from the policy exclusions. As a result, it you have this Endorsement, vermin damage will be covered.
The Enthusiasts Endorsement also removes Exclusion A.11 from the policy. This is an exclusion for fraud which in its original form reads:
We will not pay for:
11. Loss to "your covered auto" as a result
of anyone causing you to voluntarily part
with it as a result of any trick or scheme.
If this provision were left in the policy it would exclude a situation where you turn over possession or title in exchange for a bad check or some similar fraudulent promise to pay. The Enthusiasts Endorsement adds coverage to the policy for theft of money by an authorized third party broker, or total loss from confiscation by a public authority because of an altered VIN or fraudulent title (think stolen vehicle) you did not know about. However, the most it will pay in my policy for this added coverage is $1,500 which does not begin to approach the value of the car. Consider too that “theft or larceny” is covered in full under the Other than Collision coverage. So, from my reading, under this Endorsement, if someone steals your car, or tricks you into turning over title and possession, you are fully covered. But if you consign your car to a broker to sell it for you, and they steal the proceeds from the sale, or you find you own a stolen car, or one with a fraudulently altered VIN, you will get $1,500. So buyers and sellers beware.
Perhaps calling Hagerty might be in order.
Thanks Bob, for pointing this out. On further inspection, I find my policy has the same Endorsement. As our resident insurance expert, Carl, has often remarked, if you want to know details of your coverage, “read the policy”. Of course, this is easier said than done. My Hagerty policy has a general section, followed by an Arizona specific set of endorsements, followed by the “Enthusiasts” endorsements, followed by…
Reading insurance policies is an act of self abuse. Just when you think you have all the provisions and exclusions of the policy in mind, you find small, but often significant changes in the endorsements. Now, this discussion has me wondering if my agreed value is too low. . . .
I would love to be a fly on the wall of the customer service director at hagerty who must be wondering why in hell every single one of their policy holders have decided to call in the exact same week 
1 Like
Oh, I’m sure someone there is already aware of this thread.
Now, this discussion has me wondering if my agreed value is too low. . . .
I know mine is. It’s insured for what I had in the car when I restored it 20+ years ago thinking I really barely ever drive it, maybe 3000 miles in that time. Wife says I’m being a bit stupid, and so I am with the actual value 5x now. My policy just came up for renewal, so I’ll be talking to them today.
Of course, if we were ever to total an E-type while driving it, recovery of the agreed value may be more of a benefit for our estates than us personally. Be safe out there.
2 Likes