Stated Value vs Stated Amount...again

[ZRGator]

While increasing the amount of coverage on my '67 and my '93 ZR1 recently, I had the occasion to revisit the language in the endorsement for Antique/Classic Car Coverage offered by my company.
I'm here to tell you, again, that the cut and dry answer that Stated Value does not equal Stated Amount is not quite correct. Or, at least, that there is some area in between. I look forward to many of you reading the following and having the debate continue, now that there is a new player in the game.
For quite some time on here and in the other areas, the Stated Value vs Stated Amount debate has raged on...and on...and on. I am here to tell you that all Stated Value policies are NOT the same. There is actually one Stated Value Endorsement that bridges the gap between what you may understand as a "traditional" Stated Value coverage and the Stated Amount coverage. I am looking forward to ctjackster and some others weighing in on this issue, again. First, let me let you have a look at the Stated Value Endorsement offered by State Farm...get ready to read, boys.
6171AG ANTIQUE OR CLASSIC MOTOR VEHICLE

This endorsement is a part of your policy. Except for the changes it makes, all other terms of the policy
remain the same and apply to this endorsement. It is effective at the same time as your policy unless a different effective date is shown for the endorsement on the Declarations Page.
This endorsement is issued by the STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY
of Bloomington, Illinois, or the STATE FARM FIRE AND CASUALTY COMPANY of Bloomington,
Illinois, as shown by the company’s name on the policy of which this endorsement is a part.
In consideration of the premium charged for your policy, it is agreed that:
1. COVERAGE UNDER SECTION I - LIABILITY - COVERAGE A AND SECTION
II - NO-FAULT - COVERAGE P APPLIES ONLY WHEN YOUR CAR IS USED IN EXHIBITIONS, CLUB ACTIVITIES, PARADES
OR OTHER FUNCTIONS OF PUBLIC INTEREST AND OCCASIONALLY FOR PLEASURE AND BUSINESS.
2. SECTION IV - PHYSICAL DAMAGE COVERAGES
a. Limit of Liability – Comprehensive and Collision Coverages

This provision is changed to read:
The limit of our liability for loss to
property or any part of it is the lower
of:
1. the actual cash value; or
2. the cost of repair or replacement.

You and we agree that the actual cash value of your car is the vehicle value shown on the declarations page unless:
1. your car has been damaged;
2. parts have been removed from your car; or
3. your car’s condition has changed due to abuse or neglect after the vehicle value shown on the declarations
page was agreed to and prior to the loss.

If any of these events have occurred, the agreed upon actual cash value is the vehicle value shown on the
declarations page reduced by the decrease in the value of your car due to such
damage, the removal of parts and damage caused by the abuse or neglect.
Any deductible amount that applies is then subtracted.
The cost of repair or replacement is based upon one of the following:
1. the cost of repair or replacement agreed upon by you and us;
2. a competitive bid approvedby us; or
3. an estimate written based upon the prevailing competitive price.
The prevailing competitive price means
prices charged by a majority of the repair market in the area
where the car is to be repaired as determined by a survey made by
us. If you ask, we will identify some facilities that will perform the
repairs at the prevailing competitive price. We will include in the
estimate parts sufficient to restore the vehicle to its pre-loss
condition.
You agree with us that such parts may include either parts
furnished by the vehicle’s manufacturer or parts from other sources including
non-original equipment manufacturers.
Any deductible amount that applies is then subtracted.
6171AG

b. Settlement of Loss - Comprehensive and Collision Coverages

This provision is changed to read:
We have the right to settle a loss with
you or the owner of the property in one of the following ways:
1. pay the agreed upon actual cash value of the property as determined above in exchange
for the damaged property. If the owner keeps the damaged property, we will deduct its value
after the loss from our payment. The damaged property cannot be abandoned to us;
2. pay to:
a. repair the damaged property or part, or
b. replace the property or part.
If the repair or replacement results in betterment, you must pay for the amount of betterment; or
3. return the stolen property and pay for any damage due to the theft.

The Settlement of Loss provision for comprehensive and collision coverages incorporates the
Limit of Liability provision of those coverages.
If we can pay the loss under either comprehensive or collision, we will
pay under the coverage where you collect the most.
When there is loss to your car, clothes and luggage in the same occurrence,
any deductible will be applied first to the loss to your car. You pay only one deductible.
c. The following is added:
Coverage for Spare Parts
We will pay up to $500 during the policy period for direct and accidental loss of or damage to spare parts which
are owned by you and in your possession. Spare parts means equipment designed to be used with vehicles of the
same make and model as your car.
Chief Executive Officer
2 6171AG

What this endorsement says, and what I have experienced, is that the Stated Value WILL be the amount paid IF you haven't tried to mislead or bait and switch parts on the car insured.
So now let the fun begin. I await commentary on this post and I will also post it in other forums so everyone gets a chance to play.

 

[bobs78]

Works for me!

 

[IH2LOSE]

Sorry I will have to better understand it, but to me it says the same thing as before, It is not equal to "agreed Value coverage" where is it saying we will pay you out rite in the event of a total loss the agreed value?

Remember we are all on the same team here. We all have one goal in mind. to insure our cars the best way we can using a company that provides us with the best value

I have always said I insure for the catatrofic loss, I look for proper coverages first then I seak out the best price for the coverage

 

[IH2LOSE]

Sorry I will have to better understand it, but to me it says the same thing as before, It is not equal to "agreed Value coverage" where is it saying we will pay you out rite in the event of a total loss the agreed value?

Remember we are all on the same team here. We all have one goal in mind. to insure our cars the best way we can using a company that provides us with the best value

I have always said I insure for the catatrofic loss, I look for proper coverages first then I seak out the best price for the coverage

OK I have re- read it.

Quick question

Are you saying the coverage is bad and we should not use it.?



Or are you saying the coverage is good and we should use it?

 

[John Mcgraw]

This language is consistent with an agreed value policy, and not what we commonly associate with a Stated value policy. Stated value policies limit the value to ACV or Stated Value, whichever is LOWEST! This is clearly an agreed value policy similar to most of the other classic auto agreed value policy language. They have pretty much removed the wiggle room to pay out less than agreed value unless the car has pre-existing damage. The only thing that makes me lift an eyebrow, is the paragraph that requires repairs to be approved by both parties, and the isurer reserves the right to approve the type of parts used for the repairs. I am sure that this is standard language for most mainstream insurance companies, but an overly cautious person could take this to mean that cheap, non-original stlye parts could be used for repairs. My guess, is that this is not the intent, but it does give pause. I am sure that is simply meant to prevent high-ball bids by less than honest owners.


Regards, John McGraw

 

[IH2LOSE]

John

From reading the wording (to me) they are really offering nothing differant then the wording.

Your still going to have to negoceate the repairs, I deal with this pre vailing labor rate all of the time with the home owners exstended warrenties on home heating and cooling equiptment.

They survey 1 man shops,from all over the country,our labor rate on the east coast in my area is 100 plus for the first hour,buy the time the get the guys from other areas it delutes the labor rate down to $ 38.00 per hour. that ends up being less then my cost and its un realistic.

they changed the wording but they still have the same zingers.

 

[IH2LOSE]

6171AG ANTIQUE OR CLASSIC MOTOR VEHICLE

This endorsement is a part of your policy. Except for the changes it makes, all other terms of the policy
remain the same and apply to this endorsement. It is effective at the same time as your policy unless a different effective date is shown for the endorsement on the Declarations Page.
This endorsement is issued by the STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY
of Bloomington, Illinois, or the STATE FARM FIRE AND CASUALTY COMPANY of Bloomington,
Illinois, as shown by the company’s name on the policy of which this endorsement is a part.
In consideration of the premium charged for your policy, it is agreed that:
1. COVERAGE UNDER SECTION I - LIABILITY - COVERAGE A AND SECTION
II - NO-FAULT - COVERAGE P APPLIES ONLY WHEN YOUR CAR IS USED IN EXHIBITIONS, CLUB ACTIVITIES, PARADES
OR OTHER FUNCTIONS OF PUBLIC INTEREST AND OCCASIONALLY FOR PLEASURE AND BUSINESS.
2. SECTION IV - PHYSICAL DAMAGE COVERAGES
a. Limit of Liability – Comprehensive and Collision Coverages

This provision is changed to read:
The limit of our liability for loss to
property or any part of it is the lower
of:
1. the actual cash value; or
2. the cost of repair or replacement.

You and we agree that the actual cash value of your car is the vehicle value shown on the declarations page unless:
1. your car has been damaged; IS the accedent consider the damage
2. parts have been removed from your car; or
3. your car’s condition has changed due to abuse or neglect after the vehicle value shown on the declarations
page was agreed to and prior to the loss.

If any of these events have occurred, the agreed upon actual cash value is the vehicle value shown on the
declarations page reduced by the decrease in the value of your car due to such
damage, the removal of parts and damage caused by the abuse or neglect.
Any deductible amount that applies is then subtracted.
The cost of repair or replacement is based upon one of the following:
1. the cost of repair or replacement agreed upon by you and us;
2. a competitive bid approvedby us; or
3. an estimate written based upon the prevailing competitive price.
The prevailing competitive price means
prices charged by a majority of the repair market in the area
where the car is to be repaired as determined by a survey made by
us. If you ask, we will identify some facilities that will perform the
repairs at the prevailing competitive price. We will include in the
estimate parts sufficient to restore the vehicle to its pre-loss
condition.
You agree with us that such parts may include either parts
furnished by the vehicle’s manufacturer or parts from other sources including
non-original equipment manufacturers.
Any deductible amount that applies is then subtracted.
6171AG

b. Settlement of Loss - Comprehensive and Collision Coverages

This provision is changed to read:
We have the right to settle a loss with
you or the owner of the property in one of the following ways:
1. pay the agreed upon actual cash value of the property as determined above in exchange
for the damaged property. If the owner keeps the damaged property, we will deduct its value
after the loss from our payment. The damaged property cannot be abandoned to us;
2. pay to:
a. repair the damaged property or part, or
b. replace the property or part.
If the repair or replacement results in betterment, you must pay for the amount of betterment; or Any new part put on may be considered by the insuance company as betterment as the excisting part has been used,I am sure this will be a place to for them to revert to a depreceation clause on the excisting part
3. return the stolen property and pay for any damage due to the theft.

The Settlement of Loss provision for comprehensive and collision coverages incorporates the
Limit of Liability provision of those coverages.
If we can pay the loss under either comprehensive or collision, we will
pay under the coverage where you collect the most.
When there is loss to your car, clothes and luggage in the same occurrence,
any deductible will be applied first to the loss to your car. You pay only one deductible.
c. The following is added:
Coverage for Spare Parts
We will pay up to $500 during the policy period for direct and accidental loss of or damage to spare parts which
are owned by you and in your possession. Spare parts means equipment designed to be used with vehicles of the
same make and model as your car.
Chief Executive Officer
2 6171AG


If they want to make it simple change the verbage to AGREE VALUE and there will be no question of there intent

 

[bossvette]

Insurance companys are out to make money, nothing more. Larry pointed out a good example when it comes to paying out they lump the whole country together and use the average, but when you go to buy coverage you pay by region. I'll bet your (Larry's) insurance cost is higher then a simular contractor in Hicksville, Ohio. :L



FYI there is a Hicksville, Ohio and we wil be going thru it to meet the caravan down I-69 for Cruise-fest.

 

[BarryK]

You and we agree that the actual cash value of your car is the vehicle value shown on the declarations page unless:
1. your car has been damaged;
2. parts have been removed from your car; or
3. your car’s condition has changed due to abuse or neglect after the vehicle value shown on the declarations
page was agreed to and prior to the loss.

If any of these events have occurred, the agreed upon actual cash value is the vehicle value shown on the
declarations page reduced by the decrease in the value of your car due to such
damage, the removal of parts and damage caused by the abuse or neglect.
Any deductible amount that applies is then subtracted.

that part that make me wonder about, only because i'm in the mood to play devils advocate this morning, is the listed item #1.

As I read it they agree to pay the cash value of the car as listed in the declarations page unless:
1. your car has been damaged;

well, call me dumb, but if you are in an accident or the car was totaled wouldn't that mean the car was damaged??!!
Shouldn't there be wording in there that specifies they agree to pay the value listed in the declarations page PREVIOUSLY to the car being damaged?
The way it is written now, I can see some wriggle room that they contest the value they are willing to pay.
Yes, it may be listed on the declarations page as a value of $50k but now that the car is damaged from an accident or totaled they may try to claim the value is now only $10k and only pay out that amount.

sorry Dennis, not meaning to give you a hard time, but i've had too much bad luck dealing with insurance companies over the years (and one incident was only a month or so ago where i got screwd big-time!) and if they have ANY room to manuaever out of stuff I've found they will.

 

[IH2LOSE]

ZR where did you go,

So I called a state farm agent yesterday and said I may be interested in switching my collector car insurance to him. I said my concern was the clause of the labor rates for repairs. Would he please tell what the local rates would be if I had a loss.

He then explained no one has every asked for them, and that the adjusters are the only ones privy to that information when settling a claim. I then said there are only 3 repair shops within 50 miles that specialize in working on collector cars and that there labor rates is about 40 % higher then the shops that just specialize in modern car collision work. He then explained that the labor rate is used as a guide when settling a claim. the insured gets to pick the shop they want and would have to pay the additional labor rate over what state farm feels is the prevailing rate.

He did say use the term agreed value several times , did say its equal to haggerty's agreed value coverages with less restrictions. He is going to see if he can find out what the prevailing pay out wage for our area is and let me know.

Whats unfortunate is that had I not read state farms policy prior to talking to this fellow I would assume its an agreed value policy equal to a haggerty policy, and its not.

I guess the real question comes down to .Do you feel this is a better solution then the companies that are A rated offering true AGREED VALUE policies. I just dont see the benefit of getting into a contract that you will have to negotiate a loss if it occurs, You'll still have to prove the cars worth.

 

[ZRGator]

Insurance companys are out to make money, nothing more. Larry pointed out a good example when it comes to paying out they lump the whole country together and use the average, but when you go to buy coverage you pay by region.

Re the red area above. That is not true. I can't respond any further to that other than by saying that as per the insurance laws in every state preclude that scenario.

BarryK, of course I understand your point on the "damage" wording but it doesn't need to say "previously" or :"prior" damage because accepted practices (ours and those dictated by the law) make it unnecessary. Think of it...if the current accident results in a total loss situation then how could they deduct the cost of the claim from a total loss (the total value of the car) and still be within the contract where it says it will pay the actual cash value of the car (and actual cash value is clearly defined as the value stated on the declarations page) and then deduct the cost of the current accident? What court or insurance department would even entertain that argument? If that were to be true, then the company has just written a policy where they would never have to pay a claim for a total loss or for a comp or collision occurence.

 

[Tom Bryant]

I'm not addressing this to anyone in particular. Just the topic.

Here we go again. Each time this subject comes up I get the impression that some people are fiercly loyal to their insurance companies. Nothing wrong with that but you have to realize that in some extreme circumstances your company may not offer the exact product that you need. No matter what their advertising or the agent says there are situations where you need to step out of the box for a specialized product.

I was a claims adjuster for several years and I can tell you absolutely that stated value/stated amount and agreed value are 2 different things entirely. To argue that you have the equivolent of agreed value with any stated value contract is like to argue that your black Corvette is white. No matter how much discussion takes place in the end the black Corvette is still black.

You need to understand the legal definations of certain words and terms used in an insurance contract. You also need to understand that there isn't any word or term in any insurance contract that hasn't been tried in court in every state of the union so many times that their legal meaning is carved in stone. Whenever that word or term is said there isn't a judge, attorney or insurance adjuster in the USA that doesn't know exactly what is being referred to. If you don't know the legal meaning of things like actual cash value, agreed value, betterment, depreciation, prevailing rate ect all you have to do is type the word in your browser and you will get a long list of explainations and how they are determined. They are usually defined in the definitions section of your policy too but you may need to research deeper to fully understand the thinking behind the defination.

I find the fact that the agent in the above post used the term agreed value several times when talking about a stated value policy very troubling. Was he intentionally misrepresenting the product or does he just not know any better? Agents are required to carry errors and emmissions insurance that protects them and can pay out to an insured in the case that the agent makes an honest mistake on a policy. An example would be if the agent told you that you had coverage for a certain situation and later, after a loss, you found out you didn't and it was his mistake. With this agent saying agreed value you could make a claim against him if something happened to your car and they wanted to settle on a reduced ACV (actual cash value). However, if he furnished you with a copy of the policy which is a binding legal contract, then it's your responsibilty to read and understand it before you sign and pay the premium. It would be a battle to collect any damages and you would need written documentation that he said agreed value.

Prevailing rate is clearly defined in the above sample so if you think that you are going to get your rapairs paid for at a $100./hr restoration shop when every other body shop in the geographical area is working at $40./hr you are just fooling yourself. At best, an adjuster may have the authority to give you a little more but it's unlikely.

When I was in the business I had to determine ACV on a total loss by doing a market search for several cars as close to the damaged car as possible. Then you established an average. That gave you a starting point for the negotiations with the insured. Yes we offered stated value coverage and the process was the same; just a little more complicated to do and sometimes I needed to call in a specialized appraiser. The insured could also bring in an expert of his choice.

What I'm finding today is that most claims adjusters don't do their own market research. The companys contract that out to outside sources that specialize in furnishing the insurance company with the info it needs without tying up the adjuster's time. Since the fee for this service is paid by the company care to offer a guess who's position the ACV dollar amount favors? They are given the file with the photos and more than likely you will never even get a chance to talk to them to tell them all about your special car. The adjuster won't tell you up front this is how he is determining ACV unless you are smart enough to question his every move. It will also suprise you how the adjuster will stick to their report as if it was hand written by God himself. Your agent will be of little help in the negotiations because he has no authority over the claims dept. He can raise hell but it won't make much of a diference in the end.

Compare that situation to an agreed value policy where you and the company agree on the value of your Corvette before the policy is written and you are guaranteed the face amount in the event of a total loss. No ACV, no betterment, no depreciation, no negotiations. What could be simpler or safer for the insured? Also if it says you can have repairs done at a shop of your choice, like many of them do,that wipes out the prevailing rate loophole and lets face it, you are many times more likely to need a repair done to your car from something falling in the garage, or a parking lot accident than you are a total loss or total theft. I have read so many posts on all types of car and truck forums from people that had everything from hail damage to parking scrapes and took the car to a shop of their choice where the car was repaired to their satisfaction and Haggertys or whoever paid the bill no hastle.

Why would you even want to take a chance on anything less with your baby? We are all free to do what we want and if you want to take a chance on the stated value policy it's your decision. There has been enough written on this subject that you absolutely know what to expect if something happens. I hope it never does and if it does you get a good adjuster that will give you a fair shake in the indurance claims lottery. That's exactly what it is too unless it is written in no uncertain terms like an agreed value contract.

 

[Tom Bryant]

After reading the opening post again I would like to add that I totally agree that all stated value policies are not the same. Also that all agreed value policied are not the same.

The bottom line is in the defination of the words stated and agreed that make these 2 contracts totally different animals irreguardless of their individual sub features.

 

[ZRGator]

ZR where did you go,

So I called a state farm agent yesterday and said I may be interested in switching my collector car insurance to him. I said my concern was the clause of the labor rates for repairs. Would he please tell what the local rates would be if I had a loss.

He then explained no one has every asked for them, and that the adjusters are the only ones privy to that information when settling a claim. I then said there are only 3 repair shops within 50 miles that specialize in working on collector cars and that there labor rates is about 40 % higher then the shops that just specialize in modern car collision work. He then explained that the labor rate is used as a guide when settling a claim. the insured gets to pick the shop they want and would have to pay the additional labor rate over what state farm feels is the prevailing rate.

He did say use the term agreed value several times , did say its equal to haggerty's agreed value coverages with less restrictions. He is going to see if he can find out what the prevailing pay out wage for our area is and let me know.

Whats unfortunate is that had I not read state farms policy prior to talking to this fellow I would assume its an agreed value policy equal to a haggerty policy, and its not.

I guess the real question comes down to .Do you feel this is a better solution then the companies that are A rated offering true AGREED VALUE policies. I just dont see the benefit of getting into a contract that you will have to negotiate a loss if it occurs, You'll still have to prove the cars worth.

IH2LOSE, I'm still here but I've also been dealing with a serious family health matter in Virginia which managed to send me to the hospital yesterday with issues of my own. Stress is a ***** for diabetics and stroke survivors. 'Nuff said.

The Agent you spoke to probably shouldn't have used the term "ageed value" and then again, I don't see, given the terms of our policy, where it is not. A rose by any other name...Also, I clearly would not say we have LESS restrictions than a Hagerty policy mostly because I haven't seen their policy and clearly we do have the restrictions for damage, removal of parts and abuse or neglect. Personally, I think that just makes our policy just a tad smarter towards closing the door for possible fraud. I don't know where you came up with an A rating for Hagerty because I just did a search and AM Best doesn't list them. I'm not saying they're not, I just couldn't get a rating with my search at this time.
If the Agent you spoke to does manage to get the prevailing labor rates in your area at this time, I'm betting he/she will get the prevailing rates for the repair on a standard vehicle at the standard shops. That's not going to be a true comparison to what we have actually done in this specialty situation. But the fact that you asked for the rates in your area and the Agent is going to attempt to get the rates in your area sort of answers the concern/statement another poster (bossvette) had regarding averaging the rates from across the country...we don't do it.
When you say "I would assume it's an agreed value policy equal to a Hagerty policy and it's not." you are right and wrong. By any view of the definitions in our policy, it is clearly an agreed value policy.."You and we agree that the actual cash value of your car is the vehicle value shown on the declarations page unless:" and then the further restrictions still do not remove it from the realm of being an agreed value policy. This, of course, would anser your concern re .."I just dont see the benefit of getting into a contract that you will have to negotiate a loss if it occurs, You'll still have to prove the cars worth." You don't have to; the car's worth is clearly stated on the declarations page.
Now as to the section where you say, "He then explained that the labor rate is used as a guide when settling a claim. the insured gets to pick the shop they want and would have to pay the additional labor rate over what state farm feels is the prevailing rate." That is the stock answer regarding common vehicles with ordinary claims problems. If a BMW owner wants to use his "specialty" mechanic instead of the BMW dealer for his 2002 Beemer and there is a difference in the labor rate, then they would pay the difference in labor in that particular instance. I have never seen a case when a collector car was forced to use the local dealer for repair against his will. In fact, I have collected many stories where the owner said State Farm was particularly concerned in making sure a collector car was repaired to the owner's satisfaction. In a business sense, if we insure your 2 - 4 daily drivers, your house, we have an umbrella, maybe life insurance, we do your banking, hold the note on your car, the mortgage on your home, have a 529 plan for your kids and investments for your future. Would we then roast you on a specialty car claim just so we could lose all of the other business in the household? History tells me no, we would not. We didn't get to be the largest P&C insurer in the US by beating people up on their claims and you can check JD Powers for that.
I apologize if that last bit seemed like an agitated response, it wasn't meant to be. You have certainly done your "due diligence" more than most and your remarks are informed and considered. I appreciate that in a discussion (ct and I might call them "arguments") but let me ask you this in terms of your final statement, "I guess the real question comes down to .Do you feel this is a better solution then the companies that are A rated offering true AGREED VALUE policies. I just dont see the benefit of getting into a contract that you will have to negotiate a loss if it occurs, You'll still have to prove the cars worth." Do I feel it is a "better solution?" Maybe not, but it is a solution that to me seems equally as good. Given the premise in your statement that you "don't see the benefit" IF...you have to negotiate AND it is clearly shown that you don't have to negotiate..AND "you'll still have to prove the cars worth" and you don't because it is clearly defined, then I would say it is not a better solution but it is one that is as good.

The end result of our conversations here will be that you will still have your preference and I respect that. I just hope this has been a furthering of the educational process for those that have taken the time to read the endorsement mentioned.
IH2LOSE, I saw you and your car last year at Carlisle but didn't get the chance to meet you. Maybe we will meet this year (I should be in the 63-67 Registry area again) and I can inspect your excellent work.

Update...I just went to Hagerty and got a quote for my '67. I used a value of $100k (the same I have on mt State Farm policy) and their rate was $672/year. My liability limits are 250/500/100, theirs are the state minimums of 20/40/15. They have no comp or collision deductible, I have $100 comp, $500 collision. Theirs has a $10 benefit for towing ($50 for flatbed) with a 3 times per year max. State Farm has no limit for towing (but must be towed to the nearest place of repair) and no limit on times per year. Before you say the no deductible is worth it, I say I'd rather have to pay $500 to fix my car and have up to have $100k to fix the other car than I would pay everything over $15k. The bottom line for State Farm ('cause I know you're a bottom line guy)...my premium is $184.72 for 6 months ($369.44/year). So now I'd say I have the better solution because AM Best has State Farm rated at A++ and the premium is 55% of Hagerty and the libility limits are more "real world" and I happen to have a close personal relationship with my Agent.. .
Peace to all....

 

[ZRGator]

Here we go again. Each time this subject comes up I get the impression that some people are fiercly loyal to their insurance companies.

I find the fact that the agent in the above post used the term agreed value several times when talking about a stated value policy very troubling. Was he intentionally misrepresenting the product or does he just not know any better? Agents are required to carry errors and emmissions insurance that protects them and can pay out to an insured in the case that the agent makes an honest mistake on a policy. An example would be if the agent told you that you had coverage for a certain situation and later, after a loss, you found out you didn't and it was his mistake. With this agent saying agreed value you could make a claim against him if something happened to your car and they wanted to settle on a reduced ACV (actual cash value). However, if he furnished you with a copy of the policy which is a binding legal contract, then it's your responsibilty to read and understand it before you sign and pay the premium. It would be a battle to collect any damages and you would need written documentation that he said agreed value.

Of course you meant the Agent quoted in the post from IH2LOSE, because I didn't use those terms interchangably.
It's kinda funny to hear me being accused of being fiercely loyal because I have the rep of being a bit of a renegade among my fellow Agents. I'm not that much of a company man but I do see the results and can testify to them.
No need for the header regarding addressing the topic..I'm not taking any of this personally and I haven't heard from anyone here or on the other forum that indicates they are, either. It's not like I feel I'm going to sell these guys, I'm not licensed in their states and if they do go to another State Farm Agent, it doesn't do a darn thing for my net..lol.

As I stated before, I just hope to further the education and maybe debunk some of the myths regarding coverage. As I stated before, I don't have some of the knowledge a lot of these guys have regarding repair or rebuild (IH2LOSE being a member of that group) but I have learned from them and hope I can contribute something back. I didn't start this up again to debate companies, I just wanted to contribute better information.
I hope I have done this without starting any kind of bitter debate and, so far, it feels like I have.

Tom, it may make you weary reading about this again, but isn't it sorta like reading on and on again about which tires should I use? But in this case, maybe there's some new info here.

Also, I appreciate your history as an adjuster and you are essentially correct in that adjusters are notorious for not doing the homework in some areas. But we do forward specialty car claims to specialty adjusters and the Agent does have input. I know I have several times.
My apologies to your having to "*" out one of the words in m y previous response, I'm not really given to using that language in here but it was more of a comment to me rather than an attack on any person.

 

[BarryK]

Agents are required to carry errors and emmissions insurance that protects them and can pay out to an insured in the case that the agent makes an honest mistake on a policy. An example would be if the agent told you that you had coverage for a certain situation and later, after a loss, you found out you didn't and it was his mistake.

yeah, that Errors and Emmissions isurance they are required to carry isn't worth the paper they print it on!
I JUST went thru this hassle myself two months ago with my homeowners policy. The agent who has been my agent for years was suppose to transfer certain items onto the policy to be specifically listed onto the declarations page and failed to do so. I failed to notice the missing items when the new policy went into affect. These items included my wifes jewelery, especially her engagement and wedding rings.
Two days after xmas the stone was missing from her engagement ring (3 of the 4 prones on the custom made band broke). We are talking basically a flawless quality 2-carat diamond that was also an antique and they do not make those cuts anymore. This was an irreplaceable stone.
I went to put the claim in and noticed the ring wasn't on the declarations page. Called the agent and she agreed it was supposed to be because it was on the old policy and she failed to put it on this one.
Needless to say the insurance company denied the claim. We thought it would than still be covered because of their Errors and Emmissions insurance and they denied that also even though the agent herself told the insurance company the fault was fully hers!
Guess who got left out to dry on that deal............. ad

no matter how long you have dealt with a particular insurance company and/or agent be sure, to read EVERY SINGLE WORD of your policy, especially if it's a new one, and double and triple check every item that is suppose to be on your declarations page.

as far as I'm concerned, the insurance brokers and agents Errors and Emmissions insurance is worthless!

 

[IH2LOSE]

Tom its official , I am contacting Ken Americ from the S.A.C.C. and nominating you to write an article on collector car insurance for our club.As hard as it is to believe our peers dont all read the Corvette Action Center and are in a terrible situation not having a better understanding of collector car insurance.

I would do it but my grammars is bad.

ZR thanks for your input. Sorry I missed you at carlisle also I have a hard time sitting still. We will all be in touch prior to the show and I will be in the same area with the S.A.C.C

Sorry your having problems. And I know its easy to say. But when it comes to stress there is just NO benefit to it, the majority of it is self induced. Stay calm,stay cool. Just think we are never given a load its thought we cant carry,

Best of luck and contact me if I can help

 

[WayneC]

BarryK said: "yeah, that Errors and Emmissions isurance they are required to carry isn't worth the paper they print it on!"

Actually, it's "Errors and Omissions" insurance, and I suspect you have to sue the agent who made the omission, in order to get paid. It depends on whether the agent is an independent contractor or an employee of the insurance company as to exactly who you sue for the omission.

Errors and Omissions insurance is usually something a private contractor would have (not an insurance company, they would probably be self-insured... ie, they accept the costs of litigating a settlement when they are sued). Errors and Omissions insurance says, in effect, that the person you're contracting with is claiming to be a professional, and that they've insured themself against doing things, or neglecting to do things, mistakes that a professional in their field should be smart enough to avoid, in order to gain your confidence in their professional services. It protects you as well as them (by providing the "pockets" that you can sue), but primarily it is intended to protect them against a civil lawsuit from you that might bankrupt them, the same as malpractice insurance protects a doctor. If the agent is an independent and you don't have it in writing that the agent knew the ring should have been on the policy and she inadvertently omitted it, then good luck trying to prevail, it's your word against hers, not to mention that the legal fees may exceed what you are able to recover. If you are lucky enough to have correspondence telling the agent to include all the assets on the prior policy (or correspondence from the agent saying the same), that might help.

 

[Tom Bryant]

Right you are Wayne. Sorry for the spelling error. Emisions would be after the agent had Mexican food for lunch.

Chris Mc Donald (69MYWAY) wrote an excellent 2 or 3 part article that was published on the CAC several years ago. He did a much more thorough and professional job than I could ever hope to do. He is still and has been for a long time, employed as a State Farm claims professional in Florida. I think it is time to pull that up out of the archives and post it again in the Wheelspin forum. I'll see what I can do.

Tom

 

[paul67]

I don't know why we are discussing this. Just get agreed value insurance and get on with your life, assured that your toy will be protected to the fullest extent. Have I missed something?