by balvarez » Mon Aug 24, 2009 02:51 pm
I have a quick questions about two things:
1. The insurance company we have is using Auto source to value a total loss vehicle and they are valuing the vehicle at a significantly less value than NADA puts for the car. Does anyone know the process of Auto source? and
2. Can anyone suggest steps in fighting this total loss valuation process.
It is a 2003 Toyota Corolla S.
1. The insurance company we have is using Auto source to value a total loss vehicle and they are valuing the vehicle at a significantly less value than NADA puts for the car. Does anyone know the process of Auto source? and
2. Can anyone suggest steps in fighting this total loss valuation process.
It is a 2003 Toyota Corolla S.
Posted: Mon Aug 24, 2009 06:22 pm Post Subject: Auto Eval
Autosource does market surveys of like/kind vehicles in the area where you live; they physically have representatives go out and meet with the local dealers and determine what a 2003 Toyota Corolla ACV is.
Having said that, owning a 6 year old vehicle means one thing: you will not replace it for what it is worth, especially if the mileage is over 100,000. My car is paid for and in good condition, but I definitely would have to "buy up" should it get totaled out and probably start over on some car payments. It is the nature of automobiles, they depreciate quickly and when they are totaled, the insurer is only obligated to pay you the actual cash value, not the replacement value. Hopefully the Autosource eval brought back some vehicles that were similar to yours.
Posted: Mon Aug 24, 2009 06:25 pm Post Subject:
Read this thread on CCC valuescope. Basically these programs are marketed and sold to insurers and not to the general public. The results appear to be skewed in favor of insurers, why else would they use such a program when recognized programs as NADA have shown to be favoring neither and offering realistic values.
http://www.ampminsure.org/start/about9629.html
Posted: Thu Aug 27, 2009 11:57 am Post Subject:
Can anyone suggest steps in fighting this valuation.
Do a local market survey...meaning contact three or four good (not we tote the note) used car dealers, ask what they would ask for your vehicle...be honest about it's condition. Check on line with a 100 mile or so radius of your location. Once you have this data, talk with your adjuster about it..Most importantly look at their evaluation, make sure everything is correct about your vehicle (ie yr/make/model/mileage/options)...Did your vehicle have any UNrepaired prior damage? If so this will reduce it's value.Posted: Thu Aug 27, 2009 03:17 pm Post Subject:
A huge problem with NADA is.... where are _they_ getting their information from? They don't tell anyone. So how does anyone know it's accurate?
Two main problems with AutoSource... many times they are given incorrect information about the vehicle. So you need to obtain a copy of the report supplied by AutoSource and make sure that the information on your vehicle is correct. What also happens sometimes is that the vehicles used as a comparison are not as represented. I've not seen an AutoSource report in a long time but I'm pretty sure they give you the name/address/phone number of the party selling the vehicle used as comparisons. You can call these people and ask them about the condition of the vehicle to make sure it was in very good condition.
The results appear to be skewed in favor of insurers, why else would they use such a program when recognized programs as NADA have shown to be favoring neither and offering realistic values.
As mentioned above... what information is NADA using to obtain the value of a vehicle? They don't supply this information. AutoSource provides all of this information so that it can be confirmed. If it can be confirmed it can be verified. Unlike NADA which can't. How often is NADA's database updated as compared to AutoSource? As I recall NADA's pricing covers a large region, unlike AutoSource that narrows down the search to a much smaller area.Posted: Thu Aug 27, 2009 09:49 pm Post Subject:
Why three estimating platforms with three different times for similar operations and procedures? Why 5 or 6 different valuation programs for used car prices or acv's. If there were true time studies in estimating programs there would not be the differences. Each one thinks they have a better program they can market to insurers. CCC and Autosource are marketed to insurers exclusively? All other programs are available to anyone and are the same whether they are sold to insurers, dealers, or the consumer unlike estimating platforms with special tabs and programing.
Why do insurers change their estimating programs like some mothers change baby's diapers. Follow the money trail! It's predicated on what have you got to offer me that will save my shareholders money and pay out the least amount on claims rather than "let's use the most accurate program available". Truth is in estimating, there is no accurate platform in my opinion and experience.
Why not take an average of all available programs available to the public or consumer and use those instead of ones marketed exclusively to insurers on the presumption that their program is more profitable to them instead of being one sold as being most accurate.
Some programs are crap fed into them, crap extracted from them, nothing beats putting the effort into doing your own investigation of comps in a given market and verifying the accuracy of the information used.
Posted: Thu Aug 27, 2009 10:55 pm Post Subject:
Follow the money trail! It's predicated on what have you got to offer me that will save my shareholders money and pay out the least amount on claims rather than "let's use the most accurate program available".
Is the data contained in a CCC or AutoSource report any less accurate then any "book" value? Can't answer that? Why not? Is it because no one outside the "book" value companies release their database information? Unlike CCC or AutoSource who list their datebase right on the report. So when CCC and AutoSource print up all their information and base their values on this information do you say it's less accurate then phantom data?Why not take an average of all available programs available to the public or consumer and use those instead of ones marketed exclusively to insurers on the presumption that their program is more profitable to them instead of being one sold as being most accurate.
Some states require this and it's done. You say take all the book values and use an average? In that case people are simply going to come back and use the higher book value as an argument that there vehicle is worth more then the average of many book values.Lastly, when is the last time someone paid the full "book" value on a vehicle? Almost no one does. That is just a fact.
Posted: Fri Aug 28, 2009 12:35 am Post Subject:
Just wondering outloud if Nada has had any class action lawsuits against it in the last 20 years as CCC has over it's evaluation techniques and proprietary information.
Posted: Mon Dec 07, 2009 06:01 pm Post Subject:
drive your used cars into the ground,teach the auto industry a lesson....then go buy a cheap used auto againa nd keep doing it until they lower thier prices on new vehicles,and stop dropping its value way to fast after you purchased it,its a scam! :twisted: & :evil: they are... :wink:
Posted: Fri Dec 11, 2009 08:49 pm Post Subject:
Had a 2008 Taurus X totaled in July. Autosource and NADA both said it was worth 19k. NADA now says the same vehicle is worth 22k. Every dealer within 3 states of where I lived had an average selling price of 22k at the time of the accident (I did the search and even asked a dealership what they could sell me at replacement cost - 23.5k). I even had one bought out from under me by another car dealer at 20k (it had 3X the miles of the one totalled). Used vehicles don't magically appreciate 16% in 4 months like NADA claims. Due to the laws in my state I was forced to accept the total based on valuations from 2 approved guide sources. NADA is no better than Autosource and I'd be happy to join a class-action against either of them. Due to their negligence I'm out 3,000.
Posted: Sat Dec 12, 2009 12:47 am Post Subject:
Are you sure they only based it on that data alone? Or is that the only info they described two you. Several companies I have worked for require mass documentation for determaining an ACV. Documenations include dealer statements, online sales from private/public sellers etc.. To the extreme, like Geico for instance. IMO, Geico covers a lot of bases for an ACV, more so than other carriers that I have dealt with. Most of these companies require much more than what NADA provides, which as everyone seems to agree is not very accurate.
Add your comment