Insurance

My rates seemed to be climbing really fast. I currently have Hagerty. Any recommendations on others to consider?

JC Taylor-I was paying something like $60/yr. But my car was not that great. The ins was actually better than what I had on my modern cars

Have they increased the rates recently? My renewal with Hagerty last May was about the same as last year...

Not sure if they have raise their rates, but my cars have a higher agreed to value. Because of the insurance cost reaching a significant annual payment, I was wondering if there was a less expensive option out there. I am happy with the Hagerty service but just wanted to compare.

Can't they be Insured for Less than the actual Replacement value, at a lower premium cost???

(only partial coverage, but it should cost a lot less)

I can only afford Liability, on Some of my cars, so I don't know much about that.

I have Hagerty and checked on this a few months ago -- I queried 1 or 2 other sites, and their rates were comparable or higher. So I stuck with Hagerty.

I should also add that Hagerty was just terrific when I had a problem with one of my cars this summer: I couldn't have had a better experience with them, so I'm a loyal customer now.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Speedster</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Can't they be Insured for Less than the actual Replacement value, at a lower premium cost???

(only partial coverage, but it should cost a lot less)

I can only afford Liability, on Some of my cars, so I don't know much about that. </div></div>

I wouldn't insure it for less than they are worth. That is what keeps me sane driving them knowing that if something happens I'm covered. I just got back from a 3 hour ride in downtown Portland, OR in the 12 Cadillac. It was a beautiful day to be out in an open car. I probably covered 75 miles.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: 1935Packard</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I have Hagerty and checked on this a few months ago -- I queried 1 or 2 other sites, and their rates were comparable or higher. So I stuck with Hagerty.

I should also add that Hagerty was just terrific when I had a problem with one of my cars this summer: I couldn't have had a better experience with them, so I'm a loyal customer now.

</div></div>

Yep, I have no trouble with their service...and that's good info that their rates are at least comparable.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: tbirdman</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Speedster</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Can't they be Insured for Less than the actual Replacement value, at a lower premium cost???

(only partial coverage, but it should cost a lot less)

I can only afford Liability, on Some of my cars, so I don't know much about that. </div></div>

I wouldn't insure it for less than they are worth. That is what keeps me sane driving them knowing that if something happens I'm covered. I just got back from a 3 hour ride in downtown Portland, OR in the 12 Cadillac. It was a beautiful day to be out in an open car. I probably covered 75 miles. </div></div>

Ken

You are smart for doing so. If you have a total loss, the insurance company pays you the low value, plus they end up owning the car.

Let's say a car is worth $500,000 and you insure it for $250,000. Let's also say that the car has been involved in "mishap", but is still "fixable." Unfortunately, it has been determined that the repair will cost $175,000. Since you have the car insured for $250,000 and the cost to fix is more than 2/3rds the stated value, the insurance company is obviously going to total the car, give you the $250,000, and keep the car.

Are you saying our beloved Insurance Companies would actually 'Take advantage and Cheat their customers' ?

For Shame! For Shame!

How's that so? If you under insure your car, why is that the insurance company's fault. There's no cheating here in my book.

Are you being Too Serious, Again?

For Shame! For Shame!

It's a pain, but we should really all read the policy fine print and ask questions about what would be the result under various scenarios. I insure both my antiques (1934 Eight and 1956 Caribbean convertible) with J.C. Taylor, have so for decades, and insure them for what I estimate it would cost me to replace them with cars of equal condition.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: West Peterson</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: tbirdman</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Speedster</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Can't they be Insured for Less than the actual Replacement value, at a lower premium cost???

(only partial coverage, but it should cost a lot less)

I can only afford Liability, on Some of my cars, so I don't know much about that. </div></div>

I wouldn't insure it for less than they are worth. That is what keeps me sane driving them knowing that if something happens I'm covered. I just got back from a 3 hour ride in downtown Portland, OR in the 12 Cadillac. It was a beautiful day to be out in an open car. I probably covered 75 miles. </div></div>

Ken

You are smart for doing so. If you have a total loss, the insurance company pays you the low value, plus they end up owning the car.

Let's say a car is worth $500,000 and you insure it for $250,000. Let's also say that the car has been involved in "mishap", but is still "fixable." Unfortunately, it has been determined that the repair will cost $175,000. Since you have the car insured for $250,000 and the cost to fix is more than 2/3rds the stated value, the insurance company is obviously going to total the car, give you the $250,000, and keep the car. </div></div>

This past May I actualy had raised the 32 Packard agreed value to what I think the car should bring. I had tried an year earlier when I had completed the interior restoration but they said I needed an appraisal for them to do that agreed value. I felt I was under insured by about 20% but procrastinated on getting an appraisal (not smart). In May when I called to insured the 12 Cadillac that I had just bought, I asked them about raising the agreed value on the Packard an additional 20%. They did it without asking for an appraisal this time. Go figure.

One of the reasons that I went with Hagerty years ago is that they didn't force me to get appraisals on all my cars - that can get expensive in itself. My premiums haven't gone up much in ten years and I have had great service whenever I had a reason to call them. If you can afford it, you are wise to insure to replacement value. A friend of mine lost a car this spring in a fire and had it insured with one of the largest insurance companies (not a vintage specialty company) and had a long, tough time making a settlement with them. It made me think about the values that I had my cars insured for. I have a friend in Oregon and he got a quote that was alot higher than what I pay, so I wonder if it is your rating there in Oregon - are you a no fault state?

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Dave Mitchell</div><div class="ubbcode-body">One of the reasons that I went with Hagerty years ago is that they didn't force me to get appraisals on all my cars - that can get expensive in itself. My premiums haven't gone up much in ten years and I have had great service whenever I had a reason to call them. If you can afford it, you are wise to insure to replacement value. A friend of mine lost a car this spring in a fire and had it insured with one of the largest insurance companies (not a vintage specialty company) and had a long, tough time making a settlement with them. It made me think about the values that I had my cars insured for. I have a friend in Oregon and he got a quote that was alot higher than what I pay, so I wonder if it is your rating there in Oregon - are you a no fault state? </div></div>

Oregon is not "no fault" but where you live should make a difference. I wonder if my zip code which is Portland, but I really live in a suburb called Tigard makes a difference.

I've only heard one complaint against Hagerty and that is amazing for an insurance company

My friend who got the high quote lives in Tigard too - he has a 36 Packard coupe - I should get you guys together. I have an idea that location may have something to do with your rates. packard12s@hotmail.com

Where does it say in the fine print about the "two thirds of the value" rule you just stated? You could sue the insurance company over this & I think they'd lose. Any open Packard from the late 1920's early 1930's is going to be fixed no matter how bad it's wrecked. There is no such thing as a "totaled" open Packard Twelve and that arguement would be won in court. I think the only people who have their old cars covered for full value are either 1. rich, or 2. only own 1 or 2 antique cars so they can afford it. If you own 4, 5, 6 plus cars, who on earth can afford to insure them all for full value? I called Hagarty & asked them what it would cost to insure a non running car parked in a secure garage for just fire & theft that was valued at $30,000 & they said around $300/yr. Multiply that by several cars and many years & most people would go broke. Remember the term "insurance poor?" I would think most, not all of course, accidents involving old cars are the other drivers fault. Assuming, hopefully, the other driver has insurace, you can sue their insurace compnay in the event of an accident too.

The insurance company has the prerogative to give you the stated value versus paying to have it fixed. If a $200,000 car in a mishap costs $200,000 to fix, the insurance company will give you the $200,000 and take the car. Two-thirds is generally the figure they use to determine whether its totaled or not. So, yes, any car can be considered "totaled" if you do not have it insured for its proper value. That does not mean it's not restorable.

If the mishap is another's fault, then your insurance company doesn't pay... unless that person doesn't have insurance, or enough insurance (which is probably more common than you think).

OK, a couple things though. In your example, instead of taking the $200,000 & giving them the car, you can negotiate & have them give you, say, $150,000 & you keep the car. I think I've heard of this happening. I don't think most insurance companies want to own wrecked cars. If it's a replaceable car, sure, take the money, but if it's a custom from the classic era that can't be replaced I think something can be worked out. Before submitting a claim, I would find out what their threashold is for wanting the car versus not wanting it. Remember, you have the car in your possession & hold the title. They're going to have a hard time prying that car from you if you want to keep it. That Duesenberg that got wrecked in Michigan a few years ago is being fixed - and if you saw the pictures of it after the accident it could be considered "totaled." I'm sure you read the article in the CCCA Bulletin a couple months ago addressing this same issue. It too failed to mention the negotiation process involved in a large claim like your example. If a guy has a car totaled but he wants to fix it, I'm sure most insurance companies will negotiate with you. I don't know why no one ever talks about that. And just like that CCCA article said, there are a lot of guys who bought cars back in the 1960's & 1970's for a few thousand dollars that are now worth a few hundred thoudand dollars. Many of these people are just average guys who can't afford a $4000 a year insurance policy. Maybe I'll call Hagerty sometime in my free time & argue this out with them & see what they say.

On a lighter side, with all this "socialist" talk about Obama redistributing wealth if he gets elected, maybe we should all lobby him for government subsidized antique car insurance! After all, these are national treasures, right?

Yes. You are correct. You can certainly negotiate. All I am saying is that the insurance company has the right to keep your car<span style="text-decoration: underline"> <span style="font-weight: bold">if they pay you the stated value</span></span>. That does not mean they will, but they can if they want by law. That does not mean you have to accept the payment of the stated value, either.

I may have been a little low in my "two-thirds". That is not a set figure and is probably figured on a case-by-case format. Some may go as high as 90 percent to fix as opposed to "total."

If you have a $1 million car, and you insure it for $100,000, and there is a devastating loss, the insurance company may give you the stated value and let you keep the car. I think this would fall under the category of "keeping in good graces with the collector car community."

I would think that if you asked your insurance company, they are only going to tell you what the law is, and that is they will keep your car. The negotiations can only take place once there is a claim. They will not tell you otherwise, because they want you to insure it properly.

I would think a insurance company if there is an agreed value policy, is only obligated to pay the agreed value and get the car in return. It's the owners fault for agreeing to lower agreed value realizing he is paying lower premiums reflective of the lower agreed value.

Yes. I think that's what they'd tell you if you called and asked questions. If you want to be sure you're covered, don't bet on negotiating afterward. Just because you think you can repair your car for the stated amount, that doesn't guarantee that you'll own the car after the claim.

One thing they might tell you up front, though, is the question pertaining to the percentage they use to determine "totaled," given that the car is insured for its proper amount. If I had a rare car, I would want it fixed as opposed to them giving me the money for stated value.

Keep in mind that since the giant insurance companies - like AIG for instance - have a lot of power in Washington and in state capitals, most of the laws don't favor the little guy in the end, the insurance contract that you have with them is written by them and favors them, not you. They are in business to make money, like any other company. Even with the investment side of AIG losing billions, they are still making billions on insurance. The formula for totalling a car, new or old, will be how much the value is (agreed or not) vs how much it costs to fix it + the salvage value. If they don't have a contracted person to buy the salvage, they will get bids on it. It all comes down to how much they have to spend, and they will pay out the least possible. Sure you can negotiate with them, but they have teams of people who negotiate every day and they can usually wait you out, again, they won't go broke, but you have suffered the loss and are more anxious to settle, and the burden of proof is on you. As far as them taking your car, read your policy. They pay for it, they own it. Also if you do keep it, the company and the law may require that it has a salvage title, which may be permanent - most laws are written with new cars in mind, not collector cars. There are companies like Hagerty and Grundy and others who support the events we go to - we can go there and meet representatives or even owners of these agencies and you have a pretty good idea that they will be a lot more interested in being fair when they settle claims. Other mainstream companies may not feel that way. I think Ken and West's point is that if you can afford it, you are a lot better off to insure to a reasonable value and you will have less problems. If you can't afford it, then do the best you can, lots of people are "self insured". In my state, if you have plates on your car, even if aren't driving it, you have to have insurance, and you may get a random letter in the mail asking for proof, if you don't provide it quickly, they will take your driver's license away and fine you. Also every major show you take a car to wants to have your insurance info. No insurance is cheap, but we are lucky that they don't charge us the same rates as modern cars.

let me be the first to say many insurance companies cheat on the application of actuarial statistics (your rate should not go up if you have a claim, the probability is already covered) BUT why should one expect to get $100,000 worth of coverage for a $50,000 policy? If you want a two hour job done, do you pay someone one hour's labor and expect him to finish the job for you? Be as fair as a consumer as you want the provider to be with you - nobody forced you to sign the contract.

Brian, You are right, that is all we can and should ask.

BUT it sounds like to me if you tell them it will cost you around 2/3 of what the agreed policy value is to fix your car, that's the amount of check you'll get. Just don't tell them it could cost the full amount of your agreed value policy to fix the car. You can tell the insurance company you'll be doing some of the work on the car yourself for free, or already have some of the parts to fix it. I don't think anything I stated is deceptive or illegal. If I have $100,000 agreed value coverage and have a massive wreck and think I can fix it myself for $60,000 that's my right.

Again, I completely understand if you have only 1 or 2 cars in really nice shape having full coverage on them makes sense, but when you have 8 or 9 cars ranging from good driving shape to basket case & everything in between, and you're an average income person, full coverage on everything is just out of the question. I think it's better insurance to invest in extra parts for the cars you have. For example, for one of the cars I own, I have a complete extra set of fenders, head & tail lights, radiator shell & radiator, dash, most engine accessories, ect, ect. If I had a major accident with it, I'd have a majority of the parts to fix it anyway. All I'd have to pay for is labor for what I can't do myself. Yes I'd be out what I paid for the parts, but if that was 30 years ago it was pennies on the dollar for what they're worth now anyway. If you never have an accident, you can sell the extra parts & get you're money plus a lot because parts go up in value. Let's say you wipe out a whole front end on a 1940's or 1950's Cadillac convertible. I wouldn't go around trying to buy each individual piece from a parts dealer, that could cost a fortune. I'd just look on e bay & buy a whole sedan parts car from out west for $1000 or $1500 & just switch everything. Of course you'd need to rechrome & repaint things, but as you can see there are creative ways of getting ahead in some cases.

I'd like to see an antique car insurance policy that has a cash value like whole life insurance. A percentage of the money you pay goes into an investment account and if you never use it, you can get some of it back.

One question, what happens if you loan your car to a museum? Do museums generally have coverage to cover your car? If you have a lot of cars, that would be a good way to ensure safe, insured, storage for them.

Do what you have to do is what I always say.

in major repairs it pays to talk to the insurance company - A friend had a Lotus Europa with frame damage. The estimated repair to "filet" the Lotus and put in a new backbone would have totalled the car. He offered to do the repair if they covered the parts and materials - he got to keep the car and the insurance company paid a lower claim. Now to the obvious question, no, I don't know which insurance co this was.

I talked to Hagerty I could get a 10% reduction by having deductables. The minimal deductables would be 2.5K for the Packard and 1K for the Cad. Not sure if that wold be worth it. However the person I talked to did come back with a 12% discount which she said was a pre-war discount. I asked if the Cad could get 24% as it was pre-war-war. I probably re-up with them though it's painful as everything is due at once.

<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: tbirdman</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> I asked if the Cad could get 24% as it was pre-war-war. </div></div>

LOL

Hey, sounds logical to me!

Hagerty has a 5% reduction for CCCA members too - did you ask about that? Mine isn't due until April, so I'll ask then.

Yes, I have that reduction. Thiugh when you ask for it, they don't apply it until you renew. Now if I can find a few more deductions because I'm a member of AAA or AARP or NRA

Ken

I did receive a quote from Heacock Classic Insurance and it was about 10% less. However I know what I'm getting with Hagertys and 10% doesn't big enough to warrant a switch...not sure how much of a difference would warrant a switch though.

The only major difference is we put a limit of 1K on the Cad and 3K on the Packard for miles.

Bear in mind that if you ever have a claim the adjuster who show's up to evaluate the damage will likely have little if any experience with old cars. Virtually all insurance companies (Hagerty included) farm out their adjustment work to agencies near where your car resides. We have been involved in several repairs/restorations involving damaged antiques and in every case the adjuster had virtually no experience with collector vehicles. We are in fact involved in just such a claim now. Usually an amicable settlement is reached but do not for an instant think that insuring your car thru a specialty agent insures any sort of special treatment if there is a claim.

I'm in Canada and pay a percentage of the car's value. I just got appraised at 20K, so I pay $200 a year now.

- Mark