Market value?

[discotex]

that's true, the closest available bike same age and slightly less milage is $9899 + ORC, no other options exist to purchase today nor on the day of the accident (March 24th).

Question is will the disputes tribunal rule on the value of an actual bike you can actually buy, versus the insurance companies mythical bike that if a mythical person was pressured to sell you might be able to get for only 9k

I've already told you the answer to that question. I've also told you who can confirm it for you (Citizens Advice).

You just don't want to hear it because it doesn't suit you (which is where I infer the wah wah from).

So, what are you waiting for. Tell the insurance company you don't accept their offer then file against the other driver and the insurer with Disputes Tribunal.

Please tell us all how it goes.

[discotex]

If you had a son/friend, and you bought the bike and ran it in while they were saving up for it, then he bought it off you knowing everything about the bike, where is the fair meeting point that accounts for use/wear and tear/etc. That's probably the clearest way to think about fair market value.

Ahh no.. That would totally fail the "arms length" requirement in your Wikipedia definition of market value because they are related parties.

EDIT: A better version would be where the son changed his mind so the father put it on the market after 1400km and 4 months use. The price he'd get from a random stranger is the fair value. That would be around $9k..

[FJRider]

Nope that only applied for the period from March 17th to March 24th when I dropped it down from full to 3rd party. I didn't save anything believe me.

You didn't renew it to save the cost of full insurance (your own words in this thread). Your intention WAS to save money ... it just didn't quite work out that way ...

If you had a son/friend, and you bought the bike and ran it in while they were saving up for it, then he bought it off you knowing everything about the bike,

That still makes it a used second hand bike .... sorry ...

where is the fair meeting point that accounts for use/wear and tear/etc. That's probably the clearest way to think about fair market value.

Your description of how "Market Value" is found ... has changed again ...

The figure between what YOU want and what people want (and are willing) to pay will most always differ. The fair meeting point is when they front up with the cash offer .... and you accept.

There have been plenty of bikes on Trade Me for some time ... at "market value" (using your logic) that haven't sold.

And I bet you don't know how your bike was ridden during "test rides" before you bought it ...

[skippa1]

Shit you just don't get it do you. It is totally irrelevant what is on the market. It means nothing. Likewise, what is spent on fuel and services does not add value. You crashed a second hand bike, you stupidly chose to drop full cover for 3rd party, you now want somebody to reimburse you not only for the loss, but you want them to upgrade you to what you had 12 months before the accident??!!?? Wake up, the dream is over

[ldcroberts]

Your description of how "Market Value" is found ... has changed again ...

The figure between what YOU want and what people want (and are willing) to pay will most always differ. The fair meeting point is when they front up with the cash offer .... and you accept.

There have been plenty of bikes on Trade Me for some time ... at "market value" (using your logic) that haven't sold.

And I bet you don't know how your bike was ridden during "test rides" before you bought it ...

Plenty of them have sold for that too, that's why they keep listing them. Selling like proverbial hotcakes is what one dealer told me.

True there was 4km on it by the time I got it (which occurred after I forked out the money of course - presumably to test for WOF etc)

In this situation to actually buy a replacement, I have to meet the market - i.e. come up to sellers expectations - and those are higher than what the insurance guys reckon they should be - but they are saying they are using the "market" but clearly they are using an artificial hypothesised market and not the actual market, because to buy an equivalent bike on the current actual market would take more money no matter how much anyone looks around.

There's all this talk of the phantom 2nd hand bike that should be for sale at 9k, but nobody is actually offering it, and everyone who has a brand new one wants 9899 and existing owners aren't talking - certainly nobodies jumped on this thread saying hey i've got a near new ninja I'll sell you for 9k have they.

[discotex]

Well perhaps you should tell the insurance company you are happy to wait as long as it takes until a 4 month old 1400km bike comes on the market lol

[Oscar]

Shit you just don't get it do you. It is totally irrelevant what is on the market. It means nothing. Likewise, what is spent on fuel and services does not add value. You crashed a second hand bike, you stupidly chose to drop full cover for 3rd party, you now want somebody to reimburse you not only for the loss, but you want them to upgrade you to what you had 12 months before the accident??!!?? Wake up, the dream is over

I'm thinking that if he was fully insured, he'd be having the same argument with the insurer.

[ldcroberts]

Shit you just don't get it do you. It is totally irrelevant what is on the market. It means nothing. Likewise, what is spent on fuel and services does not add value. You crashed a second hand bike, you stupidly chose to drop full cover for 3rd party, you now want somebody to reimburse you not only for the loss, but you want them to upgrade you to what you had 12 months before the accident??!!?? Wake up, the dream is over

Dude take my advice, walk into a pub, knock someones beer out of their hand onto the floor, tell them your theory about how it was second hand beer and not worth anything and they should have insurance, and take the lesson and learn from how they then educate you on how things work in the real world.

[ldcroberts]

I'm thinking that if he was fully insured, he'd be having the same argument with the insurer.

insurance companies give you a brand new bike if it's less than 12 months old, they all do it these days.

I think you are implying that I'm trying to claim for something more than I'm fairly entitled to, however that is not the case.

[skippa1]

Dude take my advice, walk into a pub, knock someones beer out of their hand onto the floor, tell them your theory about how it was second hand beer and not worth anything and they should have insurance, and take the lesson and learn from how they then educate you on how things work in the real world.

Seriously? You really really think that is some sort of analogy that fits with this situation? You really need to grow up.
I am genuinely interested in how this pans out.....

[skippa1]

insurance companies give you a brand new bike if it's less than 12 months old, they all do it these days.

I think you are implying that I'm trying to claim for something more than I'm fairly entitled to, however that is not the case.

But you're not insured

[Jantar]

.....Tell the insurance company you don't accept their offer then file against the other driver and the insurer with Disputes Tribunal.
......

That is almost exactly what I would do in similar circumstances. However I would only file against the other driver. his insurer didn't cause the loss and are not party to the claim. The other driver has the contract with the insurance company.

[GrayWolf]

you shouldn't need insurance to cover damage somebody else causes.

obviously to almost anyone they would rather be the first owner on a bike than have a hand-me-down-driven-who-knows-how, and that's what I was prior to the accident, and now they are trying to say I should be happy to go and buy a 2nd hand bike same km's as mine and "believe" it to be perfectly fair and exactly the same - which to top off the insult such a bike doesn't exist and nobody really knows what it would be worth they can only guess.

I had a bike written off many years ago in a 'not at fault' situation... the other driver was prosecuted for 'driving without due care causing an accident'. I was young and dumb with 3rd party Fire/theft on a 250.
The first 'trick' they used was a low ball figure, then claimed I was 15% at 'fault' after their investigation, so therefore only entitled to a sum reduced by 15%...
I ended up using a solicitor and after some wrangling they covered the cost of the bike and gear. It took MONTHS.
I realise this was in the UK, but insurance companies are pretty much the same worldwide.

Lesson to learn, 3rd party insurance is better than none, BUT your insurance will not 'fight for you', you are on your own, jack.

If you want to be really covered, Full comp' is the ONLY way, then your company talks to their company and settle it, sometimes on a knock for knock basis, sometimes the offender's pays in full.

As for relying on others insurance? What if he had been a drunk driver? Or no WOF/Rego?.... Those are legal policy 'get outs' in many cases, to render the offender uninsured. Then mate, it's you, him, and the court system. Again Full Comp? You are covered and if they feel like it? They will be the ones taking the oik to court for compensation, and they HAVE the funds, lawyers etc to be successful.

[ldcroberts]

Seriously? You really really think that is some sort of analogy that fits with this situation? You really need to grow up.
I am genuinely interested in how this pans out.....

There are a lot of parallels between the two situations.

I think the biggest issue, which I'm sure everyone here can actually relate to, is people are being brainwashed into thinking that vehicles lose a lot of value immediately.

How many people here think "oh yeah I'd be willing to sell this 10k bike for 9k after 4 months if it was mine" ? nobody

yet we are all supposed to swallow that this is what would happen in a fair market

sure people think "I'd only pay $9k for a 4 month old vs 10k for new".

So nobody is selling (unless they are forced to - and then accept they take a loss blaming it on whatever reason forced them to sell).

Then in an accident you are effectively forced to sell, but they are supposed to make it based on a fair sale that you willingly did, yet nobody has the education or gumption to actually work it out that way, instead they look at the last time someone was forced to sell one, look at what they got from it, and go with that.

[discotex]

Dealers sell low km, low age cars and bikes *all* the time. They are called demo models. They regularly sell for 5-10% less than RRP.. That is fact, not brainwashing.

Try again young grasshopper.