Insurance write offs

**Skinny_Birdman** · 16th May 2008, 19:10

A mate of mine low-sided his CBR1000F at about 120km/h (he was unhurt, I might add), and as it went down the road it dug in and flipped. Broken clip ons, footpegs, all side fairings and w/s f***ed and thermostat casting poked etc ad nauseum. And looking at the thing the sub frame appeared to be bent to shite. Written off, of course.

So imagine my surprise when at the Levels round of the NZ champs this year the same CBR1000F (quite distinctive - definitely the same one) was parked up on the embankment. A definite rat bike, the owner paid $800 for the wreck, and just fixed the essentials, ie the exhausts, thermo casting and put new indicators, pegs and bars on. It didn't look pretty, but he seemed to be getting his money's worth out of it. I wouldn't go near anything that bent except for parts!

**fridayflash** · 16th May 2008, 19:43

id say yes for sure,obviously depending on condition of structure etc etc

**Ixion** · 16th May 2008, 19:58

Helped put myself through Uni doing that. Probably do it again when I retire, make a bit on the side. 'Fetch the welder, boyo'

**sinfull** · 16th May 2008, 20:06

I did it ! Wasn't till i got it home and had it checked out that i found out someone had taken the front end apart and had mixed up all the bolts in reassembly ! Axle bolts were only in by a couple of threads RRRRR not the sort of thing ya wanna find out at 240 ks Kharma is my friend lol

http://www.kiwibiker.co.nz/forums/sh...ht=flying+auks

**sinfull** · 16th May 2008, 20:15

But i have saved a good 6 grand in doing it this way ! Only reason it was written off is price of parts speedo (works fine) just a crack in the lens, bars bent (straight now) bar ends and grips, side cover scraped (who cares) tanks scratched (ditto) And a few other cosmettics that i dont give a shit about ! Trouble is having only 3 thou ks on the clock the insurers have to replace everything, tank etc back to new cond. price of parts made it not worth it !
$900 to revin it and its in a bike show morra lol !~

**orangeback** · 17th May 2008, 10:41

sure would , better than buying a race bike thats been crashed a dozen times or more

**crash harry** · 17th May 2008, 17:53

Yes, but only if you know what you're doing.

If you have to pay someone to do it back up again, it's unlikely to be cost effective

**crazybigal** · 17th May 2008, 18:23

you need to know all the rules about this before you make coments like this.
Its not a simple job of fixing it up and sticking it back on the road like it used to be.
If a bike is writen off dammaged and dereged with land transport, you need to go through a lengthy process.
The bike will have to get a low volume cert before you can re vin it.
The frame has to be measured and inspected along with forks and wheels.
I have seen frames more out of line new than after they were fixed!!
The spec that the frame and forks have to measure upto is very tight.
Any work that is done is then signed off and then a cert is issued.
Then its off to get a VIN and inspected by the testing station and given new plates.
In short you cant get away with a dogy repair on a dereg writen off bike.
i would be more worried about buying a bike that had had a crash but was not writen off and de reged and then fixed by a backyarder who has no idea.
I have repaired a few bikes and been through all the hoops one has to jump through to do this and would trust all of them.

If a bike is sold by an insurance company and has been checked and not dereged then it is deemed to not have structural damage.

Originally Posted by Kittyhawk

Question: Would you buy an insurance write-off bike, fix it up and ride it, given the state you bought it in?

I see them on trade me, and wonder is it a safe thing to be doing especially with more powerful bikes. I can understand if a biker requires parts to fix their own bike etc, but to buy a whole bike?

Wouldnt this cause more mechanicial failures and increase chances of riders coming off?

I see it like helmets, one decent hit, time for replacement not for repair.

**FROSTY:Me** · 17th May 2008, 18:31

Originally Posted by crazybigal

If a bike is sold by an insurance company and has been checked and not dereged then it is deemed to not have structural damage.

.
Sorry to disagree here dude but safety has little to do with why a bike is written off. Its a question of economics plain n simple
How much to fix Vs insured value is the deciding factor.
Its more a case of Once a frame is damaged then there is usually $$$$$$$ of other damage as well

**Matt_TG** · 17th May 2008, 18:36

Frosty's right. It's a write off if it costs more than its worth to fix, using new parts & full labour costs. It's not written off due to 'x' amount of structural damage.

Any damaged bike is repairable, structural or cosmetic, it depends on what skills and money you have. If you can get cheaper parts and do the work yourself you can bag a bargain.

We are required by law to de-register all written off bikes, FYI.

**crazybigal** · 17th May 2008, 18:44

well if you talk to any insurance company they will tell you they write them off de reged for safty reasons and so there is no come back on them.
as i said in my post i would rather trust a bike that had been dereged not just sold off still reged.
People like yourself get the words "Writen off" confused.
Writen off is a total loss in economic terms for the insurance company.
A stolen bike can be writen off.
People use the term writen off meaning it must have been damaged and be unsafe.
you could have a new bike writen off becaues someone stole all the plastics off it, it desnt mean the bike is now unsafe to ride.

Originally Posted by FROSTY

.
Sorry to disagree here dude but safety has little to do with why a bike is written off. Its a question of economics plain n simple
How much to fix Vs insured value is the deciding factor.
Its more a case of Once a frame is damaged then there is usually $$$$$$$ of other damage as well

**crazybigal** · 17th May 2008, 18:49

you missunderstood what i was saying
the topic was about buying bikes that had been wrten off.
yes any damage is repairable, but if its dereged it has to be low volume certed not just re vined.
And you say all bikes are ment to be de reged by law, there is no such law its a rule made by the insurance industry to cover their own arses and so they should.
so you say that but why is star insurance selling some bike on trademe that are writen off with plates!!!
one i recall was a lightly damages rsv1000 that was sold still reged.
now correct me if im wrong but was that bike not writen off!!!!

you need to take what i said in context

Originally Posted by Matt_TG

Frosty's right. It's a write off if it costs more than its worth to fix, using new parts & full labour costs. It's not written off due to 'x' amount of structural damage.

Any damaged bike is repairable, structural or cosmetic, it depends on what skills and money you have. If you can get cheaper parts and do the work yourself you can bag a bargain.

We are required by law to de-register all written off bikes, FYI.

**Matt_TG** · 17th May 2008, 19:03

Ummm, I posted before you

**crazybigal** · 17th May 2008, 19:06

now your just confusing yourself

Originally Posted by Matt_TG

Ummm, I posted before you

**325rocket** · 17th May 2008, 19:08

Originally Posted by sinfull

I did it ! Wasn't till i got it home and had it checked out that i found out someone had taken the front end apart and had mixed up all the bolts in reassembly ! Axle bolts were only in by a couple of threads RRRRR not the sort of thing ya wanna find out at 240 ks

shit that was lucky.
i guess if its only superficial damage its not a problem at all.

223