Betterment - ?

[simongt]

I'm in the process of working through the expenses / compensation claim for my RTA in April. Obviously I'm claiming for a replacement cycle as mine was written off. The steed in question was a GT Bravado with Reynolds 631 frame. Said bike is long out of production. The GT cost me nearly £950 in 1999 which to me was a LOT of money. The reason for this was that I knew that a Reynolds 631 frame would last a very long time. It had served me well for nineteen years up to the RTA and I'm confident it would have otherwise carried on for a good many years.
The nearest equivalent with a Reynolds 631 frame is the Jamis Aurora Elite @ £1,400. However, according to my claims adviser ( Cycle UK ), I can only claim the cost of the original cycle, £950. To claim more is known as betterment, which seems a trifle unjust considering the current cost of buying an equivalent quality / spec cycle.
Do I have a point - ?

 

[MichaelW2]

I used to work in cycle insurance claims and you have a good case for arguing that a frame with equivalent grade branded steel tubing is like-for-like not betterment. How does the groupset grade and finishing kit compare ? We would never replace a high end bike simply on price but match on frame and kit . What are they offering/what is the closest you can get for the 1999 retail price?
Are Cycle UK claims handlers offering a cash settlement or replacement bike? You usually do better with a replacement supplied by the insurance co.
Don't forget to claim for damaged kit (helmet/gloves/clothing and footwear) and accessories (pedals, lights, computer).

 

[Jody]

If you can get £950 for a 19 year old bike then snatch their hand off.

 

[I like Skol]

Insurance adjusters are tricky fekkers.

I think you should argue that 20 yrs of inflation make it a very comparable price?

Just for an extreme example with totally made up numbers, say you had bought that bike in the 1920s for £1. Ignoring the antique value but just looking to replace with something of similar quality, would they still argue that you can have your pound back, or should you be entitled to a settlement of £1k+ for the equivalent bike? This makes a mockery of their argument as you are not being 'bettered'.

 

[bpsmith]

My claim is going through presently. It’s a 2016 bike, so can’t compare properly, but the engineer has put the cost together on current pricing to replace but adding 10% per year depreciation. I assume that there is a maximum depreciation amount that would come in for a bike of the age of yours.

 

[classic33]

If it's like for like, it's hardly betterment. Things have increased in price over the years.

As said above, how do the two match up when compared to one another.

 

[I like Skol]

There is a discrepancy between accident solicitors claiming against third party insurance and a claim on your own house or bike insurance.

I think the accident solicitors can/will only look at market value so use the depreciated figure (I know they did in my case recently) where as many insurance policies will pay out as new or like for like values as an incentive to make their product more attractive.

I was fortunate in that the valuing engineer used the depreciated full list price for my bike, rather than the discounted price I paid for what was an end of season bike at the time of purchase. As there was only just under two years depreciation to factor in I came away with a sum not far from what I paid and managed to find a similarly discounted equivalent bike as a replacement so in the end it all worked out fairly and I am on a near identical bike to the damaged one with hardly any financial penalty.

Is/was your bike insured by you? It might be worth talking to your own insurance to see if they will make up the shortfall if the loss is also covered by them. They will be happy not to be getting the full hit for £1.4k if they only have to cover the deficit of £400-500

 

[vickster]

There is a discrepancy between accident solicitors claiming against third party insurance and a claim on your own house or bike insurance.

I think the accident solicitors can/will only look at market value so use the depreciated figure (I know they did in my case recently) where as many insurance policies will pay out as new or like for like values as an incentive to make their product more attractive.

I was fortunate in that the valuing engineer used the depreciated full list price for my bike, rather than the discounted price I paid for what was an end of season bike at the time of purchase. As there was only just under two years depreciation to factor in I came away with a sum not far from what I paid and managed to find a similarly discounted equivalent bike as a replacement so in the end it all worked out fairly and I am on a near identical bike to the damaged one with hardly any financial penalty.

Is/was your bike insured by you? It might be worth talking to your own insurance to see if they will make up the shortfall if the loss is also covered by them. They will be happy not to be getting the full hit for £1.4k if they only have to cover the deficit of £400-500

Presumably the latter

I'm only getting betterment value for my ruined favourite and no longer made tights removed at the hospital and a month old helmet. I bought a new helmet out of my own pocket 4.5 years ago, payout hopefully imminent

The bike was undamaged unlike me

 

[Jody]

Am I missing something here. Why doesn't depreciation occur like cars?

 

[I like Skol]

Am I missing something here. Why doesn't depreciation occur like cars?

It does, as I said above. The fact that some house insurance and private bicycle policies will offer new-for-old to sweeten their products and tempt more customers is irrelevant in an accident claim against a third party.

 

[vickster]

Am I missing something here. Why doesn't depreciation occur like cars?

It does which is why betterment is the case in a cycling claim against a third party. Like for like seems more usually for insurance policies where you are covering against theft or accidental damage when there's no 3rd party being claimed from

Cross posted with @I like Skol

 

[Vapin' Joe]

Am I missing something here. Why doesn't depreciation occur like cars?

Good point.

If you bought a car brand new in 1999 and wrote it off in an accident today you'd get little more than scrap value. The same would apply to most things unless you had a new for old policy.

 

[I like Skol]

Good point.

If you bought a car brand new in 1999 and wrote it off in an accident today you'd get little more than scrap value. The same would apply to most things unless you had a new for old policy.

But not a house presumably.....

 

[spen666]

you are entitled to be placed in the same position you were in before the accident.

I would argue that you had a XXXequipped bike of XXXstyle then and are entitled to be placed in the same position now.

It is irrelevant what bike cost back when you bought it. It is what is would cost to replace it with an equivalent bike now that you are entitled to in compensation

 

[Alan O]

Ach, I can't help at all with the insurance/compensation thing, but I just want to say it pains me to hear of the loss of your GT Bravado