Why do our cars get salvaged so easily?

[Dadhawk]

Originally Posted by DarkSideFRS

u don't think $3k is excessive for that??

There was crash bar and fender support damage underneath you can't see (you can see in the photos I referenced), but yes, probably. I didn't seek other estimates because the person who pulled out in front of me was covering it.

[Tcoat]

Originally Posted by DarkSideFRS

u don't think $3k is excessive for that??

We get to decide what is excessive? If the insurance company decides to pay then that is what it costs.


Costs are about the same for any newish car. Ours are no worse than most and way better than many. The difference is that nobody repairs a written off Yaris so you just don't see them with salvage titles.

[mav1178]

Originally Posted by DarkSideFRS

these are just some i found today... there are tons more I see on FB with supposedly more "minor" accidents

Like I said... it's salvage for a reason.

I have tons of friends in the bodyshop industry. Once you exceed a certain number of hours of repair on the car, you write off as a total loss. Insurance companies aren't stupid, they know what they are dealing with when it comes to vehicle repairs.

A lot of cars get salvaged pretty easily, it's just how it is built now. More efficient manufacturing does not mean easier fixes, it actually makes it more expensive.

[mav1178]

Originally Posted by Tcoat

We get to decide what is excessive? If the insurance company decides to pay then that is what it costs.

I think if we had our way this car would've cost $20k with 500HP twin turbo and rides smoother than a Toyota Avalon.

[conehead]

I just had a car get totaled for a minor accident where I was not at fault. You have to look at it from the insurance company's perspective.

If it gets fixed they have to pay for the full cost of a professional repair WITH factory parts AND your rental car AND diminished value.

If they just total it, they skip all that plus get to sell it at auction.


The math is a lot different if you are at fault, and that often makes the difference between totaling and not.

[HKz]

this thread reminded me of a small incident last year when some old lady bumped into the rear of my FRS while I was waiting at a light.. It felt like I got hit hard AF and it was enough of an impact to make the Monster (the drink since y'all have dirty minds) that was sitting in between my legs explode everywhere...when I got out of my car it looked like I damn pissed myself to the folks passing by!!

well I know it is probably a bad habit but I tend to just sit at stoplights in neutral without being on the brakes or having the e-brake engaged so I guess since I didn't have any brakes involved it just jolted my car and left a rather unnoticeable bumper rash which the old lady immediately tried to wipe off with her shirt


tl;dr the twins can take small abuse if the right circumstances ;p

...admittedly the lady who ran a red light with her Impala and totaled my first FRS probably only needed a new headlight and bumper while my front end was totally mangled..

[xdavidx]

Originally Posted by HKz

it was enough of an impact to make the Monster that was sitting in between my legs explode everywhere...when I got out of my car it looked like I damn pissed myself to the folks passing by!!

umm...

[extrashaky]

Originally Posted by DarkSideFRS

i understand insurance looks at value vs cost of repair, but that would mean that they undervalue our cars or cost of repair is insanely high.

here are some examples:

1. 2016 FRS with 40k miles

"Car had sustained an indirect hit on the right side and scraped against something. Only the right passenger door assembly and right rear quarter panel were replaced in the salvage repair."

https://orangecounty.craigslist.org/...902653260.html

It's not exactly as simple as value vs. cost of repair, and it's different in different states. Some states use a loss threshold percentage between 50% (Iowa) and 100% (Texas), with most at 70%, 75% or 80%. But 21 states use the Total Loss Formula, which totals the vehicle when

Cost of Repairs + Scrap Value >= Actual Cash Value

The examples you listed are in California. CA is a Total Loss Formula state.

So let's say the actual cash value is $12K before the accident, and the scrap value is $8K. The repairs would only have to come up to $4K to make it a total loss, despite being a relatively low percentage of the value of the car. You lose your car not just because the repair bill was high, but also because the salvage value of the car was high.

If you had that same car in Texas (100%), the repairs would have to come up to $12K to total the car. In Tennessee, Alabama or Nebraska (75%), $9K would total it. In Iowa (50%), it's $6K.

I just threw out some numbers by way of example, so those may not be what you're actually quoted by an adjuster. But knowing our cars do carry a relatively high salvage value, I would expect them to be more likely to be totaled in a TLF state like California than in percentage threshold states.

Originally Posted by conehead

The math is a lot different if you are at fault, and that often makes the difference between totaling and not.

It's not different. The thresholds and calculations are set by state law or state insurance regulations.

[DarkSideFRS]

Originally Posted by extrashaky

It's not exactly as simple as value vs. cost of repair, and it's different in different states. Some states use a loss threshold percentage between 50% (Iowa) and 100% (Texas), with most at 70%, 75% or 80%. But 21 states use the Total Loss Formula, which totals the vehicle when

Cost of Repairs + Scrap Value >= Actual Cash Value

The examples you listed are in California. CA is a Total Loss Formula state.

So let's say the actual cash value is $12K before the accident, and the scrap value is $8K. The repairs would only have to come up to $4K to make it a total loss, despite being a relatively low percentage of the value of the car. You lose your car not just because the repair bill was high, but also because the salvage value of the car was high.

If you had that same car in Texas (100%), the repairs would have to come up to $12K to total the car. In Tennessee, Alabama or Nebraska (75%), $9K would total it. In Iowa (50%), it's $6K.

I just threw out some numbers by way of example, so those may not be what you're actually quoted by an adjuster. But knowing our cars do carry a relatively high salvage value, I would expect them to be more likely to be totaled in a TLF state like California than in percentage threshold states.

finally an answer that makes sense! I wonder what determines the salvage value.

[bkharmony]

Originally Posted by Dadhawk

It really doesn't take much. See the photo below? This cost almost $3,000 to repair. You can see the details including some additional photos of the damage underneath in my Owner's Journal starting in post 397

Wow. You have a journal with 440 entries!?

I'm also gobsmacked by your 33MPG average. I'm sitting here at 20MPG over two years.

[extrashaky]

Originally Posted by DarkSideFRS

finally an answer that makes sense! I wonder what determines the salvage value.

A large part of it is past auction prices, which will be bid up higher if a particular model is popular among rebuilders. Even junk yards might pay more for a non-rebuildable car with good parts on it, simply because there aren't that many of our cars in junk yards, so used parts prices can remain high.

[HKz]

Originally Posted by xdavidx

umm...

um? tough crowd guess the visuals aren't funny for some folk

[MJones_RB]

It's not just the 86s. My friend recently spun out in his S2000 and sideswiped a pole. The damage wasn't catastrophic, dented fender and rocker panel, bent door panel, damage to the front right suspension, etc. Fixable for sure. The first insurance estimator gave him a repair value of $8000. Another estimator went out, talked with the body shop and simply totaled it. There must be a precedence where an insurance company would lose less money by totaling out than risk fixing a car and then getting sued for faulty repairs.

[extrashaky]

Originally Posted by MJones_RB

There must be a precedence where an insurance company would lose less money by totaling out than risk fixing a car and then getting sued for faulty repairs.

That's not it.

First, the states set the standards for when a car is totaled. The estimates may provide a small amount of wiggle room in cases where the decision is right on the line, but not much. Often the insurer has little choice.

Second, processing claims costs money, not just in claims expense. There are also personnel and back office expenses, and the insurance companies have cut personnel to save money and expect the remaining employees to handle a larger workload than in years past. Declaring a vehicle to be totaled involves fewer man hours than carrying a vehicle through the repair process, and over many claims those hours add up so that the company can hire fewer people.

Second and a half, one of the ways the company accomplishes those faster claims is to provide incentives for the claims managers to settle the claims quickly. The claims manager is evaluated not primarily on payouts, but on productivity, the number of claims processed and how quickly those claims are settled. Your claims manager wants your claim off her books as fast as she can get rid of it, and totaling the vehicle gets rid of it faster than anything else she can do.

An insurance company is allowed to total a vehicle even if it doesn't meet the threshold, just to get it off their books. Sometimes the incentives for the claims managers are strong enough that they're willing to do that just to improve their numbers.