From: Ian on 10 Dec 2008 12:56
On 10 Dec, 17:31, Roger <ro...(a)nospam.zetnet.co.uk> wrote:
> Even today outside the property hotspots like London the
> value of the land is a relatively small proportion of the typical house.
Up here - rural south west Scotland - building plots cost about 40% of
the value of the house. And there are - or were - still a LOT of
builders making a LOT of money by putting up houses. Which they
wouldn't, if building costs were more than the market value.
> And you have to insure at a realistic rebuild cost otherwise you will
> get crucified on a partial loss which is far more common than a total
> rebuild event.
Last time I checked, I was insured for unlimited rebuilding costs.
> > In exactly the same way that the OP's insurance company is reluctant
> > to allow him to insure to have every bump, ding and shiny bit he has
> > put in over the years recreated at their expense.
> I suspect that the real reason for not finding such a policy is that the
> demand for it is so small that the insurance company can't rely on
> statistics to predict the extent of claims and with such a small
> potential market can't be bothered to even quote an inflated premium to
> cover the lack of predictability.
That, too. Plus the excess amounts will vary wildy. The chap who does
bodywork for me is doing a Mini Cooper (proper) for a local landowner.
He has already spent over twenty five thousand on bodywork ...
> > > And new for old contents insurance is now so common it must be difficult
> > > to actually get the old fashioned 'subject to average' type insurance..
> > Indeed. It's still a market value, though.
> It is difficult to see how getting a new piece of kit costing £1000 to
> replace something several years old and worth say £500 has anything much
> to do with the market value of the original piece.
It's the market value of the new piece. As I pointed out initially,
and reiterated with "a market value" above.
From: Ian on 10 Dec 2008 13:00
On 10 Dec, 15:28, Adrian <toomany2...(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> Ian <ian.gro...(a)btinternet.com> gurgled happily, sounding much like they
> were saying:
> > The best route is to push hard at agreed value time. I know of one
> > super-concours (think autistic levels of anal retention) Citroen DS
> > which is insured at an agreed value of £80,000. That's four times more
> > than you'd pay for a superb one ...
> True, but I know he's turned down unsolicited offers of close to that in
> the past.
You know it then? I heard a Well Known Citroen Nut say that he's
helped the guy prepare it for a contest and had found - shock, horror
- some dried traces of polish in the corners of the part numbers
moulded into the rear lenses. At which point I realised that concours
at that level is not a hobby. It's a mental illness, pretty closely
related to Obsessive Compulsive Disorder. Seriously.
From: Adrian on 10 Dec 2008 14:26
Ian <ian.groups(a)btinternet.com> gurgled happily, sounding much like they
> At which point I realised that concours at that level
> is not a hobby. It's a mental illness, pretty closely related to
> Obsessive Compulsive Disorder. Seriously.
It's taken you this long to realise that?
From: Rob, Jane and Freddy on 25 Dec 2008 12:21
theres no such thing as gap insurance for classics, you obviously dont
understand what gap insurance actually is?
"Phileaus Leaius" <whos(a)prettyboy.then> wrote in message
> I've managed to get a guaranteed value policy for �11k on my freshly
> rebuilt motor, but I know it would cost more than �14k to have a
> replacement built for me if the worst happens. I'm happy that the GV is
> 'correct', but where can I buy an *additional* policy to 'top up' that
> �11k to the amount it would cost to replace? Gap insurance seems to be the
> term for the policy I want, but it seems that its only available on new
> cars - how can I do the same thing for a classic?