23
   

Vehicle depreciation due to accident

 
 
mm25075
 
  2  
Thu 9 Jul, 2009 04:38 pm
@mm25075,
************USEFUL COMMENTALERT*****************************

mm25075 wrote:

sstainba wrote:

I only hope I don't have to go the route of a lawsuit to bridge any lost value.


Oy. You'd spend an awful lot of money on a lawyer to tell you, that you can't fault someone else for depreciation of a vehicle. How much of the depreciated value was caused by driving the vehicle off the lot? How much depreciation occured in 'normal' use of the vehicle for the period of time you had it? Going to spend more money figuring out and PROVING the depreciated value was due to the accident rather than the many other factors that determine a car's true actual cash value after an accident.

You can find out what your car value is before going to the dealer and discussing the trade in with the dealer. You don't have to accept what they are willing to give you. Negotiate. They WILL low ball you because there is plethora of used vehicles out on the market right now. Many people prefer to sell the vehicle to a private buyer in order to get more for their trade in.

www.kellybluebook.com is a good place to start.

*********END USEFUL COMMENT

Um yeah...don't see a a knowledgable comment here. I must be stupid. Heh yeah, that's it.
0 Replies
 
Ragman
 
  0  
Thu 9 Jul, 2009 05:16 pm
@mm25075,
This thread is the best entertainment of the day. Stick around, sstainba...you're FUN! Drunk
0 Replies
 
chai2
 
  1  
Thu 9 Jul, 2009 05:17 pm
sstainba cracks easily under pressure.
0 Replies
 
Ragman
 
  1  
Thu 9 Jul, 2009 05:27 pm
This kind of reminds me of an Oscar Wilde quote: ""The cynic knows the price of everything and the value of nothing."" 2 Cents
0 Replies
 
joefromchicago
 
  3  
Thu 9 Jul, 2009 06:41 pm
And members of this site wonder why some people feel like they're getting jumped-in as part of a gang initiation when they first post to A2K Rolling Eyes
mm25075
 
  1  
Thu 9 Jul, 2009 08:34 pm
@joefromchicago,
Obviously he has no respect for making valid arguments, especially when laced with degrading remarks. No wonder he hasn't been too welcomed... Rolling Eyes
Ragman
 
  1  
Thu 9 Jul, 2009 09:23 pm
@joefromchicago,
Do you think this was a case of someone being ganged up on unfairly, Joe..really? This sniping didn't occur in a vacuum. I see where it actually turned...there wasn't the warm and fuzzy on either end. To me, there seemed to be a demand for accurate exact info and free legal advice..an officious tone permeated....that is what I objected to -- then I saw more sniping...you could sense trouble coming.
joefromchicago
 
  2  
Thu 9 Jul, 2009 09:46 pm
@mm25075,
mm25075 wrote:

Obviously he has no respect for making valid arguments, especially when laced with degrading remarks. No wonder he hasn't been too welcomed... Rolling Eyes

Granted, her calling your post "stupid" was out of line, but then your post was irrelevant -- except in the places where it was wrong. Sstainba came looking for advice regarding the diminished value of her car due to the accident, not the general depreciation that affects all cars. All of that Kelly Bluebook business was completely beside the point. She was right: the only person who really addressed her original post was hawkeye.
joefromchicago
 
  3  
Thu 9 Jul, 2009 09:57 pm
@Ragman,
Oh, I think there were some short fuses lit on both ends of this discussion, no question. But then a person comes to A2K because this is a site where people can ask questions and get answers. Instead, I've seen far too many people ask questions and get a lot of snark in return. True, sstainba could have shown a bit more patience, but no one was really answering the question she asked. I'm sure that can be frustrating.

Most people in that situation, I think, would have just given up and moved on to some other, more helpful forum. She stayed, tried to get the participants to focus on her question, and was pretty much called a whiner and a privileged brat for her trouble. And when she reacted, she was the one who was criticized for being ill-mannered. Oh well, if that's how the veteran members of A2K choose to welcome newbies, then so be it.
Robert Gentel
 
  2  
Thu 9 Jul, 2009 10:05 pm
@joefromchicago,
I couldn't agree more. The site exists for the purpose of helping people, and a lot of the members are decidedly unhelpful.

The conflict between discussion and question types is one reason this exists. To many members this isn't a Q&A site, it's a chat room for their friends. But that's why the different topic types were created (and why they probably need even more distinction between them).

It'd be way cool if questions were given answers that are helpful. That's what the site was made for.
Ragman
 
  2  
Thu 9 Jul, 2009 10:40 pm
@joefromchicago,
Agreed. After rereading and some introspection I see that what I provided was an off-topic diversion with KBB info. I I think your observation is correct as is RG's. Chat room or information resource...sometime when it's dynamics are both...as in this case, it served no one well. Casual banter is A2K style, and wasn't appreciated so when there was pushback by someone who demanded info, it was resented by some -0- rightly or wrongly.

However, when joe provided his legal expertise on pursuing reimbursement of the depreciation in court, it seemed to be unappreciated or unvalued somehow.
roger
 
  3  
Thu 9 Jul, 2009 10:59 pm
@joefromchicago,
Not true. EhBeth, who knows casualty insurance as well as anyone around here, also answered the question.
solipsister
 
  0  
Thu 9 Jul, 2009 11:24 pm
@roger,
was all this an accident or an incident
roger
 
  1  
Fri 10 Jul, 2009 12:37 am
@solipsister,
Are not most accidents incidents?
0 Replies
 
joefromchicago
 
  1  
Fri 10 Jul, 2009 08:29 am
@Ragman,
Ragman wrote:
However, when joe provided his legal expertise on pursuing reimbursement of the depreciation in court, it seemed to be unappreciated or unvalued somehow.

That doesn't bother me too much. I still offer my limited advice when people come here looking for help with legal questions. If they don't express any gratitude, however, that might affect my willingness to extend help on their next question. That's mostly why I stopped posting to the English language queries from our many Chinese friends. A simple "thank you" once in a while goes a long way.
0 Replies
 
chai2
 
  1  
Fri 10 Jul, 2009 08:59 am
@Robert Gentel,
Robert Gentel wrote:

I couldn't agree more. The site exists for the purpose of helping people, and a lot of the members are decidedly unhelpful.

The conflict between discussion and question types is one reason this exists. To many members this isn't a Q&A site, it's a chat room for their friends. But that's why the different topic types were created (and why they probably need even more distinction between them).

It'd be way cool if questions were given answers that are helpful. That's what the site was made for.



Now wait a cotton pickin' minute here Robert....

decidedly unhelpful?

was that before or after the OP told everyone at large we were willing to take it up the ass?

I just did a quick count.

After the initial post, he/she got 11 answers were it was obvious the intent was to be as helpful as possible. It's no one's fault that those answers, attempts at helping weren't what the OP wanted to hear.

After what I thought were multiple opinions that a lawsuit wasn't worth it, we get this (leaning toward snide) remark how no one was reading her posts correctly.

Well please forgive all the posters who up until that time had the audacity to answer as best they could, while at the same time injecting their indiviual thoughts.

So then a couple of "get real lady" comments were made, nothing that an adult in the real world shouldn't have been able to handle. They were made in a conversational way as in, "so you had an accident, what? you think the world owes you something?"

After that, some more what I considered trying to be helpful comments were made, until the OP then lost his/her dignity and resorted herself to name calling.

Finally, the OP has a mini melt-down because no one will tell her she can sue the pants off someone because he hit her car.

Let's not go overboard with the high and mighty purpose of answering a question. She was given an answer, she didn't like it.

Ruffled feathers goes with the territory of finding out you probably won't be able to do what you want, or what you expected to hear.

At the end, she showed the bitch she was, and I don't believe people should have to apologize for responding in kind.

You act like we're paid to be here, and so are obgligated to be on our best behavior at all times.

Acting on our best behavior.....everybody wants to rule the world.

Slappy Doo Hoo
 
  3  
Fri 10 Jul, 2009 09:01 am
People do get way too off topic, or start pointing out useless things on this site too much....first off, kellybluebook is NOT going to tell you what your car is worth. It can be thousands of dollars too high, too low...it takes a little more research to find out what your car is really worth.

And this person isn't on here whining, it was a legit question.

To those who said if it's repaired correctly, it doesn't affect value: you're dead wrong. ESPECIALLY on a year old, $60,000 BMW. If it was a Ford Focus, no, a repainted bumper probably won't matter, but any dealer that looks at the car as a trade will be able to tell the rear bumper was repainted. Now if it was a body panel repainted, it would value a car like that probably a couple thousand less. But, it's just a bumper, might not make that big a difference. Obviously a repainted bumper doesn't equal major accident. On the other hand...if there was a police report filed on the accident, and it shows up on Carfax(if the dealer runs a carfax), that could play into it as well...especially if he/she was trying to sell it privately. A lot of people are easily scared away by an accident on carfax, even if it's just a bumper.

Don't know about suing for perceived depreciation though, never heard of anyone doing that. Insurance agent might know of some cases too. Personally, because it's just a repainted bumper, I don't think it would be worth the time & money to sue, because I don't think it'll cause that big a depreciation hit. If it was body panel(s), then maybe.
DrewDad
 
  1  
Fri 10 Jul, 2009 09:14 am
@Slappy Doo Hoo,
The way modern cars are made, the repair better have been more than repainting the bumper.

And the whole point of the depreciation detour was to point out that a year old, $60,000 BMW ain't a $60,000 BMW anymore.
Slappy Doo Hoo
 
  2  
Fri 10 Jul, 2009 10:12 am
@DrewDad,
According to her original post, the rear bumper was replaced. Repainted/replaced = same thing, it's aftermarket.

I'm talking about the detour of people telling her she's complaining over nothing and whining, ect. I don't know about the suing part, but at least I could give real input on how much things like this do or don't affect value. Putting up a link to KBB and trying to guess what the car is worth isn't advice.
NickFun
 
  1  
Fri 10 Jul, 2009 10:37 am
Assuming there was no frame damage to the vehicle, a new bumper should actually increase the price of the vehicle. However, with luxury vehicles that's not the case. I had the front end of my car replaced after someone ran into it and I sold it for more than I would have otherwise.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 11/12/2024 at 06:24:23