| Gold Account Holder |  Re: Cat D/C Cars help needed
Hello Sarah!
I regret I don't think there is any clear evidence out there. However, I can say that my own rule of thumb would be to use something like Parker's Guide, which is readily available in most Newsagents, and also on-line.
They keep changing the Pricing structure, which is not helpful, so you'll have to hear what I say and then re-work it to fit their current bands of Prices.
But they used to have the following Price Bands (what they use now is based on this, but with different names and with additional sub-divisions within what was an older Price Band):
A1
Good
Fair
Part-Exchange
In general, a well-repaired Cat D Car that was A1 in all other respects such as age, mileage and Service History, if the damage and repairs were fully declared, would expect to achieve around Fair to Good. IOW, this is really down to plain common sense. If something is perfect, then it is perfect. If something is not perfect, and you are made aware of any imperfections, then its Price ought to be lower than an otherwise perfect example.
The key is that you were made aware if the person selling was himself/herself aware, or should've been aware if they were in a position to check via Trade HPI Check (to spot Cat C/D), or via Physical Inspection when preparing a Car for Sale (to spot Cars that have been previously Repaired by an Insurance Company and/or that were 3rd Party Insurance in the past and repaired by a previous owner/garage). If they declare what they know, and adjust Price to reflect this, then all well and good. Nothing bad about that at all.
It's when people don't tell you about something, when they reasonably should've done, that you have a clear complaint. If they were Trade, then you may well have reasonable grounds for some form of Compensation for their failure to declare what they knew.
For example, if the Car was sold as A1 at £10,000 but they neglected to mention that it was Cat D, or that it had been previously repaired and the evidence was there to see if inspected during normal pre-sales preparation, then the Car's likely value at that time may've been Fair (£7,500) to Good (£9,200). Your Claim would therefore be between £800 to £2,500, depending on the issues.
I would get an Engineer to inspect in such a case, and base any Claim on that report. If the Car was still in very good order, and the issue is mainly just history rather than anything physical, then the Claim would tend towards the lower level. OTOH, if the Engineer came back to say the front chassis rails are not perfectly aligned, say, out by 1-2mm so that the bumper, wings, bonnet and headlights do not quite sit perfectly with a 2mm difference between panel gaps left to right, then the Claim would be higher. A slight mis-alignment won't affect the Car being usable for the rest of its life but, had you known, you would not have paid £10,000. You would either not have bought, or you would've expected to see a hefty discount off A1 to reflect the slight mis-alignment and history. In that case, £7,500 would've been a reasonable price to get an otherwise decent looking Car, with low mileage, and a slight mis-alignment that you could live with in return for a £2,500 discount.
Working further ahead, when it came to selling the Car, say, after 3 years of use, then the A1 example should be worth, say, £4,500 and the Cat D example perhaps £3,800. Again, when the next owner sells after another 3 years, then the A1 example may be worth £2,000 and the Cat D example perhaps £1,850. This reflects my experience of what tends to happen, the effect of an Insurance Database marker fades as the Cars age and the further away from the event they get.
Your main Claim, therefore, should really be aimed at the initial loss of value, because the older a Car gets, the depreciation factor is actually lower on a Cat C/D than on an A1 Car, so it's probably better not to tackle the Claim based on depreciation. The key issue is value at time of sale.
Thus, before damage or loss (some are not actually damaged, such as Stolen and then Recovered), then the Car would otherwise be Priced at A1. After loss/repair it would deflate to Fair to Good, depending on just how A1 it was initially, and upon just how good the Repairs were, or how little Repairs were needed in the first place (such as Stolen/Recovered and needing just a Lock Set).
Category C tends to have a further deflationary effect on Price, mainly owing to the misconceptions about what Cat D and Cat C actually mean:
Cat C = Cost of Repairs assessed as being greater than Pre-Accident Value. Insurance Engineer has confirmed Car is Repairable (i.e. it is not Controlled Waste).
Cat D = Cost of Repairs assessed as being lower than Pre-Accident Value. Insurance Engineer has confirmed Car is Repairable (i.e. it is not Controlled Waste).
That is it. The categorisations have nothing whatsoever to say about severity of damage. An old Car with a broken headlight and dented wing can be a Cat C, whereas a late Sports car that has been wrapped around a tree can be Cat D if the value is such that a new Bodyshell is warranted and the overall Cost does not exceed the Pre-Accident Value.
Likewise, an older Car that has been wrapped around a Tree can be a Cat C, and a later Car with large tin of paint spilt all over the seats can be a Cat D (fit good 2nd hand seats and Carpets and the Car is then 100% repaired to the same standard as when A1, albeit Cat D).
Thus, the same previously A1 Car if damaged/repaired with a Cat C rating, would tend towards Fair.
All of this will depend on the type of Car. But the general rule of thumb holds true in my experience. Therefore, if the Car was Good or Fair before damage, then you need to crank down the value for it, if it ends up as Cat C/D as applicable.
There are exceptions in all things, so you need to take into account all factors. For example, a Jaguar D Type if fully restored will fetch what it will fetch, irrespective of any marker on an Insurance Industry Database.
The Trade use (or did use) two main Publications: Glass's Guide and CAP/Black Book. Glass's tends to be only accurate for later Cars, i.e. geared to Cars under 4 Years old. CAP/Black Book is more down to earth, and better for Cars as they age.
Parker's is never a million miles out, and is surprisingly effective as a general guide.
The bottom line is Age and Mileage. Those two factors are the key, and are the two that have the main effect on Price...hence why so many Cars are clocked. Disposing of the Service History to mask when a Car has been clocked is usually well worth doing for a dishonest Seller, which tends to show that whilst Service History is something that adds value, it does not do so more than an apparently low Mileage reading.
The older a Car gets, and the further away a Car gets from when a Cat D/C rating was applied, has the effect of reducing and even eliminating the deflationary effect on Price. Once Cars get to a certain age and value, people just want something that is clearly reliable, good looking and at the lowest Price they can find.
Ultimately, Cat C/D just means that the Car has been declared Repairable by an Insurance Engineer, and the Insurance Company concerned did not want to pay for Repairs. Why they did not usually has more to do with their own internal policies, than with the Car itself. Always remember that Insurance Companies are not in business to Repair Cars. They are in business to charge Insurance Premiums. They will pretend otherwise, but that is where they are coming from.
They now have a ready market for damaged Cars, so are not bothering to repair significantly greater numbers than ever before. Thus, Cat C/D is now more common than it once was, in view of the greater percentages being sold before Repair, not because more Cars are being damaged as a percentage of all Cars on the road.
In simple terms and just to illustrate the percentage effects, if you can imagine that there were 100 Cars on the road in 2000, and around 10 a year were damaged, then back then, maybe 5 would be repaired, 2 declared Cat D, 2 declared Cat C, and one scrapped as being too badly damaged. Total Cat C/D thus being 4%, with another 5% being Cars that were damaged but that were Repaired by an Insurance Company and not repaired. Total number of Cat C/D is 4 Cars out of the 100 that were on the Road at the start.
If by 2009 there are 1000 Cars on the road, and the same percentage get damaged, i.e. 10%....that's now 100 Cars that are damaged. Same 10% but bigger numbers in view of the larger numbers of Cars whizzing around. However, the thing that has changed is whereas in, say, 2000 5% would be repaired by Insurance Companies, that figure is now less, say, 3%. That's because they can now sell damaged Cars more easily than they once could.
Thus, in 2009, 10% are damaged (100 Cars), of which 1% are scrapped (10 Cars), 3% Repaired by Insurance Companies (30 Cars) and 6% declared Cat C/D and sold damaged (60 Cars). So you may see that Today, more numbers of Cat C/Ds are around, because the volumes of Cars on the road are greater, and a greater percentage of that greater volume are declared Cat C/D. The percentage being damaged in the first place has not really changed, it's the ratio of Insurance Repaired (not Recorded) to Insurance Repair Declined (Cat C/D Recorded) that has changed and is changing.
I do not have the actual percentages, but have seen many reports that confirm year on year growth in terms of the percentages declared Cat C/D. Plus there is ample physical evidence in terms of the number of Salvage Contractors in operation whose business is dealing with damaged Cars before repair, who represent a ready market for damaged Cars that the Insurance Companies are only too happy to sell to.
Do remember that Cars damaged and repaired when the repairs were paid for by an Insurance Company, have no damage history whatsoever! None.
My gripe is I think that issue is very unfair, and Insurance Companies should be required to record all Cars that are damaged, irrespective of who pays for the Repairs. Full stop! Repairable damage is a fact of life, and there is nothing inherently bad about repairing a Car for re-use. It is the double standards that I would like to see changed, so that Consumers get to see the full picture. Adverse information is not bad in itself, it is the act of hiding it that is the problem.
Cheers,
BRW
Last edited by banker_rhymes_with; 24th June 2009 at 09:58.
Reason: Typo
|
Cat D/C Cars help needed 
