Feel good story of the day...

[Harry P.]

http://www.foxnews.com/leisure/2014/06/25/stolen-17-chevrolet-corvette-recovered-after-33-years/?intcmp=obnetwork

[cobraman]

Wow ! That's amazing to get it back after all those years.

[Joe Handley]

That's cool!

[Harry P.]

Wow ! That's amazing to get it back after all those years.

Sure is.

[slusher]

That was a good surprise for the owner...

[Draggon]

Neat, saw the fellow on TV, just a normal guy, that makes it a great story.

[cobraman]

I can't place that new Harry................. who is it ?

[Harry P.]

You should know him. He's a big name in automotive history...

[sjordan2]

GM, like other huge global operations, is filled with thousands of people in different operations. This gesture is much-needed PR for these guys, though I fear it won't be appreciated enough.

The thing is, their hundreds of other divisions and profit centers are also filled with people who are deeply, personally affected by the millions of GM recalls, and take their disappointment and worries home at night.

I had a taste of this when I was in Exxon's Houston ad agency, as lead person in charge of Exxon creative advertising during the Exxon Valdez oil spill. Exxon employees were literally crying in the hallways. When somebody says "corporations are people," this is what they mean.

Edited June 26, 2014 by sjordan2

[Tom Geiger]

And we'll see how this plays out. A two year old car normally was financed and thus had to be insured for value. If he accepted a settlement on the car, it technically belongs to the insurance company... if that can all be reconstructed today.

Many years ago I sold my '73 Barracuda to a friend who never fully paid for it, and returned the car to me. I then resold the car to a guy from Bayonne, NJ. A year or so later my buddy gets a summons in the mail for abandoning a vehicle in Bayonne. So we called, and were told that since the title was still in his name, we could pay the fine for 'abandoning' it, and get the car back. We went to the holding yard and were sadly surprised.. the car was a total wreck. Stripped and the remaining panels all dented and not worth taking back at all. So it's interesting when they are recovered in good condition!

[Harry P.]

If he accepted a settlement on the car, it technically belongs to the insurance company...

Interesting. I never thought of that. I'd like to hear how this story ultimately played out.

[Mark]

I didn't see anything regarding financing...maybe the guy paid cash for it? That said, then as now, not having at least "fire and theft" insurance on a two-year-old car wouldn't be too bright. I can't stand giving money to insurance companies (you're basically buying something you hope you will never use, and if you do put in a claim it gets even more expensive afterwards). But, fire, theft, and liability insurance isn't as outrageous as collision coverage...it makes sense to have it on a 'Vette. I was going to dump the collision coverage on my ten year old truck, until I looked at the itemized bill. Not even ten bucks a month, that's less than the "uninsured motorist" coverage that you can't be without around here...

[Harry P.]

"Uninsured Motorist" coverage.

Don't even get me started...

[Mark]

"Uninsured Motorist" coverage.

Don't even get me started...

The last time I worked downtown, I drove to work by the shortest route. My brother used to manage a Midas muffler shop that I drove by on that route. When I told him how I was driving to work, he told me: "as you drive that way, count to three over and over...every third car you see probably won't have insurance".

When my 2004 truck was about a year old, someone slammed into the back of it, bending the rear bumper. Guy gets out of the car (an '89 Probe, if I remember right) and, first thing, says "do we have to go through the insurance?". Uh-oh. We pull off to the side, and he says "I haven't got my insurance card with me". When I did payroll and HR at a roofing company, "I don't have my drivers' license with me" translated to "I haven't got a drivers' license", and that stuck with me. But this guy did have insurance, and the bumper did get replaced.

I still think insurance companies are legalized thieves, though. If you have had a claim recently, your insurance goes up. If you haven't had a claim in a long time, then you are "more likely" to file one soon, so your insurance goes up. If you have a small car, you're more likely to get hurt in an accident, so your insurance is higher. If you have a truck or SUV, you're likely to cause more damage to another vehicle in an accident, so your insurance is higher. When isn't it higher?

[Harry P.]

Amen, brother. They have you coming and going.

[Danno]

Tom's correct. At some point after an insured vehicle has been reported stolen and has not been recovered, the insurance company will establish the vehicle's actual cash value (basically a fair market value) and will pay the owner that amount in exchange for a signed power-of-attorney and title transfer. The insurance company then transfer's the vehicle's title to the insurance company as titled owner. Then the title and paperwork is filed away by the insurance company to await eventual recovery . . . if it ever happens. If the vehicle is recovered, the insurance company then sells the vehicle at auction to recoup whatever it can.

Once the owner signs the power-of-attorney and title paperwork, his/her ownership interest in the vehicle ends. He/she may be listed in police reports as the owner, but the insurance company actually is. Typically, the original owner (or, insured) will never be notified or know if the vehicle is ever recovered.

Rarely, an insurance company will let the original owner know of the recovery. More commonly, the recovering

The entire process is different, obviously, if the vehicle was not insured. Then, the original owner will continue to be the titled owner until the vehicle is recovered.

I've been involved in hundreds of recoveries over the years, including a couple similar to this. {My personal record was a 44-year recovery of a split-window '63 Corvette.}

Edited June 27, 2014 by Danno

[Foxer]

You should know him. He's a big name in automotive history...

His race cars looked good, but that 'stach has to go!

[Harry P.]

His race cars looked good...

Agree on the 'stache.

[Joe Handley]

Preachin' to the choir here Mark, I wish I knew why my '98 XJ Jeep Cherokee Limited with a 4.0l I-6 costs nearly as much for full coverage as my 2012 200 Touring with the Pentastar V-6 does, there's less that $100 difference between the two! Can't be hp/lbs, the 200 is slightly heavier but way more powerful and I think it would do just as much damage to the other vehicle in a wreck unless a pedestrain is involved. Could be handling and stability, but considering XJ's are freakishly stable and have surprisingly high handling limits for SUV's with two solid axles and 700lbs worth of I-6 sitting over the front axle, I'd hope that isn't the case, unless they base SUV safety and liability on the first 10 years of Explorer production, I don't know........

[Harry P.]

Preachin' to the choir here Mark, I wish I knew why my '98 XJ Jeep Cherokee Limited with a 4.0l I-6 costs nearly as much for full coverage as my 2012 200 Touring with the Pentastar V-6 does, there's less that $100 difference between the two! Can't be hp/lbs, the 200 is slightly heavier but way more powerful and I think it would do just as much damage to the other vehicle in a wreck unless a pedestrain is involved. Could be handling and stability, but considering XJ's are freakishly stable and have surprisingly high handling limits for SUV's with two solid axles and 700lbs worth of I-6 sitting over the front axle, I'd hope that isn't the case, unless they base SUV safety and liability on the first 10 years of Explorer production, I don't know........

It's all about where you live, how old you are, what sex you are, your driving record, whether or not you park the car in a garage or on the street, etc. The actual vehicle itself is minor... it's all of the other "extenuating circumstances" that figure into your insurance cost.

[Joe Handley]

The 200 is registered to me (37) while the Jeep is also registered to Dad (72), both are registered to the same house, gets nearly all the same discounts (except the alarm and the nannies and such, the 200 is full of that junk while the Jeep only has 2 airbags), and both get driven in the many of the same areas as your Mustang, just much less now for the Jeep since I don't DD it all of the time any more.

[Danno]

The greatest component in cost of insurance is the liability coverage. The cost of liability coverage has some to do with you (age, gender, marital status, occupation, history, etc.) and a little to do with your vehicle (type, mass, usage), but most to do with the other demographics ~ loss experience among all traffic units in the area your vehicle will be operating, average cost of repairs of all vehicles in that area, accident severity in that area, injury ratio, injury severity, and liberalness (generosity toward claimants, not politics) of juries, are major components of how much liability insurance costs you.

Uninsured motorist coverage is not priced based on any consideration of you, other than where you live. Pricing is determined mostly by the statistical accident experience in the metro or local area where you will operate your vehicle. Some areas have fewer uninsured motorists running around than others. For example, in Arizona the ratio of uninsured motorists was, at one time, as high as 44%. That means nearly half the driver/vehicle combinations on the street were uninsured. Our uninsured motorist premiums were sky-high, as you might understand. And, you couldn't risk driving without it. The 'experience severity' (number of uninsured accidents) and therefore the premiums/rates for coverage have come down because the number of uninsured driver/vehicle combinations has been reduced remarkably (largely due to HB1070).

In short, don't be so quick to blame your insurance premiums on discrimination against you or your vehicle. Blame it on your neighbors, fellow motorists, body shops, healthcare, and local juries.

As the movie title said . . . "It's Complicated."

[Tom Geiger]

I still think insurance companies are legalized thieves

Little known fact is that insurance companies have a second profit center... selling damaged vehicles. That has become big business. There is a yard in King of Prussia PA that you can see from the Turnpike that holds cars for insurance companies. That yard probably holds 1000 or more cars and trucks and fills up and empties weekly! So there are literally thousands of cars totalled out every week. And when you see a truck on the highway with several 'totals' on it, you'll notice that some of them have somewhat minor damage. Yea, that's all part of their game. Screw you out of your car for a low ball offer, so they can resell it at a profit.

When my wife got hit in the Jaguar I called my insurance company and the insurance company for the lady who hit us. My company sent us to their body shop for an estimate. The estimate was sky high, over $6500 for this little front corner hit, mainly due to listing all brand new parts. I don't have it in front of me, but things like new hood over $1000. The Jaguar is a 2000 S Type, but in pristine condition with 25,000 miles on it. I had bought it 2,000 miles and three months earlier for $10,000 cash. They offer me $5000 cash and wanted the car. I knew they had something like $4500 in parts on the estimate and knowing that the car would actually get repaired with used parts, I tried to negotiate them down, with me keeping the car. No, they don't do that. There offer was take it or leave it. They wanted the car.

So I declined their offer and went after the lady who hit me. Her company also used the same body shop and agreed to allow the same estimate. Only they took the estimate and reduced it to $3500 calling it 'fair market' estimate, saying that they could get the car repaired for that. Fine, if they had a relationship with the shop and it would get repaired on a professional discount. No, the shop said they wouldn't honor that number. Then the insurance company comes back and says that they are only admitting 20% fault in the accident and are offering me $700. I check with my insurance company and they tell me that if I signed that, it would be admitting 80% fault and they'd come after me and my insurance to pay for their insured's car. So I don't accept it.

This was during a difficult time in my life, so I didn't have the time / brain space / money to hire a lawyer to chase them, so I got nothing and the car never got repaired. It is drivable, but looks like hell. So having collision coverage on your car isn't the end all solution.

Edited June 27, 2014 by Tom Geiger

[Harry P.]

Insurance companies are set up to be the winners, no matter the situation. They'll "total" a slightly damaged and repairable car and offer you a low-ball "take it or leave it" settlement, as Tom pointed out. You can have coverage and pay your premiums for years, even decades, without ever making a claim... but if you do finally have a claim, even after decades of faithfully paying your insurance bill, they'll jack up your premium immediately, or drop you altogether. I don't know if I'd go as far as to call them "legalized thieves," but they do have their business set up in a "can't lose" way.

[Harry P.]

So having collision coverage on your car isn't the end all solution.

Yeah, I learned that several years ago. I was involved in a crash (the other driver's fault, BTW), and my insurance company "totaled" my car and offered me a cash settlement. Based, of course, on what they said the car was worth at the time. I made a stink about it, told them I couldn't possibly buy a replacement comparable to the car I had with the amount they offered. They said, basically, take it or leave it. So I took the money and bought a replacement car, but nothing even close to the car I had lost. And the worst part of it all was that the other driver caused the crash, but I wound up the loser.