Insurance write-off reasons?

ClownShoes · 21 Jun 2016 at 13:34

Hi all,
After wanting a change from my Bandit 1200, even though it’s been almost faultless for nearly 4 years, I decided to have a look around.

Only wanted to spend a few grand really to scratch an itch so was looking at older Triples and some Z1000, decent ones for the years (03 ish) seemed to hover around £3000. Saw an ’03 Z1000, 17k miles, lots of custom bits and cans, union jack spray paint and £2700! It was a CAT D which explained the price.

I called the garage and asked why and all they could tell me was it was wrote off in the first few months of ownership, I bought it and hoped for the best :cool:

I did do my own HPI check on the bike and it was manufactured in March 03 and wrote off in April 03, part service history since then with some full services etc carried out.

Is there any way to find out why it was wrote off? I’ve had it for a couple of months now without anything feeling wrong, apart from swapping the reg/rec which was a bit useless, just curious really.

Cheers

tom_e · 21 Jun 2016 at 13:42

I'm not sure how to get the information but that's a fair bit of damage to Cat D a brand new bike!

Fireskull · 21 Jun 2016 at 13:45

I don't think there is any way of finding out what the damage was.

ClownShoes · 21 Jun 2016 at 14:04

tom_e said:
I'm not sure how to get the information but that's a fair bit of damage to Cat D a brand new bike!

I thought the same thing, I did wonder how it was "only" a CAT D but insurance decided not to repair? From what I read CAT D are generally not structural but there's not a lot of body work to them so not sure what else it could be.

Fireskull said:
I don't think there is any way of finding out what the damage was.

I'm thinking the same now to be honest, I've had a friend have a ride and a check over and nothing screamed out to him, but just can't see any way of getting any reports etc.

tom_e · 21 Jun 2016 at 14:06

Things like forks can be bent, caliper mounts ripped off etc. as long as it's not trashed the actual frame of the bike it won't get Cat A/B'd from my understanding. I think even our resident crash dummy up there has struggled to completely scrap a bike

skyripper · 21 Jun 2016 at 14:13

Stolen and recovered?

Also write to the former owner on the V5 document.

ttaskmaster · 21 Jun 2016 at 14:30

One word - CUSTOM.

Cat C would be where repairs exceed the vehicle value.
Cat D would be where repair costs are significant compared to the vehicle value, including availability of parts.

Custom stuff is expensive to get, but the resulting vehicle is often not worth as much as the owner thinks... plus if the PO only had TPFT or insured it for just a few grand, that counts against the vehicle value.

wazza300 · 21 Jun 2016 at 14:32

Only way is to get hold of the insurance damage assessor's report which I doubt you'll manage

Supposed to be just cosmetic or stolen recovered if its a cat d,im riding a cat c bike atm,writing to the previous owner is a good shout,i got sent the owners handbook by doing that,but I didn't ask what happened accident wise

I wouldn't worry,just enjoy riding it

Far as I know it gets written off as its not cost effective to repair but they quote main dealer prices for parts which are astronomical,cheap used spares off eBay cost pennies which makes it easy for folks to put them back on the road and save money

ClownShoes · 21 Jun 2016 at 15:18

Cheers for the answers.

I did think the custom paint job may have been to hide damage, but from the receipts that I have and log book the colour change wasn't until around 2008.

The bikes had 5 owners in it's 13 years so bit of a trail to get to the original one to find out.

It is fun to ride though so I'll try and put it out of my mind for now, local garage said he'll check it over for me and he mocks me plenty when I buy a dud and he has wrote bikes off so won't be shy telling me if there's something too bad.

TallPaul_S · 21 Jun 2016 at 15:39

Bikes can be a write off due to tiny thing, like a scratch in the frame - insurers would need to repair the bike to as new condition, so that would be a new frame needed.

ttaskmaster · 21 Jun 2016 at 16:40

It should have had an MoT before being allowed back on the road anyway.
Cat C would also need a VIC check before they are allowed back.
There are a number of services that can check the detailed history and inspect the repairs to make sure it's safe. I think the RAC offers this, too.

tom_e · 21 Jun 2016 at 16:41

ttaskmaster said:
It should have had an MoT before being allowed back on the road anyway.
Cat C would also need a VIC check before they are allowed back.
There are a number of services that can check the detailed history and inspect the repairs to make sure it's safe. I think the RAC offers this, too.

VIC does not apply to bikes, in fact it no longer applies to anything but it's never applied to bikes IIRC.

Dogbreath · 21 Jun 2016 at 21:37

wazza300 said:
Supposed to be just cosmetic or stolen recovered if its a cat d

It's a purely financial decision based on cost to repair (including hire charges etc) vs vehicle value. The type and amount of damage is not taken directly into account for a Cat C/D, just cost to fix it.

This is why a write off on a nearly new car or bike implies that it received a significant level of damage compared to an older, less valuable vehicle.

wazza300 · 21 Jun 2016 at 21:43

That's what I said,cost effective

ttaskmaster · 22 Jun 2016 at 12:22

Dogbreath said:
This is why a write off on a nearly new car or bike implies that it received a significant level of damage compared to an older, less valuable vehicle.

No, it just implies that the parts are overpriced or hard to source.
Break a wing mirror off a brand new Seat and then a Bentley, see which one costs you more... In fact, with older vehicles, the cost of some parts are higher than the vehicle sells for - Mercedes, for example, as the Mrs found out!

But as mentioned, it's a dodge - The £3,800 quoted to fix my bike using brand new OEM parts ended up being just £600, including labour, using 2nd hand and Club-sourced parts.

tom_e said:
VIC does not apply to bikes, in fact it no longer applies to anything but it's never applied to bikes IIRC.

After my accident in 2013, my insurance required both VIC and MoT before they would continue my existing policy... The VIC was just a bloke who came to see the V5 and check against the engine & frame numbers, mostly.

tom_e · 22 Jun 2016 at 12:25

ttaskmaster said:
After my accident in 2013, my insurance required both VIC and MoT before they would continue my existing policy... The VIC was just a bloke who came to see the V5 and check against the engine & frame numbers, mostly.

That's down to that specific insurer some won't even be bothered about it going through another MOT as long as the old one is still current.

wazza300 · 22 Jun 2016 at 12:29

I didn't require a Vic test,it was out of mot,that was with Bennett's

Just a straightforward normal mot

ttaskmaster · 22 Jun 2016 at 14:02

tom_e said:
That's down to that specific insurer some won't even be bothered about it going through another MOT as long as the old one is still current.

Whereas some want chapter and verse... Devitt, I'm looking at you!!

ClownShoes · 22 Jun 2016 at 15:52

I only started thinking about it as a friend bought a CAT D car and he said he had a report with his, but he was the first owner since the write off so possibly why.

It was an impulse buy for summer really so, hopefully, it'll keep running well for then at least

Dogbreath · 24 Jun 2016 at 13:05

ttaskmaster said:
No, it just implies that the parts are overpriced or hard to source.

No, it implies that it is more expensive to repair than the vehicle is worth. That might be due to parts prices, might be due to labour charges or might because because a part isn't available for a month so they have to provide a hire vehicle or some other reason.

Very few people are going to be happy to have their car/bike repaired with second hand parts, particularly in the case of a no fault claim.