ICBC sells teen's car from under him

[MegaMx]

Originally Posted by dai3yuen

Adding a new engine and rims and tires won't increase the value of a car by $3000.

x2

Originally Posted by tiger_handheld

its just the replacement costs. icbc should give 2700+ cost of engine + rims provided he has receipts for those! + refund his premium. that would be the right thing to do!

Why?? $2700 is for the same car like that that works. I doubt he put in a '08 engine, it's a engine out of another car that "works" so it should be cars + rims (proof of rims cost) as I have a feeling they're only worth a few hundred.

$2700 is more than the average '92 integra on craigslist.

[racerman88]

ICBC did screw up though

[Mancini]

Originally Posted by MegaMx

Why?? $2700 is for the same car like that that works. I doubt he put in a '08 engine, it's a engine out of another car that "works" so it should be cars + rims (proof of rims cost) as I have a feeling they're only worth a few hundred.

$2700 is more than the average '92 integra on craigslist.

Good point.

[Lomac]

Originally Posted by ericthehalfbee

Why should he get the value of the engine?

If I have a $2,000 car, and the engine is worn out and I put in another engine, the car is still only worth $2,000. I doubt he put in a "brand new" engine - it was probably another used engine from a similar car. In fact, since he admits to paying $3,000 for the engine, wheels and tires this shows it wasn't some high-performance or "special" engine - it was just the going rate for a used engine from a wrecker to match his vehicle.

ICBC doesn't give out extra money if you happened to repair your car just before an accident. I see this all the time where someone drops $1,000 on a new brake job, then writes the car off. ICBC sure as hell won't give you back the $1,000 for the brakes. Therefore they shouldn't give the money back for the engine.

There's more to this regarding the rear-ender as well. If the at fault driver fled, then the driver of the first vehicle should have been a witness to this fact. It's only in cases of hit & run where there are no witnesses that the person getting hit is assigned fault, since there's no "evidence". It's easy for the first driver to know: did he hear a bang and then fell the impact, or did he feel the impact and then hear another bang.


But hey, it's fun to pick on ICBC cuz their the big bad suits out to fuck the little guy over. In my dealings with ICBC I see people getting what they deserve, and many more getting even more than they deserve. This guy is fucking whining over a mistake ICBC made on some PSO fucking junk car. This kinda stuff makes the news?

When my MX6 got written off, I submitted an entire stack of receipts, ranging from new Toyo Proxes tires (literally installed the day before the car burnt down) to a ton of engine work I had done over the past month. My adjuster took all the work I had done on modifying the engine into account and increased her offer quite substantially. They even offered 90% of the retail value of the tires on top of the offer. And while I wasn't given the amount that I put into the car, they offered so close a number that I wasn't going to complain. So no, they don't have to pay out for any work on the car, but if you state your case and have a nice adjuster, you can get paid back for a good chunk of work you've put into the car.

That said, ICBC also sold a car out from under a friend's nose after it was in an accident. He never signed the salvage waiver because he wanted to get the car back for parts. A week later he found out that it was sold to a salvage yard. Of course in this case he was offered a substantial amount for the "troubles" he was given, and not shown the run-around as it appears this other family is.

[Volvo-brickster]

come to think about it, the guy should request 4 tickets to the mens hockey finals and call it a day

[Soundy]

^In both cases, ICBC sold a car that they didn't hold title to... no matter what else, it amounts to theft, and should be treated accordingly.

[Mancini]

Originally Posted by orange7

damn.. sometimes i wonder if it's even worth not buying the most basic insurance? I mean, ICBC might not even cover what's suppose to be covered..

why am i paying the extra for insurance when ICBC will probably screw me over when accidents happen...

Basic Autoplan is mandatory in BC.

It covers up to $200,000 of third party liability, accident benefits (medical & rehab) and first party coverage (uninsured & unidentified motorist protection). It does not include your collision & comprehensive.

Most of the people I've talked to that make these blanket statements typically have both collision and comprehensive, as well as more than the mandatory minimum of third party liability. If you really feel that it's a rip off then you can just get the basics for much cheaper. Your risk, your call.

Accident benefits operate on a "no fault" system, meaning ICBC will pay.

Third party liability operates on an "absolute liability" concept, meaning ICBC will pay.

Most of the disputes seem to arise from the valuation of the claim, not the fact that ICBC refuses to pay.

[tonyvu]

ICBC ARE DOUCHE BAGSSS

[InvisibleSoul]

Originally Posted by Soundy

^In both cases, ICBC sold a car that they didn't hold title to... no matter what else, it amounts to theft, and should be treated accordingly.

I guess he should report the theft to ICBC...

[MegaMx]

Originally Posted by Lomac

A week later he found out that it was sold to a salvage yard. Of course in this case he was offered a substantial amount for the "troubles" he was given, and not shown the run-around as it appears this other family is.

Big difference, the family is asking for 2x more than what the car is worth because they want to take advantage of the situation. They probably clued in that ICBC sold it under them so they can rip them off now. What ICBC offered them is fair and if they handled it properly rather than acting like PMSing high school girls I'm sure the adjuster would have been more than happy to give them a bit more. Service people react much better and are willing to do much more for you if you're nice to them.

ICBC did f*k up but then again we're all used to it by now more or less. If you're unhappy go check out the DMV, insurance and all the fiasco that happens in the US. There's no "utopia" in the car insurance world, here nor south of the border.

[jimzilla]

holy, fuck icbc!

[fetched]

Don't let ICBC get away with this.
I stole your car, i got caught, i pay you what the car's worth and nothing happens to me. Does that go well with you?
Sue ICBC for every single penny you can get out of them for doing that shit

[B-DiZzLe]

ICBC offers $600 increased from original offer, what a fuckin joke. These fuckin jew's rape every fuckin driver in BC for insurance but can't afford to fuckin pay an appropriate amount for their own fuck up, poor kid. This angers me.

[phatpower]

Originally Posted by fetched

Don't let ICBC get away with this.
I stole your car, i got caught, i pay you what the car's worth and nothing happens to me. Does that go well with you?
Sue ICBC for every single penny you can get out of them for doing that shit

I so agree with this ICBC is a joke and should be taught a lesson

[MegaMx]

Originally Posted by VancityPimp

ICBC offers $600 increased from original offer, what a fuckin joke. These fuckin jew's rape every fuckin driver in BC for insurance but can't afford to fuckin pay an appropriate amount for their own fuck up, poor kid. This angers me.

I don't quite see why everybody is worked up over this. They already offered him over the market price and now increased it by $600 more and they're still complaining? Why does he get 30% more than his car is worth? I was thinking about selling my range rover but i guess i can just get rear ended and then expect ICBC to pay me double what it's worth so people don't get their panties up in a bunch.

They did screw up but it happens and who knows how long ICBC had to park and store the car for them before they decided to sell it. If they wanted to keep the car, why didn't get it towed back to their home right away or right after the adjuster was done with it? It took them 4+ months to find out their cars been sold? I had no idea ICBC was a free garage. Check out the insurance in the US and other parts of the world, not much better than ICBC and often a lot worse.

Get over yourselves people and your self-entitlement to a utopian world and undeserved money.

[MegaMx]

Originally Posted by fetched

Don't let ICBC get away with this.
I stole your car, i got caught, i pay you what the car's worth and nothing happens to me. Does that go well with you?
Sue ICBC for every single penny you can get out of them for doing that shit

Yea that's exactly how it goes. Go steal a car, get caught and see what happens. You'll barely get a slap on the wrist. So better yet go steal a car that's a write-off and barely worth the tow truck fees to get it out of there and then come back and complain. I guess I forgot that all these car thieves loose so much money every time they steal a car (sarcasm ).

[BoneThug]

Originally Posted by Volvo-brickster

"In the accident, Brendan was hit from behind and then pushed into a car in front of him. The at-fault driver fled -- and ICBC assigned fault to Brendan. "

brutal. absolutely brutal.

thats one side of the story. dont know if its what actually happened.

[fetched]

Megamx
Are you dumb?
It doesn't matter if it's a write off, doesn't matter if it's worth less than the tow truck fees, it doesn't even matter if the car is undrivable.
It's the principle that ICBC broke by selling the car before any waiver/consent was signed, and it doesn't matter what the car is worth in your eyes, because you are not the owner. In this case, ICBC should pay whatever value the car was worth in the owners eye, up to 2x the market value i guess is perfectly fair.

I'm going to steal your car tomorrow, return it to you without the engine and strip the shit out of it, give you what I THINK the car's worth, and tell you to fuck off. But then shit doesn't work that way in the real world, you'll probably call the cops, they'll find me and arrest me. Charge me for PSP, go to jail, have court date, and get bum fucked in jail while i wait for my trial. I guess big corporations like ICBC have supporters like you, who pays ICBC huge premiums each month to have them rape you when that day comes.


Show ICBC your post and they'll probably hire pricks like you. Have no respect for the law and for consumer confidence

[MegaMx]

Originally Posted by fetched

Megamx
Are you dumb?
It doesn't matter if it's a write off, doesn't matter if it's worth less than the tow truck fees, it doesn't even matter if the car is undrivable.
It's the principle that ICBC broke by selling the car before any waiver/consent was signed, and it doesn't matter what the car is worth in your eyes, because you are not the owner. In this case, ICBC should pay whatever value the car was worth in the owners eye, up to 2x the market value i guess is perfectly fair.

No but it's obvious you are. The justice system does not pay for "what it's worth to you" otherwise next time I have a thief break into my car, steal my radio, then sell it and I catch him, I'll sue him for millions because it was my first radio ever and that's what it's worth to me. If he offers me 30% more than it's worth I guess I'll tell him to fuck off and pay me a shitload more. If you're paying people based on sentimental value how come I can't sue somebody who rear-ends me because it's no longer mint and for me my car mint is worth 100x more?

Originally Posted by fetched

I'm going to steal your car tomorrow, return it to you without the engine and strip the shit out of it, give you what I THINK the car's worth, and tell you to fuck off. But then shit doesn't work that way in the real world, you'll probably call the cops, they'll find me and arrest me. Charge me for PSP, go to jail, have court date, and get bum fucked in jail while i wait for my trial. I guess big corporations like ICBC have supporters like you, who pays ICBC huge premiums each month to have them rape you when that day comes.

Can I nominate this for stupid post of the year? They're not giving him what they think it's worth, they're giving him ABOVE market value for a object. Can a '92 integra that's been compeltely wrecked at somebody else's fault (or even his own) really hold that much sentimental value? Also how did ICBC rape him? His car got totaled and they're giving him more money than it was worth? Also how come in your scenario where you steal my car you're not talking about financial compensation of what the car is worth to me which is your entire premise for the argument?

Originally Posted by fetched

Show ICBC your post and they'll probably hire pricks like you. Have no respect for the law and for consumer confidence

First of all, , I've been ripped off by ICBC before by getting blamed for a accident that wasn't my fault. It doesn't make me loose judgement in anger and being a fucking hippie and "sticking it to the man" so don't tell me I'm a huge fan of theirs. I'm just saying they made a mistake in paperwork and who knows the other side of the story. Did they never pick it up from ICBC or were they trying the entire time to pick it up? If you crash your car in front of my house and park it on my lawn for months on end, I'll sell it and tell you to fuck off when you ask me for the money. Everybody wants to sue ICBC over everything. It's a totaled piece of shit car that's barely worth $500 in scraps and they're paying him 30% more than it's worth to replace with a mint working one.

ICBC did fuck up by selling it before it's signed but that's an accident and overlooked not a intentional criminal action.

[fetched]

Originally Posted by MegaMx

No but it's obvious you are. The justice system does not pay for "what it's worth to you" otherwise next time I had a thief break into my car, steal my radio, then sold it and I caught him, it could be worth millions to me because it was my first radio ever. If you're paying people based on sentimental value how come I can't sue somebody who rear-ends me because it's no longer mint and for me my car mint is worth millions?


Can I nominate this for stupid post of the year? They're not giving him what they think it's worth, they're giving him ABOVE market value for a object, can a '92 integra really hold that much sentimental value? How did ICBC rape him? His car got totaled and they're giving him more money than it was worth? Also how come in your scenario where you steal my car you're not talking about financial compensation of what the car is worth to me?



It's fucks like you the reason why we have to pay the premiums. Everybody wants to sue ICBC over everything. It's a totaled piece of shit car that's barely worth $500 in scraps and they're paying him 30% more than it's worth to replace.

ICBC did fuck up by selling it before it's signed but that's an accident and overlooked not a intentional criminal action.

Too bad it wasn't a thief, it's ICBC. ICBC of course arn't going to charge their adjuster or whoever responsible to take the blame, so the rightful way to solve this issue is to repay the sentimental value of the car to the owner up to 2x the market price or whatever the judge feels appropriate.
We trust ICBC to safeguard our future in case of an accident or stolen property, and for them to do the opposite of what their suppose to do, the owner has the gounds to sue them for everything from the payout and compensation for BREAKING THE LAW.
It's fucks like you that doesn't understand the underlying problem with this incident, this incident has nothing to do with our premiums as he has a legit reason to sue ICBC for whats rightfully theirs.
It is an accident, but also a criminal action, intentional or not, if ICBC isn't going to man up and pay what the owner thinks of what the car's worth, then a lawsuit is reasonable under the grounds that ICBC FUCKED UP. Will ICBC give you leniency if you do something that is not included in your policy such as driving drunk or not wearing a seat belt? No, they will not, they will adjust their payout accordingly to the circumstances. In this case, they have to adjust their payout to the circumstance the owner of the vehicle experienced, and the mistake that they made.

PS: A thief = Someone that jacks your car.
ICBC = You pay them alot to jack your car. Therefore a bigger payout is necessary hence my point. I did not say anything about the payout being absurd, neither did the owner of the vehicle, they simply wanted 2x the value of the car which is under reasonable grounds, and of course the final settlement will probably be somewhere in the middle of those two numbers.

[MegaMx]

Originally Posted by fetched

Too bad it wasn't a thief, it's ICBC. ICBC of course arn't going to charge their adjuster or whoever responsible to take the blame, so the rightful way to solve this issue is to repay the sentimental value of the car to the owner up to 2x the market price or whatever the judge feels appropriate.
We trust ICBC to safeguard our future in case of an accident or stolen property, and for them to do the opposite of what their suppose to do, the owner has the gounds to sue them for everything from the payout and compensation for BREAKING THE LAW.
It's fucks like you that doesn't understand the underlying problem with this incident, this incident has nothing to do with our premiums as he has a legit reason to sue ICBC for whats rightfully theirs.
It is an accident, but also a criminal action, intentional or not, if ICBC isn't going to man up and pay what the owner thinks of what the car's worth, then a lawsuit is reasonable under the grounds that ICBC FUCKED UP. Will ICBC give you leniency if you do something that is not included in your policy such as driving drunk or not wearing a seat belt? No, they will not, they will adjust their payout accordingly to the circumstances. In this case, they have to adjust their payout to the circumstance the owner of the vehicle experienced, and the mistake that they made.

I'm pretty sure for it to be criminal you need to prove intent. If ICBC encourages people to do this, then yes it's criminal. If it's a accident, it's not.

Tell me this, if a registry clerk short changes you on a purchase (accidentally), is that criminal?

Anyways I updated my top post and I am in NO WAY a ICBC fan. I just got to -10% instead of being a lot lower because a long time ago I got blamed for an accident that wasn't my fault (not going to get into it) but just because I dislike ICBC doesn't mean every case that comes up I'll be all for otherwise our premiums would be MUCH higher if ICBC kept on paying out people what they want or what people think it's worth. Look at the US system and then you'll be thankful you have ICBC.

Regardless, no matter what court you go to, every judge will tell you the same thing, they can't compensate on sentimental value. Why? because that opens up a whole new precedent for future cases. Sure for this car it would be only $3000 but what if it was a Ferrari that it happened to. ICBC should now pay a extra $500,000 on top of the $500,000 that it's worth? (Don't forget who pays these fees in the end, which then goes back to the rest of us starting up a new thread complaining about how our rates went up.) In other words, no matter what nubmer ICBC gets to, it sets a precedent that somebody in the future can do. So if they pay him 50% over value and tomorrow I total my Range Rover and I just ignore their letters and wait for them to sell it without my permission (keep in mind even PO Boxes will open and sell the boxes that you haven't picked up within a certain amount of time) I'll ask them for 50% more because I heard in this case that's what they did. If they try to say it was a lower amount, i'll just sue them for discrimination then (sarcasm) for even more and bring up the case in court.

[Soundy]

^The point is, the kid should have had the CHOICE to keep the car, or take the buyout from ICBC. What the car is "worth" market value is irrelevant - if YOU had just finished dumping $3000 into your car when it got smacked up, wouldn't you want the option to keep it and salvage your new parts yourself?

He wasn't given that choice; ICBC's actions were, quite frankly, fraudulent and illegal. Put bluntly, they sold a vehicle they didn't own.

[CanadaGoose]

MegaMx, i think you're missing the point...

SOundy hit the nail on the head. because mistake or not, they sold a vehicle they did not own. it's not their decision what to do with someone else's property. $3000 or $30,000....what a ridiculous mistake to be making

[Poonpee]

Originally Posted by MegaMx

Sure for this car it would be only $3000 but what if it was a Ferrari that it happened to. ICBC should now pay a extra $500,000 on top of the $500,000 that it's worth? (Don't forget who pays these fees in the end, which then goes back to the rest of us starting up a new thread complaining about how our rates went up.)

So you are saying if i own a Ferrari and a Honda Civic, their insurance will be the same ?

Thats why we hate ICBC...."(Don't forget who pays these fees in the end, which then goes back to the rest of us starting up a new thread complaining about how our rates went up.)"

[FatalCloud]

icbc's at fault for sure, how much do you guys think icbc should pay then to be fair? it's hard to be on the Lillies side of things though when they're asking for over $6000, that's just ridiculous.