Dow+17.46up+0.17%
10,023.42
Nasdaq+7.12up+0.34%
2,112.44
S&P+2.67up+0.25%
1,069.30

MSN Money Video

Video on MSN Money
This video player requires the installation of the free Adobe Flash Player
More video on MSN Money
Car wreck © George Doyle/Getty Images

Extra5/7/2009 12:01 AM ET

Detroit's woes to inflate car insurance rates

The fading value of the Chrysler and GM brands will force insurers into larger payouts for parts and repairs. Drivers of those models will ultimately foot the bill.

By Insure.com

Drivers of many American-made vehicles may soon find themselves handed bigger car insurance bills due to the automakers' troubles.

While Chrysler works its way through bankruptcy, General Motors tries to hammer out turnaround plans and Ford nurses its supplier network, wheels are in motion for events that will impact insurance.

Car insurance rate increases spring from a variety of factors, including higher costs for labor and repair parts. When the components used in an accident repair rise in price, insurance companies are forced to make larger claims payouts, and later adjust rates when data show that premiums are not sufficient for increased claims.

Automaker troubles are on track to affect those bottom lines. Here's how it could happen.

Resale values drop

A decline in resale value (also called residual value) for certain models, especially discontinued makes like Pontiac, will lead to more expensive insurance claims.

Consider this: After an accident, a car is considered a "total loss" when the cost of repairs exceeds a certain percentage of the car's value. That threshold is often 70%. At that point, the insurance company gives its policyholder a check for the car's market value and the car is hauled to the salvage yard. Total losses are among the most expensive claims for auto insurers.

With the uncertain future of GM and Chrysler, their used vehicles will likely drop in value as they become less desirable to used-car shoppers. This could hit used Pontiacs especially hard, as buyers perceive that parts and service will be hard to come by, or simply don't want to own a discontinued brand.

A decline in market value means the threshold for "total loss" will be reached more quickly and on more cars. Suddenly, auto insurers could find themselves swamped with total losses on Pontiacs and other American cars.

Once insurers see data showing a spike in total-loss payments, they'll increase rates for the drivers of affected vehicles.

Susanna Gotsch, industry analyst at CCC Information Services, which tracks auto claims data, points to the demise of Daewoo as a possible window into the future. Daewoo discontinued production in 2000.

"What we saw was that for Daewoo vehicles, the percentage of repair appraisals that were flagged total losses increased exponentially," Gotsch says.

Video on MSN Money

Car buyers © MedioImages / Getty Images
Smaller car, bigger insurance bill
While the price of a small car may be lower, you may end up paying more for insurance than you would with a large car or truck.
CCC data show that from 2001 to 2008, the percentage of model year 2000 Daewoo four-door sedans deemed total losses increased from around 6% to roughly 42%. By comparison, the industry average of total losses went from about 4% to 20%. That means twice as many Daewoos were junked as the average.

"If, at the end of the day, GM is not a viable company, then it's like a Daewoo," says Gotsch.

Or consider the fates of Oldsmobile and Plymouth. CCC notes that one year after those brands were discontinued, a 2-year-old Oldsmobile or Plymouth had the resale value of a typical 5-year-old vehicle.

With those rock-bottom resale values, a spike in total losses won't be far behind.

Continued: 'A classic case of supply and demand'

 1 | 2 | next >

Rate this Article

Click on one of the stars below to rate this article from 1 (lowest) to 5 (highest). LowRate it 1Rate it 2Rate it 3Rate it 4Rate it 5High
Join the discussion!
Sort by:
1 - 10 of 173
Thursday, May 07, 2009 7:05:17 AM
This makes no sense. WHen the resale value of the car drops, the amount the insurance company pays out drops with it. If you are driving a less expensive vehicle, the premiums should decline rather than increase.
Thursday, May 07, 2009 7:06:28 AM
Here's the flaw in that logic. If a car's value has  plummeted because it is no longer made then the value wriiten off as a total loss also has plummeted.
Thursday, May 07, 2009 7:24:55 AM

I'm not sure I understand the logic of the insurance companies.  Sure, I understand that the owners (and insured's) are going to be taking a hit on the value of their cars, but why is this going to cost the insurance industry more?  The article sounds like advance shock to cushion us for an upcoming round of greed by insurers.

 

If a two year old vehicle made by a bankrupt/discontinued car manufacturer is worth what a five year old vehicle is worth, getting into accidents with GM and Chrysler vehicles should save the insurance companies money.  Since the vehicles are now worth less (as in not as much money vs. nothing) premiums should also decline.  Cost to insure goes down, cost to handle a claim after an accident goes down.  

 

What am I missing?

 

 

Thursday, May 07, 2009 7:26:50 AM
Here we go again...There are millions of cars on the road, but insurance companies on pay out a fraction. They are the biggest scam artist alive today, down right racket! When is it all going to stop, all we here is accuses. Can you imagine driving for more than 30 years paying out thousands of dallars for insurance and never had to file a claim..well millions of drivers fit this bill. Once again greed-greed-greed! Enough said. 
Thursday, May 07, 2009 7:28:22 AM

You guys need to go back and re-read the article.

The writer makes perfect sense, the value of the vehicle has dropped therefore instead of repairing the car they are totaling it.  Which means they are paying for the whole cars resale value instead of just the repair.

Thursday, May 07, 2009 7:43:30 AM

The value of the car may decline but the repair costs stay the same or go up. If the value goes down, the threshold of a "total loss" becomes more of an issue and the claim amount will go up an additional 30%. Plus, now lawyers are getting tougher going after diminished value cases on vehicles. GAP claims will increase considerably also. Becomes a big circle with us, the paying policy holders, still holding the bill & paying out the wazu! The insurance co's will take the hit in the beginning but you know they won't loose for long before they raise rates.

Thursday, May 07, 2009 7:57:37 AM
Yes, it's true that there will be a higher number of total loss vehicles; however, the question is whether the extra 30% that the insurance companies are going to pay out at a lower fair market value will exceed the repair cost at a non-deflated fair market value (where the vehicle would not be a total loss). If the value of the vehicle drops more than 30%, then the insurance companies will actually spend less on payouts for total losses vs. repairs.
Thursday, May 07, 2009 7:58:53 AM
Plus, you forgot to add that if parts become scarce, since the cars aren't made anymore, and the car isn't a total loss, the insurance company will have to pay more to buy parts to fix the car.  The whole supply and demand issue.  So, when parts are scarce, they will cost more to get...
Thursday, May 07, 2009 8:00:51 AM
For all of you who do not understand the logic of the insurance companies just remember they only have one main objective - SCREW THE AMERICAN TAXPAYER  insurace companies are corporate america at its best.  Have you ever wondered why in the land of the free it is a LAW that you are not allowed to take your own life ( a law that cannot be monitored or enforced)?  It is bc of the insurance companies they have more influence of our govt than the people.  We are not a govt for the people.
#10
Thursday, May 07, 2009 8:01:36 AM

Unless of course you have "Actual Replacement Cost" coverage. In that case the following example "could" apply and increase costs to your insurance company and you.

 

Example you have a 2005 Pontiac Grand Prix. We know that GM is closing production on all Pontiac cars. Lets say for example you paid $25,000 for you car new and to replace it in 2010 with a comparable Chevy brand cost your insurance company $32,000. You get the idea? Additionally as "threader" pointed out with a car no longer being made, it is only a matter of time before there are no more parts to repair the damage available so they have to replace the whole car instead of just parts of it. While I have a feeling that if the car no longer being made is popular enough there will be "after market" body parts available, there is no guarantee this will happen.

 

Last but certainly not least, there is the simple GREED factor by the insurance companies. Most states require mandatory insurance. The insurance companies know this and feed off of it. Take E-insurance for example. I made this mistake of switching to them a few years back because they gave me a quote that was less than half what I was paying through my old insurance company. 6 months later when the bill came due again my rates had went up by $400. I had no claims. No moving violations and my credit score had improved greatly. When I asked E-Insurance why? I was told that all insurance companies were increasing their rates. Which a little online research proved was a lie. E-Insurance got greedy and increased my rates simply because they thought they could. I switched to Liberty Mutual, got better rates than E-Insurance gave me to begin with and have seen my rates drop ever since.

 

Bottom line: What will fuel the rate increase for most Auto insurance companies is GREED, plain and simple. They will increase rates to make more money simply because the can. If you're not happy with your auto insurance company, shop around I did and saved hundreds a year and don't believe the TV commercials.

1 - 10 of 173
To add a comment, pleasesign in