[Aditya]

Thanks to Vidya Gupta for sending this information in. Heartfelt gratitude for sharing it with other enthusiasts via this Team-BHP share page!

Good Afternoon

I am a regular visitor to this site for the last many years and though I have been bestowed the honour of membership of this site, I have not contributed anything. I have benefitted from the wisdom and experiences of others shared on this site though.

Recently I have faced an unfortunate incident. I purchased a new Fortuner Sigma 4 (4X4) AT model in November 2016. Last month, it was stolen. It was insured with RTI (return to invoice) cover.

Now, while discussing the claim with the insurance company, they have mentioned that Sigma 4 is a discontinued model. However, to my knowledge and understanding, it is still the same model that is on sale as on date.

Can any esteemed member provide me with the necessary / authentic paper proof to refute the claim (that my Sigma 4 AT purchased in 2016 has been discontinued) of insurance company? The insurance company is portraying the facelift as a different model and is trying to avoid payment of on road price of today's 4X4 AT model towards the claim settlement.

Kindly consider it as an urgent request and if possible, try to respond ASAP.

[Axe77]

Originally Posted by Aditya

Thanks to Vidya Gupta for sending this information in.[/url]!

I understand what the insurance company is not offering but can the OP please clarify what exactly they ARE offering? This will be instructive in assessing in how to react to the insurance company.

Also, what happens in the case where a model itself is discontinued. Just as an example, for instance, if I have a RTI for a 3GT and it is no longer sold, should they not at least benchmark to the closest equivalent model - in this case at very least a 3 series and more reasonably a 3 GL?

[lsjey]

It would be good if the details of the insurance are shared like Insurance company name, add-ons chosen etc. It will help the members here weigh-in on the matter.

Regards,
lsjey

[androdev]

I am not surprised by this. I have shared my opinion on return to invoice cover in this thread:

https://www.team-bhp.com/forum/india...ml#post5084637 (Car insurance : Return to invoice vs IDV)

Originally Posted by androdev

This is how it is mentioned in my policy:



Option#A is very good and simple to understand.

Option#B has lot of ambiguity. Let's say you bought an Octavia last year and Skoda launched a new model this year. Would you be offered the new model as a replacement? I doubt it. I tried to find more details about option #B but could not get a definitive reply. If you just get ex-showroom price, you will lose out a lot (road tax, inflation, etc). There is no way you can buy the new Octavia with the ex-showroom price of previous generation Octavia.

Some companies offer this for upto 5 years I think. Even zero depreciation policy is also offered for 8+ years I think. It all depends on the insurance company. Personally, I don't find this as useful as zero depreciation cover.

Attachment 2168722

As with all insurance claims, there is an ambiguity here and insurance company is playing dirty and he has to do what every Indian consumer is expected to do. Waste a lot of energy to get his due.

I am also curious to know what is the offer from the insurance company, without which this discussion is incomplete.

[vinodh_eee]

Originally Posted by androdev

I am not surprised by this. I have shared my opinion on return to invoice cover in this thread:

As with all insurance claims, there is an ambiguity here and insurance company is playing dirty and he has to do what every Indian consumer is expected to do. Waste a lot of energy to get his due.

I am also curious to know what is the offer from the insurance company, without which this discussion is incomplete.

Doesn’t return-to-invoice means giving the total money spent by the customer including ex-showroom, road tax etc. Irrespective of whether the model is being currently produced. Or does it qualify for some inflation benefits too?

[Bibendum90949]

Reproducing one of my old posts here.

Originally Posted by Bibendum90949

I tried to do some fact digging on this. Here's what I found. I'm marking them in bold that provides answer to your query.

Few points.

* CBU 's can't avail Return To Invoice add on.
* Models that are declared obsolete presently can't avail this either.

In the event of a claim, they'll pay whatever the lowest amount from the below 3.

1. OTR price at the time of orginal purchase.
2. IDV as per definition( IDV is considered as ex show room price+ road tax+ registration charges at the time of orginal purchase)
3. current replacement price (on road ) in case exactly the same make / model is available.

I guess the above clause is made to protect the insurance company in case the price of the car in question is slashed. This means , one of the first two prices I just mentioned above is applied in case the vehicle is no more in production(IDV amount probably since OTR(1) may include facilitation, extended warranty etc and hence a higher amount than 2).

One is assured of the OTR price at the time of orginal purchase if present prices are higher than earlier or an amount equal to current OTR price of the same model (in case of slash in price compared to original buying price).

I've attached the full document. Refer the header " Add on 2"

Add on - 2
Return to Invoice Value (Insured’s Declared Value ie equal to On Road Price)
(Available to all Classes of vehicles ie Pvt Cars,Two Wheelers, all Commercial vehicles including Misc D)

The IDV shall be taken as the On Road Price which is defined as Manufacturers’ Selling Price of the vehicle+ Road Tax +Registration Charges as applicable for
the class/make model of the vehicle as supported by the invoice of original purchase issued to you by the insured and documents in support of the charges
payable under the head Road Tax and Registration Charges .
In event of a claim for your vehicle being a Total Loss /Constructive Total Loss due to an accident or theft during the period of insurance and not being
recovered, we will pay the lowest of the On Road Price of the vehicle at the time of original purchase or the IDV as defined above or the current replacement
price (on road ) in case exactly the same make / model is available .
Conditions : You are the registered owner of the motor vehicle
1. Claim is deemed to be Constructive Total Loss if aggregate cost of repairs and retrieval exceeds 75% of the IDV .
2. The addon is available subject to the vehicle not being older than 60 months counting from the date of invoice or the date of registration of the
vehicle whichever is earlier
3. The financiers’ “No Objection” shall be available for above
4. The Add on shall prevail only if the Total Loss /Constructive Total Loss claim is admissible under the Policy
5. Not available for Imported vehicles ie fully built up units imported from overseas
6. The new vehicle should be insured with USGIC
Specific Exclusions:No coverage under this add on is available if stolen vehicle is recovered within 90 days of theft
1. Cost of accessories(electrical/ electronic /non electrical) installed by You and or installed bi -fuel kits not insured at inception of the policy
2. This shall not include any facilitation charges paid to any intermediary/ dealer for getting the vehicle registered.
3. Models declared obsolete (out of production ) shall not be provided the Add on .

These excerpts were from a 2010 document. The conditions should still hold good I guess.

[ruzbehxyz]

Originally Posted by Aditya

Thanks to Vidya Gupta for sending this information in. Heartfelt gratitude for sharing it with other enthusiasts via this Team-BHP share page!

First of all, all details are not given in the message above. If the owner has RTI and if the Insurance company is willing to pay the total value + others as per RTI clause, then the owner should be happy and accept it, or do you want to make a profit out of it ?
No offense to Toyota owners, but there are some buyers who want to make a hugh profit out of the vehicle during resale or any other means.

In case of RTI, please note when you make a claim under Total Loss / Constructive Total Loss or Total Theft, the insurance company generally compensates the lower of the following two values:-

1. The price of the vehicle including the Ex-Showroom Price, the Road Tax and also the Registration Charges at the time of the original purchase.
2. The current replacement price of the vehicle including the Ex-Showroom Price, the Road Tax and the Registration Charges, in case the same model is available.

In your case, no.1 is applicable as the prices of Fortuner keep rising. Even if the model is still running, no.1 is applicable. No.2 is not applicable.

Secondly regarding models of cars, if the company launches the same vehicle with same engine and just some minor tweaks, and with a different name, it is still considered as a new model. Model is derived from the name. Eg. Toyota Fortuner Legender.

[Aditya]

An update from Vidya Gupta:

After reading some of the comments of esteemed members, I am sharing some key details as asked for:-

The insurance is RTI (return to Invoice)

The company is saying that Sigma Σ4 stands discontinued in 2020.

However to my understanding and responses from Toyota (Galaxy/Uttam/Espirit) dealers, the Σ is nothing but a sign for 4x4 models. But the insurance company is confusing the same as a different model. I have asked Toyota and according to them, the said Sigma sign is being affixed even on today's 4x4 model.

The insurance company, in my opinion, is trying to pass the 2020 facelift as a different model which should not be the case, as a facelift is not the discontinuation of the model itself and, as such, the insurance company is trying to settle the matter by offering the 2020 model's on-road price inclusive of road tax.

But as already stated above, when the model is still continuing, I must be entitled to the on-road price as of today.

PS: One of us is wrong, but the question is WHO? Hence the query.

[androdev]

What was the on road price paid for the stolen car?
What kind of settlement is being offered by the insurance company?
What would be the on road price for the new car?
What exactly are the wordings from the policy statement?

Insurance company is not wrong to claim that the model has changed (going by the letter of the contact) but they should give you the benefit of doubt going by the spirit of the contract.

[WorkingGuru]

Had to read through the whole thing to understand that they're offering the 2020 model's on-road price inclusive of road tax.

Honestly this is the first time I'm hearing that the insurance company would pay OTR price of a new vehicle for a 5 year old one. Unbelievable.

As others have requested, kindly share the insurers name and possibly the break-up of the policy costs. It will be very helpful to me.

[thirdmainroad]

I think if they are paying the On Road Price of what you paid - not of what a similar variant is priced today - the Insurance company is being quite fair!

I think they have a clear clause stating that they will pay the OTR value of the vehicle on the date of purchase - meaning they will pay what you paid, not what you would pay if you were to buy a similar model with a price hike.

[ninjatalli]

So if I understand, there are three OTR prices being considered

1. Fortuner 4X4 AT 2016 (owner's purchased) model
2. Fortuner 4X4 AT 2020 (facelift) model
3. Fortuner 4X4 AT 2021 (currently available) model
Given the price increases every year, I'm guessing the 2021 model $ value > 2020 model > 2016 model.

As OP (/Vidya) hasn't really given the full financial details (Qs shared by @androdev), s/he's pushing for 2021 OTR price while the insurance firm is offering 2020 OTR price. Is there a sizeable monetary difference? Trust OP can clarify on the questions.

I guess the OP is trying to get the maximum buck possible. Nothing wrong in it but I wonder why the reluctance in sharing details here. It'd help in others responding, especially those aware of the Fortuner variants (differences).

P.s. If OP is already a member, why not post as a member directly I wonder?

[IamNikhil]

As per my knowledge, RTI should cover the final on-road price that prevailed at the time of delivery.

Can the OP please clarify which insurance company she is dealing with?

Companies keep launching facelifts and newer versions; doesn't mean a customer should be deprived of their legitimate claim arising out of owning an earlier vehicle.

[VW2010]

Forgive my ignorance. Is the owner expecting more money than the original invoice? If so I will be super surprised if insurance settles it that way. The lesser of invoice vs same car replacment is what insurance will pay. It is totally unclear what the issue is here?.

[AutoNoob]

Originally Posted by Aditya

An update from Vidya Gupta:

The insurance company, in my opinion, is trying to pass the 2020 facelift as a different model which should not be the case, as a facelift is not the discontinuation of the model itself and, as such, the insurance company is trying to settle the matter by offering the 2020 model's on-road price inclusive of road tax.

But as already stated above, when the model is still continuing, I must be entitled to the on-road price as of today.

IMHO, Insurance company is correct on its part. Facelift is not the same model. It's an upgrade (mostly) with different specifications (and prices).