17 captured repliesPartial discussion capture · Source accounts, not a confirmed diagnosis
THIS DISCUSSION / SOURCE-DERIVED OVERVIEW
Discussion summary
YOUR RESEARCHAgreed value on 996 Turbo? - Page 1 - 911/Carrera GT - PistonHeads UK
Leading reported evidence
Use evidence based values at the time of loss
Suggestion or failed attempt
No successful repair reported for this finding.
0
Reported fixes
0
Unsuccessful attempts
1
Discussions
Read evidence and context
Explicit resolution reports before identified causes, performed actions and suggestions. Within each level, matching component labels precede direct query mentions and inherited thread context; successful versus unsuccessful discussion counts, owner confirmations and independent discussion support determine order. This is not a probability of success.
Discussions that contain suggestions
1
0 original-poster resolution reports. Counts can overlap; they are not unique people or a success rate.
0 discussions have direct query context; 0 report a fix in that context. Other evidence may inherit the discussion’s subject.
Suggestion
An assessor uses evidence based values at the time of loss.
Agreed value on 996 Turbo? - Page 1 - 911/Carrera GT - PistonHeads UK
Read full discussion summary
Leading evidence: 'Use evidence based values at the time of loss' (no explicit attributable resolution; this is a reported action or suggestion). Across 1 matching discussions, The most frequently discussed action is 'Use evidence based values at the time of loss' (1 discussions). For that action, 0 discussions report a resolution and 0 report an unsuccessful attempt. No action has an explicit, attributable resolution report under the current rules. These are forum reports and suggestions, not a confirmed diagnosis.
Source reports, not a diagnosis or a success probability. Counts refer to discussions and can overlap.
Agreed value on 996 Turbo? - Page 1 - 911/Carrera GT - PistonHeads UK
Coverage and how to read this overview
Counts describe captured discussions, not unique people or a diagnosis. Author identities are not reliably stored. Exact duplicate evidence is counted once across matching discussions; one discussion counts at most once per action/state. Multiple repairs reported together remain a combination. Suggestions and failed attempts do not establish a fix. Matches cover whole discussions and can include related faults, model variants and incomplete threads.
17 eligible posts · 0 unverified posts · 1 discussions match the subject in their title or opening post.
PistonHeads: 1 discussions
0 evidence records excluded for query context · 0 excluded by outcome qualification · 0 adjusted by outcome qualification.
0 acknowledgements have no verified action link; they do not establish a repair result.
Generation: 20261026T203514Z · outcome-qualification-6. Deterministic extraction; no AI model inference. How we use sources
It's insurance renewal in a month's time, and I was wondering if it's worth getting an agreed value for my 2002 996 Turbo on the policy. It's through Mannings, their quote is reasonable given the UK track day cover but I don't currently have an agreed value for the car with them.
I know that threads about value rather than driving are tedious but I'm just wondering if any other 996 Turbo owners have this on their policy, or is it not worth the bother?
martyspain said:
It's insurance renewal in a month's time, and I was wondering if it's worth getting an agreed value for my 2002 996 Turbo on the policy. It's through Mannings, their quote is reasonable given the UK track day cover but I don't currently have an agreed value for the car with them.
I know that threads about value rather than driving are tedious but I'm just wondering if any other 996 Turbo owners have this on their policy, or is it not worth the bother?
I have an agreed value of 30k on mine (2002)
Values have and are rising as they have been sleepers for a long time now but the market is waking up to the bargain 911 of the last few yrs.
I put mine at an agreed value of £26k last year with Mannings. Don't think it affected the premium at all but they did say if i had wanted to put it above £30k they would need something off me, can't remember if it was just photos or a valuation off an expert.
Renewal is up soon and will be asking for an agreed value of around £30k this time i imagine, or maybe £29.5k if £30k is too much hassle
Mad March Taffy said:
You need to ensure that you have adequate cover for the car which reflects the market value.
Do you mean agreed value or something else?
Basically if you under call the value of the car and then try to claim that the market value is higher then the insurance company will simply say that you should have declared that at the time. So, if you think that the value has gone up since last year then you need to tell them. Generally works in reverse, as most cars are depreciating!
Having an agreed value policy on an easily replaceable car in a rising market is the wrong thing to do. You will likely be behind the curve updating them on the value and stand to lose out. All the valuations have to be backed up with specialist proof, which is costly and time consuming too.
FZP said:
Who does these valuations? Any pointers. Im in the same boat as the OP,
TIPEC will do it as well for members. 996 Turbo prices are rising so this may need revising every year or so.
Mousem40 said:
Having an agreed value policy on an easily replaceable car in a rising market is the wrong thing to do. You will likely be behind the curve updating them on the value and stand to lose out. All the valuations have to be backed up with specialist proof, which is costly and time consuming too.
If you take out insurance and state a value of £40k as an example on a non agreed value policy the most you will get is £40k or market value if that is less. On an agreed value policy if you agree £40k that is what you will get regardless of market value. No hassle for valuation just ask your OPC or indi and they are usually willing to do this for no charge, email to insurance co or broker job done
Mad March Taffy said:
Basically if you under call the value of the car and then try to claim that the market value is higher then the insurance company will simply say that you should have declared that at the time. So, if you think that the value has gone up since last year then you need to tell them. Generally works in reverse, as most cars are depreciating!
I would be worried they could claim you delibarately under-valued the car (adn therefore under-stated its risk) and therefore insurance is null and void!
(less likely if only a few k of course)
I have an agreed value of £50k on mine. The only problem with a standard policy in my experience is that the insurer will always try and give you the lowest value out there for a car that may have similar milage, but is in the worst condition and not a true reflection on the value of your car.
OK,
So I've just had a good old chat with Company "X". If you insure your Porsche for £50k market value, in the event of a loss, you're left short by a bit then you can argue up to (say 10%). Anything over that, good luck, but you will only be covered up to £50k ish mark. An assessor uses evidence based values at the time of loss.
According to their rep, their becoming super aware of the values of Porsche, and many customers are ringing up on quarterly basis and reviewing the policy to ensure enough cover.
Should it become apparent that you may end up being short throughout the year, you can always alter that value throughout the 12 months and pay the difference accordingly.
Alternatively, you can switch to an agreed value at anytime during the 12 months and pay the difference.
Not to mention unltd track days in the UK. Happy days.
This is my summation in discussions with them, well worth having your own discussion and dissecting the policy until you're happy with the response.
FZP said:
OK,
Should it become apparent that you may end up being short throughout the year, you can always alter that value throughout the 12 months and pay the difference accordingly.
retrosepctively? after you need to make a claim?
This is a source reference. Confirm exact model applicability in the original material.