OP ask for a bike from them that's £2500 at cost. They won't be out of pocket so can't complain but you'll get a bike worth ~£3,500 RRP and so will likely be XT throughout and a much better frame than your old one.
I am alone in thinking a Trek Remedy 8 is an excellent bike for around that money? I'd say you're quids in.
I expect they'll give the op a 2.5k (trade price) bike so he'll get something nice as it'll be less hassle and they won't loose to much money as they'll have lost half day labour sorting it out.
There are many excellent bikes for that money, just as you can get an excellent car for £15000, that doesn't mean it's an adequate settlement if your Ferrari gets nicked 😉
And what their insurance company is offering to reimburse them is irrelevant to what they should be offering the OP.
That's the crux of my point!
joolsburger - MemberI am alone in thinking a Trek Remedy 8 is an excellent bike for around that money? I'd say you're quids in
The spec is Deore/SLX though, so it's not equivalent. (Assuming the forks are equivalent to the OP's.)
When I worked in Wheelies this may have been the Trek equivalent:
http://www.trekbikes.com/uk/en/bikes/mountain/technical_trail/remedy/remedy_9_27_uk/#
£3700
The spec is Deore/SLX though, so it's not equivalent
Is spec really just groupset (consumables?!) though? IMO that's the bone of contention in this thread.
My old insurance company had an insane 'new for old' policy (which partly explains the premiums...)
12 year old frame, 7-8 year old parts.... insurance valued at £4,500 for a "like for like" build. Cheque was sent in the post, minus 20% (as I didn't want to buy from Wheelies).
That was 1 of 3 bikes nicked at once. We hit 5 figures on the cheque!
Few weeks of trawling eBay, and I've got the same frame model on its way to me (to start a replacement build). For £100.
Yeah, I don't really get how people are defending the shop.
Regardless of how good the Trek might be, I don't see why the OP should have to settle for something that he's not entirely happy with.
I'd certainly not expect the shop to be *profiting* from letting a customer's bike be stolen.
Frame age is not the point it's a like for like replacement so OP should get equivalent at today's prices with same spec running gear etc at today's prices. If it had been my bike and given I'm insured I would have my insurance chase up bike shops insurance and let them thrash it out.
I had a 7 year old Giant XTC nicked with second hand Fox forks and Superstar wheels on it. They paid out for latest XTC 29er with Fox forks and then paid an extra £300 to upgrade the wheels.
The value is immaterial. He wants a bike, he didn't want to sell his old one, he didn't want £500. Will £2500 give him a better bike than before?
Yes, it will be miles, miles better than his old bike.
Yes, it will be miles, miles better than his old bike.
That^
GHill - MemberThe spec is Deore/SLX though, so it's not equivalent
Is spec really just groupset (consumables?!) though? IMO that's the bone of contention in this thread
To reduce it to a ridiculous level, if only his XT chain had been stolen and the bike shop offered an Deore/SLX replacement - because it does the same job - should he be happy?
And I thought the bone of contention was that plenty of people said he should be happy with £2500 because the bike was old (and worn out presumably). Nothing to do with actual values of kit, how insurers actually work, etc, just a bit of jealousy that somebody seems to be getting a better deal.
Posted 8 minutes ago # Report-Post
grum - Member
The value is immaterial. He wants a bike, he didn't want to sell his old one, he didn't want £500. Will £2500 give him a better bike than before?
Yes, it will be miles, miles better than his old bike.
So, if you are the insurer, how do you quantify that? A random £2500 and here's hoping that the [s]fool[/s] victim accepts on the basis that the internet says his bike was rubbish?
To reduce it to a ridiculous level, if only his XT chain had been stolen and the bike shop offered an Deore/SLX replacement - because it does the same job - should he be happy?
Except your analogy doesn't really work because he is also getting something vastly superior and worth vastly more than the original, which would more than make up for slightly worse shifters or whatever.
So, if you are the insurer, how do you quantify that? A random £2500 and here's hoping that the fool victim accepts on the basis that the internet says his bike was rubbish?
I don't know, what do you suggest? He just gets to name any figure he wants?
Getting stuff nicked is shit and I have sympathy but I think emotion is clouding judgement here. New bikes are so much better than 10 year old bikes there's hardly any comparison.
Plus £2500 cash would get you a Canyon with ridiculous spec.
So, if you are the insurer, how do you quantify that? A random £2500 and here's hoping that the fool victim accepts on the basis that the internet says his bike was rubbish?
How much would the Op's bike go for on classified for then? certainly not £2500, no one said it was rubbish, more the question of it's actual
value as a whole including upgrades, which is less than 2.5k.
Anyhow, I'll leave it that, hopefully the OP gets it all sorted and the shop does a good deal on a decent spec. bike.
grum - MemberTo reduce it to a ridiculous level, if only his XT chain had been stolen and the bike shop offered an Deore/SLX replacement - because it does the same job - should he be happy?
Except your analogy doesn't really work because he is also getting something vastly superior and worth vastly more than the original, which would more than make up for slightly worse shifters or whatever.
Except it does as work because, as I've already written, that's how the insurers do it. Like for like replacement.
Yes, it will be miles, miles better than his old bike.
Why? He'd clearly changed a lot of the parts, we're not talking a 10 year old bike in it's entirety, there's maybe a 10 year old frame. They were great frames (Triad shock maybe less so), as I said previously, they were immensely popular. What is it that inherently makes a new one so much better? You'd happily take a downgrade because it was newer?
he is also getting something vastly superior and worth vastly more than the original,
Again, what it's [i]worth [/i]is irrelevant, because the OP's not trying to sell it, he wants to ride it, and he may end up with something that's less well specced.
Getting stuff nicked is shit and I have sympathy but I think emotion is clouding judgement here.
It's the inclusion of the third party (ie the shop) in this case that makes it different. If the bike got nicked from his shed, he'd potentially get a new for old, why should that change because of the shop's involvement?
How much would the Op's bike go for on classified for then?
Once again. That's irrelevant because he's not trying to sell it. The monetary value is a red herring for anything other than purchasing an equivalent replacement. New... for... old...
Simple.
LoCo - MemberHow much would the Op's bike go for on classified for then? certainly not £2500, no one said it was rubbish, more the question of it's actual
value as a whole including upgrades, which is less than 2.5k.
I believe njee may have addressed that question a couple of pages ago. Second-hand value has no bearing on insurance replacement unless your policy has a wear and tear clause, and seeing as the OP had his bike stolen from a shop I'd not expect a wear and tear clause to be forced on him.
I have a 10 year old Madone, 1000g frame, full Dura Ace, Race X Lite wheels, carbon bars etc. If that was valued at £2500 the new replacement wouldn't even be in the same league - it's the shop's screw up, I'd be wanting a modern equivalent with full Dura Ace, Race X Lite wheels etc, they've got to suck it up.
Funnily enough a mate of mine bought a very nice 2004 Madone dripping with pristine DA 7800 earlier this year.... £500 😀 I shit thee not...
Obviously the modern equivalent would cost a massive multiple of that but then insurance companies ain't stupid (always) they would expect to factor age and depreciation into any valuation... having fitted new drivetrain parts really just falls under "maintenance" after a decade of use, in most people's eyes...
If I told them my 15 year old golf was stolen tomorrow, I doubt they'd offer me the cash to go out and buy a brand new one, even if I have had it regularly serviced...
cookeaa - MemberI have a 10 year old Madone, 1000g frame, full Dura Ace, Race X Lite wheels, carbon bars etc. If that was valued at £2500 the new replacement wouldn't even be in the same league - it's the shop's screw up, I'd be wanting a modern equivalent with full Dura Ace, Race X Lite wheels etc, they've got to suck it up.
Funnily enough a mate of mine bought a very nice 2004 Madone dripping with pristine DA 7800 earlier this year.... £500 I shit thee not...
Obviously the modern equivalent would cost a massive multiple of that but then insurance companies ain't stupid (always) they would expect to factor age and depreciation into any valuation... having fitted new drivetrain parts really just falls under "maintenance" after a decade of use, in most people's eyes...
If I told them my 15 year old golf was stolen tomorrow, I doubt they'd offer me the cash to go out and buy a brand new one, even if I have had it regularly serviced...
jeez, have you not read anything that's been written?
Funnily enough a mate of mine bought a very nice 2004 Madone dripping with pristine DA 7800 earlier this year.... £500 I shit thee not...
Not relevant at all.
Obviously the modern equivalent would cost a massive multiple of that but then insurance companies ain't stupid (always) they would expect to factor age and depreciation into any valuation...
Depends on the policy but if you have a wear and tear clause in your policy, more fool you. Most policies are NEW FOR OLD!
having fitted new drivetrain parts really just falls under "maintenance" after a decade of use, in most people's eyes...
No it doesn't, see above.
Obviously the modern equivalent would cost a massive multiple of that but then insurance companies ain't stupid (always) they would expect to factor age and depreciation into any valuation
As IdleJon has said, that's just not true, plenty of policies are "new for old" which, unsurprisingly, means exactly that. In this instance specifically that's exactly what the OP should get. If that's not how the shop's cover works then tough shit for them. Taking your example, if we were to assume the market value of my Madone was £500 would it be reasonable that I couldn't afford the bottom of the range Trek road bike to replace my 16lb full carbon one?
I think we need a bit of basic insurance knowledge here: [url= http://www.moneysupermarket.com/home-insurance/new-for-old/ ]New for Old Contents Insurance[/url]
The whole introduction of carbon frames has made the situation more difficult, which means replacing new for old impossible. I appreciate that.
I'd be happy with a 100m travel alu specialized frame, with a 2014 XT build and wheelset, which is what I gave them. Alu is probably better for adventure racing what with it being strapped to kayaks and what not.
I don't think the OP is being unreasonable in wanting a replacement for his bike, and the age is a red herring.
If I were the shop and that had been made clear by the OP/customer.
I'd take the insurance money.. source a 2004 Specialized Stumpjumper pro and build it back to the OP's bike spec. Cash in hand for them to cover their insurance excess/hike too.
That would make everyone happy.. although the OP wouldn't have made the most of the rather fortunate situation he's been presented with (aside from the upset of the theft)
Not sure why you'd not work with the shop and push for a carbon Fuel EX 9.8 27.5. At wholesale its probably not much more than 2500. You say you don't like Trek.. but like most brands, they do make very good bikes. Much better than your Spec.
I'd like to think the shop will take care of you if you've a buying history with them.
but like most brands, they do make very good bikes. Much better than your Spec.
Again... why?
A lot of people are taking the newer = better angle here, blindly. That statement reads that any Trek would be better than his Spesh, which is clearly utter bollocks.
You can not replace old with actual old, as although the replacement may be of the same age, you don't know if it has had a hard life and or how well it has been maintained so can not claim it to be equal.
You would have to agree a new old for new replacement or an acceptable cash sum.
I was going to send some forks and a rp23 for servicing soon and had decided on loco. But not so sure now as in the unlikely event he lost them he might palm me off with some old shite.
I was going to send some forks and a rp23 for servicing soon and had decided on loco. But not so sure know as in the unlikely event he lost them he might palm me off with some old shite.
Y'know I was surprised to see him being so vocal, to that end.
jeez, have you not read anything that's been written?
I've read it all ta, "New For Old" in my book means new/modern equivalent based on the value of the original stolen bike, Thus in 2004 money:
[url= http://www.bikepedia.com/quickbike/BikeSpecs.aspx?year=2004&brand=Specialized&model=Stumpjumper+FSR+Pro+Disc ]list price for a Stumpy Pro FSR in 2004 was $2710 = ~£1570 GBP at the time[/url] (I'm not sure what SBC UK charged though I doubt it was a huge amount more)...
Factor in inflation ([url= http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/bills/article-1633409/Historic-inflation-calculator-value-money-changed-1900.html ]handy inflation calculator[/url]) £1570 GBP in 2004 = £2103 GBP in 2014 money, plus £400 for the upgrades that £2500 looks about right...
Or did you think it meant the exact same letters and numbers should all appear on the spec sheet? because they don't actually make any of that stuff anymore you know...
The modern "New" equivalents of that "Old" 2004 Stumpy FSR pro come with a Deore/SLX mix, The money they've given the OP should deliver something a notch higher and get him mostly SLX with a bit of XT, functionally it'll be about on par with what he lost... which is about right...
That said the OP doesn't want a "new" stumpy he reckons he wants a 2004 or similar vintage Stumpy more like his stolen one... you could go a bit more recent if you like:
[url= http://www.ebay.co.uk/itm/Specialized-StumpJumper-FSR-Pro-Carbon-2007-with-HOPE-Upgrades-and-Extras-/111384600131?pt=UK_Bikes_GL&hash=item19ef0a1e43 ]hows about an '07[/url]?
Just as an indicator of "value" if you buy that particular £1100 stumpy, you could bin and replace all that SRAM tat with XT, have the Fork and Shock serviced and then mull over how to spend the remaining ~£800...
list price for a Stumpy Pro FSR in 2004 was $2710 = ~£1570 GBP at the time (I'm not sure what SBC UK charged though I doubt it was a huge amount more)...
It was £2300 for a 2004 Stumpjumper Pro, but your fundamental understanding of new for old is wrong. It really is just that, you get new kit of the equivalent spec of your old one.
I don't know how many times I have to say it, but the monetary value isn't relevant, sometimes a new for old replacement will be more expensive than the original, sometimes it will be less. Technology is an obvious example of the latter.
I bought a Sony LCD TV about 7 years ago that cost me £1000. If it was insured new for old I'd be entitled to the equivalent model from the current range, which may or may not be £1000 (I'm guessing it would be a chunk less).
Factor in inflation (handy inflation calculator) £1570 GBP in 2004 = £2103 GBP in 2014 money, plus £400 for the upgrades that £2500 looks about right...
My stumpy didn't cost £1570. The frame alone was £1500 with saddle, seatpost and clamp (no forks). The rest was custom build (XT, easton, hope).
I'm sure I can get a rebuilt epic for roughly the cash their talking about.
The frame alone was £1500 with saddle
If it was you got ripped off, the Pro frame was £900!
Of no consolation whatsoever to the OP but on the plus side, at least it wasn't stolen from your house & the thieves should be none the wiser when you get a replacement.
It was £2300 for a 2004 Stumpjumper Pro, but your fundamental understanding of new for old is wrong. It really is just that, you get new kit of the equivalent spec of your old one.I don't know how many times I have to say it, but the monetary value isn't relevant, sometimes a new for old replacement will be more expensive than the original, sometimes it will be less. Technology is an obvious example of the latter.
From your own link on "New for old" insurance further up:
...This means that the insurance company will provide you with what you had before - they'll restore you to the previous position. That means if you claim for a dishwasher that is four years old, you will be given a replacement dishwasher that if four years old.
Similarly, if you bought a laptop a few years ago for £400, but that model is no longer available, that is the sum you would get from the insurer, even if it would cost you much more than that to replace it with a new one....
That irrelevant monetary value is precisely what insurers deal in... they're not looking at the details on the spec sheet and ticking off all the [I]XT M760[/I] bits that no new bike comes with anymore, the term would be "Functional equivalent"... and for £2500 you'll get a functional equivalent of a 2004 Stumpjumper pro with a couple of extra bells and whistles...
If, God forbid, your old Madone was stolen, you would not be offered a full 9070 Di2 group hanging off a Madone 7.9 Just because that's the Modern top of the range, you'd maybe have a case for a 5.2 but a 4.7 would be more likely (Ultegra 6800) and TBH a 3.1 probably looks pretty similar to most insurance companies, 10 cogs at the back, made of carbon, its arguably a modern equivalent, functionally speaking anyway, and most importantly its got the same name... just with some different numbers after...
The OPs bike was never worth the ~£4.5K a new "XT spec" Stumpy Expert Evo would cost, nor in any way equivalent to it...
If I was the shop-owner and read through this I'd be sourcing a 2004 Stumpy and building it up as per the OP's spec - probably cost all of a £1000 for a s/h frame and non-RRP parts.
And not claiming through insurance.
I'm convinced, OP should push for a XT equipped bike with all the bits. Problem is from Canyon that bike is 2500 from Specialized it's 3500. What else do this shop stock?
Mate just bought a 2006 stumpy in decent condition for £150! add on xt kit and you'll still have about £1800 to play with!
Skipping through this thread.....why would anyone want to buy another old frame and put high end parts on it? Seems like an exercise in turd-polishing to me.
cookeaa - Member
I've read it all ta, "New For Old" in my book means new/modern equivalent based on the value of the original stolen bike, Thus in 2004 money:list price for a Stumpy Pro FSR in 2004 was $2710 = ~£1570 GBP at the time (I'm not sure what SBC UK charged though I doubt it was a huge amount more)...
Factor in inflation (handy inflation calculator) £1570 GBP in 2004 = £2103 GBP in 2014 money, plus £400 for the upgrades that £2500 looks about right...
Apart from being utter rubbish that doesn't take into account the fact that bike prices aren't linked to inflation. There was a massive rise in the price of bikes a few years ago. My £1800 X9/Fox forked Cannondale was significantly more expensive the year after I bought it. By your reasoning if it had been stolen I would have been seriously out of pocket had it been stolen.
From the ABI website:
[i]'New for old' means your insurer will replace your lost or damaged belongings with new items of the same type and quality as the originals
[/i]
So by your definition I would have less than £1900 back if that bike had been stolen a year after I bought it which would not have replaced with the same type or quality.
And how do you define the quality of a bike? Generally speaking the groupset of the bike is a good signifier which is why this next bike is also wrong:
cookeaa - MemberThat irrelevant monetary value is precisely what insurers deal in... they're not looking at the details on the spec sheet and ticking off all the XT M760 bits that no new bike comes with anymore, the term would be "Functional equivalent"... and for £2500 you'll get a functional equivalent of a 2004 Stumpjumper pro with a couple of extra bells and whistles...
Are you from the US because the only reference I can find to 'functional equivalence' is from US websites?
I've worked in various types of insurance for 15 years and never heard of it. I even spent 4 years replacing bikes for insurance companies on new for old policies. (Yes, XT on the spec sheet of the stolen bike meant he got XT back, not SLX.) I'm not claiming to be an expert but I have a fair bit of experience in the area. Maybe I should text the guys I ride with who still do that job and ask them what happens at the moment? I'm pretty certain of the answer, that's why I'm not bothering.
ticking off all the XT M760 bits that no new bike comes with anymore
Btw, if you'd read the thread you would have seen that the XT gruppo wasn't 10 years old, it was new. But that would be irrelevant even if it was old.
But, really I'd love to be your insurer! 😆
I am quite stunned at what some people would accept from insurance companies. A 10 year old stumpjumper with full xt if covered by a new for old policy should be replaced by a brand new stumpjumper with full xt. If the wheels on the new one aren't up to the spec that the op had then they should be upgraded or some cash given to upgrade.
I had a commuter stolen and that was how it worked.
In my experience it isn't just a random person that deals with the claim. It's outsourced to a company that deals with the replacement that has some knowledge of bikes and is responsible for sourcing replacement. I would guess that in some cases they might have preferred suppliers, so you would get a brand they deal with. Again in my experience my Orange evo that I'd built up with 2nd hand bits (X0 level) was matched to a new Scott scale.
a 2015 properly designed 650b bike will ride a lot better than a 9 year old bike with the wrong size whells on.
XT or no XT.
oh, and I could ride round cwmcarn on a CX bike, an epic would have it for breakfast.
Again in my experience my Orange evo that I'd built up with 2nd hand bits (X0 level) was matched to a new Scott scale.
Thats unfortunate, nobody wants a scott 🙂
My 2009 Orange Five with some serious upgrades was insured on 'New for old'. It got nicked a few months back.
The insurers asked for a shop to price the equivalent bike now. This came in at just under 5k as mine was essentially the Five RS with a couple of upgrades.
They sent me a cheque for 5k minus 5% excess. In my eyes (and the eyes of my insurer ETA) New for old means you get the equivalent new bike to your old. In my case the only bike equivalent to my old five was the new top spec one with extra thrown at it, so that's what they covered.
So I bought a Cube for 1.5k less, got a better bike and booked a holiday for me and the Mrs!
Anyone who would accept a bag of Shit with a flag stuck in as replacment for a nice bike is off their head IMO.
