GAP insurance on used cars

Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.

f17ant

Active Member
Joined
Aug 29, 2020
Messages
554
Location
London
Car
W205 C63 Saloon
Hey everyone

I have always got GAP insurance on any lease car I have had from Mercedes and after my GLC got stolen and GAP took me to invoice price I think I will never own a car without it.

As a few of you know I purchased my C63 privately and I thought it would be a headache to get GAP for but I'm surprised was really simple. They valued the car well (they go by todays value and keep that figure as there is no "invoice" to go back to)

anyone else got gap on a car that's not brand new ?



Antony
 
Haven't taken it, but MrsGreedy just got new-to-her Golf. £12k. 2016 model.
As part of the hard sell, they tried to entice us to take gap insurance for 3 years at £300, which we didn't think was too bad.
A quick 60 second quote whilst we were sat there revealed the same can be had for £150, so needless to say we didn't go with what the dealer was offering.
But it seemed pretty straight forward and decent value.
 
Haven't taken it, but MrsGreedy just got new-to-her Golf. £12k. 2016 model.
As part of the hard sell, they tried to entice us to take gap insurance for 3 years at £300, which we didn't think was too bad.
A quick 60 second quote whilst we were sat there revealed the same can be had for £150, so needless to say we didn't go with what the dealer was offering.
But it seemed pretty straight forward and decent value.
lucky you had a quick check nice little saving there! It makes sense on cars that are not brand new if the worst was to happen you still want your money
 
I always thought GAP insurance was a great big swizz designed to generate main dealer margin and sales person’s commission.

I always thought that in the even if a total loss the insurance company would pay out market value, which would put be back where I was.

After a claim I found out the hard way and now I buy GAP insurance for pretty much every car we buy now - whether new or secondhand.

I now know that it’s a genuinely useful thing, despite being a great big margin/commission generator. I buy separately from the car.
 
I bought Gap Insurance from the MB dealer I bought my car from, it was just under £300 for three years.
First time I’ve bothered with Gap but I feel happier having it, just in case!
 
When I bought my 7 year old SLK 55 from a MB dealer I took out 3 year gap insurance for just over £200 , half the cost of their quote. When I sold it after 18 months got a £85 refund . Would buy gap again if I bought another expensive motor ( unlikely at the moment as the recently bought house is turning into a money pit and old age ( or worse ) may catch up with me before it is finished
 
100% worth it and recommend ala.. got paid out 18k invoice on my w207 61 plate when it was written off couple years ago it was worth around 11k at the time of the accident 🙃
 
There are different types of GAP insurance, some pay difference between insurance payout and invoice value and some pay finance value. Invoice value costs more than finance value.
 
I've always bought it although I've never needed it thankfully. The 5 year back to invoice GAP I purchased for my E-Class ran out in July. I shudder to think what I'd get from insurers now on "market value" compared to the car being a total loss back in July (£15k back to invoice limit)!
 
Yep i got it, the garage wanted £300 for 3 years, i checked on line Motoreasy was doing it for £150 i left it a few days then they offered a discount on that £120 result. But like all insurances read all the small print to make sure what you are getting, but on paper i would recommend them.
 
There really should be no need for this product, car insurers ought to pay up enough to buy a replacement car.
Yea you are right, but this insurance will give you your purchase price back, insurance is all a gamble.
 
Yea you are right, but this insurance will give you your purchase price back, insurance is all a gamble.
I know but it’s scandalous that we are expected to buy a second policy because the first one wont perform.
 
The gap policy can be taken to bring you back to a purchase price, or another set value (The finance value for example). Normal car insurance will pay out at the market value at the time of the accident, which of course departs downwards from the gap insured value the more time passes between taking the policy and the claim. If you had a claim the day after taking gap, they might not need to be involved. If you had the accident a day before the 3 year expiry of the policy, they definitely would be
 
I know but it’s scandalous that we are expected to buy a second policy because the first one wont perform.

The first one does perform - just not as you want - so you have the option of buying a form of top up.

It's a principle that the loss being covered is based on the value of your car the time of the loss.

The issue with GAP where there is return to invoice or some agreed value that is higher than actual value of the car is that it changes some of the incentives regarding claims.
 
Hey everyone

I have always got GAP insurance on any lease car I have had from Mercedes and after my GLC got stolen and GAP took me to invoice price I think I will never own a car without it.

As a few of you know I purchased my C63 privately and I thought it would be a headache to get GAP for but I'm surprised was really simple. They valued the car well (they go by todays value and keep that figure as there is no "invoice" to go back to)

anyone else got gap on a car that's not brand new ?



Antony
Hi Antony I bought a C300d Coupè recently with only 4000 miles on the clock, 1 year old. The dealer wanted in excess of £600 for Gap Insurance, I went onto Insure the gap, last night after reading your post. Fully insured for 4 years for £120 and valued correctly at £30K.
Thanks.
 
The first one does perform - just not as you want - so you have the option of buying a form of top up.

It's a principle that the loss being covered is based on the value of your car the time of the loss.

The issue with GAP where there is return to invoice or some agreed value that is higher than actual value of the car is that it changes some of the incentives regarding claims.
The first one does not perform in the way that anybody wants, not one person would wish for it to fail to cover the cost of a replacement car, not one person wants to buy a second policy to cover the shortfall of the original.
 
The first one does not perform in the way that anybody wants, not one person would wish for it to fail to cover the cost of a replacement car, not one person wants to buy a second policy to cover the shortfall of the original.

Except that it does in principle cover the cost of a replacement car - the confusion is that *you* and *some* others assume it should be the equivalent of a sort of 'new for old' in that it replaces your vehicle with what you originally purchased. A car is a depreciating asset. Most people understabd this - even if they don't necessarily do the calculations or know the actual value of the deporeciation on a monthly or annual basis. The insurance covers the replacement of a depreciated asset with a similar value asset.

If you dont like it - then buy GAP cover. If insurers offered the equivalent cover then one might reasonably expect the policy to be increased - the euivalent of adding GAP cover.

And "not one person would wish for it to fail to cover the cost of a replacement car" .... well if your assertion is true then presumably a 100% of used cars are bought with GAP policies. I rather suspect that this is not the case. Therefore your assertion is unproven.

(Insurance policies on new cars typically do cover the exceptional case of a writeoff of a car that is under a year old with the replacement of a new car - if you are the first owner.)
 
Except that it does in principle cover the cost of a replacement car - the confusion is that *you* and *some* others assume it should be the equivalent of a sort of 'new for old' in that it replaces your vehicle with what you originally purchased. A car is a depreciating asset. Most people understabd this - even if they don't necessarily do the calculations or know the actual value of the deporeciation on a monthly or annual basis. The insurance covers the replacement of a depreciated asset with a similar value asset.

If you dont like it - then buy GAP cover. If insurers offered the equivalent cover then one might reasonably expect the policy to be increased - the euivalent of adding GAP cover.

And "not one person would wish for it to fail to cover the cost of a replacement car" .... well if your assertion is true then presumably a 100% of used cars are bought with GAP policies. I rather suspect that this is not the case. Therefore your assertion is unproven.

(Insurance policies on new cars typically do cover the exceptional case of a writeoff of a car that is under a year old with the replacement of a new car - if you are the first owner.)
How arrogant to assume that you not only know what I assume but some others as well.

I expect insurance to put me back in the position that I was in pre-incident and that’s not happening any more unless I buy a top up policy.
 
How arrogant to assume that you not only know what I assume but some others as well.
I assumed nothing.

I *inferred* from your *own* statements.

But that aside however arrogant you think I am - it will be an massive underestimate of the actual level.

I expect insurance to put me back in the position that I was in pre-incident and that’s not happening any more unless I buy a top up policy.

Which is a misunderstanding on your part.

You buy a vehicle. You insure it. The asset wears and depreciates. The standard insurance on said asset replaces the equivalent of what was worn and depreciated. That puts you back in the in the position you were pre-incident.

You are complaining because you want to be put back to the position at which you purchased the vehicle.

Where the system as such is actually unfair is where you have a lease vehicle where an 'initial rental' was paid. Or there is finance involved and the vehicle value at the time of loss is less than the outstanding finance.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top Bottom