Let's Talk About Kijiji

[taco.vidal]

Originally Posted by calgaryblood

Yes I did. I sent in three fake ones and an actual real one to not look so fishy.

Again, of course the comparables helped me. They asked for some, I gave them some and then I got a higher offer and then settled. It could very well be they were going to offer me more once I refused but what happened was what I said.

And I just sent you the email I sent with the comparables.

Lol. What an end to this tale!

You sure are a smart one.

[Ducay]

Wait, who argues to defend they committed insurance fraud? Especially when you're a regular poster where plenty of people have your real name, etc? You're just asking some dink on the internet to contact CPS.

[Matt Reeeeead]

For one thing, its clearly not insurance fraud. Kijiji is available to be used by any public idiot. If the insurance company is using this as comparable evidence, then they run the risk of having inaccurate information. Its the same reason why people shouldn't use Wikipedia as a resource for research papers and facts. Use at your own peril. He certainly didn't put a gun to the head of the insurance company and said "you have to use kijiji to value my car".

[Fuzz]

Isn't knowingly supplying false information to an insurance company in violation of your policy? Hence, insurance fraud? If he had just posted the ads, it would be one thing, but supplying the links to them....

[mrkajz44]

What I find most interesting is his adamant defense that he was, in fact, deliberately using false information in order to get more money from the insurance company.

"I'm serious guys, I can totally confirm I was a complete slimeball there! Honest!"

[taco.vidal]

I think the worst part is that he thinks he outsmarted the insurance company.

[pylon]

I think if the ad was placed explicitly with the purpose of misleading the adjuster, the link forwarded to them as evidence of market pricing, then yes it is fraud. You've created false credentials for financial gain. In my eyes it would be no different than photo shopping together a fake degree and using it to get a higher paying job. Or providing a bank with fake pay stubs, to obtain a loan you don't qualify for.

People rely too heavily on Black Book values as a crutch. It is just a round about basis. Many market conditions come into play. In some cases we are way below book value as they there is mitigating factors that can drive values down. In other scenarios, we go way above book value, if it is a super coveted car, or high demand. There have also been a few scenarios that are hilarious. I remember a Ford Aspire, if you followed the Black Book, was worth negative value if you had a base model in rough condition, no air, or ABS. If I recall the car was worth negative (-$1200) once you took out the deducts. Dodge Neons did this for a while to.


OK, now this is just some friendly OT car buying advice, and why it seems like the dealer is trying to steal your trade....

Jim has a 2014 F150 he bought right at the beginning of a model year in Sept 2013. Paid $50,000 for it. Made a few years worth of payments, and now owes $35,000. Now he's trading it in 3 years later with 60,000 kms on it.

Model year clear out is on and an identical 2016 that lists for $50,000 can be bought for $38,000 with the cash rebate. Also Ford has stack-able financing at 1.9% which drops the value another $5000 for the saved interest compared to a bank. Dealer markup is $5000 on the truck. Wear/tear/usage is another $6000. The truck to a dealer at most is worth $22000 at that window in time. Because a dealer can buy a brand new one with a full warranty on a fleet purchase from another dealer for $50,000 - $12,000 - $5000. +/- $33,000 for a truck with no mileage. That is the starting point with no model year depreciation, usage or condition factored in. Once you do that, now it's worth $22-25000 in the real market.

The Black Book says, It's worth $34,000. More than than what a brand new one can be had for. People get all indignant at the time you offer them $22-24000 at that time, and automatically say "But the Black Book says!!!" My tongue and cheek response used to be, "Send the Black Book office in Markham Ontario your truck, and see if they send you a cheque."

The problem with the Black Book, is they are usually 30-60 days behind factory rebates and incentives on the new stuff, which drives down used values. If you are looking for a deal on a 2-4 year old used car, especially from a dealer, the first thing you do, is call a dealer, and find out how much a brand new one, can be had for on a cash purchase with all rebates applied. Then work back from there.

[Fuzz]

Ya, when we were looknig for a vehicle for my wife, all the used ones were within 10-15% of new. I've always sworn never to buy new from a dealer, but when you throw in free winter tires/rims and discounts it made no sense to buy a 2 year old one.

[bossy22]

NM: wrong thread

[undercoverbrother]

Originally Posted by Ducay

Wait, who argues to defend they committed insurance fraud? Especially when you're a regular poster where plenty of people have your real name, etc? You're just asking some dink on the internet to contact CPS.

"Dink", interesting term.


I think that if there was less activity like calgaryblood we might not pay as much for insurance.

http://business.financialpost.com/pe...on-fake-claims

That hits you right in your pocketbook. The website insurancehotline.com says an estimated 15 per cent of insurance premiums go toward covering fraudulent auto insurance claims. In real numbers, this means $225 on an annual average auto insurance premium of $1,500 covers the cost of auto fraud for the insurer.

[V]

Originally Posted by Ducay

Wait, who argues to defend they committed insurance fraud? Especially when you're a regular poster where plenty of people have your real name, etc? You're just asking some dink on the internet to contact CPS.

Considering there are lurkers on this forum that have done very comparable things to multiple posters, not the smartest move by this poster.

[Bring_Back_Shantz]

Originally Posted by Matt Reeeeead

For one thing, its clearly not insurance fraud. Kijiji is available to be used by any public idiot. If the insurance company is using this as comparable evidence, then they run the risk of having inaccurate information. Its the same reason why people shouldn't use Wikipedia as a resource for research papers and facts. Use at your own peril. He certainly didn't put a gun to the head of the insurance company and said "you have to use kijiji to value my car".

Right, it's not fraud.
It's just knowingly creating adds under false pretenses, and then passing it along to an adjuster without disclosing that they were created by you with no real car for sale, and made up prices, with the express purpose of creating the false perception that there were comparable cars being marketed at a price he thought was appropriate, with the intent of receiving more money. How could anyone see that as fraud?

[Cecil Terwilliger]

To be fair to the OP, if an insurance company is going to hand out money based on #### they find on kijiji then they are the idiots. I mean, honest to god read this thread and tell me that you'd want to base your company policy, with millions of dollars at stake, on kijiji.

It probably doesn't totally excuse his actions and you could probably make a case that they would have negotiated the price anyway, even without the fake kijiji ads.

[Ducay]

There are thousands of easy ways to commit fraud. Just because the insurer falls for it doesn't make it any less illegal.

[calgaryblood]

Yeah ok so I should just suck it up and accept their offer because some crackhead who needs money and is desperate to sell, lists his car for $6000 or the guy who is about to lose his house and is also desperate to sell, lists his for car for $5500 on kijiji.

The adjuster isn't slimey for using these ads? Like I said several times even if it is slimy I really don't care, the insurance industry is full of slime who take advantage of its customers. Personally, I thought it was fraud obviously but after reading some posts on here I'm not so sure anymore and like I said it doesn't matter to me even if it was.

Using kijiji instead of the black book value is shady. How do they know the condition, active status? Or rebuilt? They tried to take me for a ride and I wasn't having it.

[GGG]

Originally Posted by Bring_Back_Shantz

Right, it's not fraud.
It's just knowingly creating adds under false pretenses, and then passing it along to an adjuster without disclosing that they were created by you with no real car for sale, and made up prices, with the express purpose of creating the false perception that there were comparable cars being marketed at a price he thought was appropriate, with the intent of receiving more money. How could anyone see that as fraud?

But if he was going to sell his car on Kijiji he would have listed it for the price he listed.

So had he not had the accident there is theoretically a car available for purchase at that price. Its an add not a forged bill of sale.

Edit: If the person doing it thought it was fraud its probably fraud. Though I think you would need to prove the market value of the car was less then Calgaryblood received. Otherwise his insurance was supposed to pay him market value and he received market value so he did not gain anything through the deception.

[undercoverbrother]

Originally Posted by calgaryblood

I thought it was fraud

Yip it's the adjuster and insurance industry that are slimy.

[Slava]

Originally Posted by calgaryblood

Yeah ok so I should just suck it up and accept their offer because some crackhead who needs money and is desperate to sell, lists his car for $6000 or the guy who is about to lose his house and is also desperate to sell, lists his for car for $5500 on kijiji.

The adjuster isn't slimey for using these ads? Like I said several times even if it is slimy I really don't care, the insurance industry is full of slime who take advantage of its customers. Personally, I thought it was fraud obviously but after reading some posts on here I'm not so sure anymore and like I said it doesn't matter to me even if it was.

Using kijiji instead of the black book value is shady. How do they know the condition, active status? Or rebuilt? They tried to take me for a ride and I wasn't having it.

Wow. For some reason I have this misguided trust or faith in CP and that is just sad to read. I mean I am not entirely sure its fraudulent on a personal level (although I wouldn't ever partake in that kind of activity), but if you totally think it is and choose to do it anyway then it really says a lot.

[Bring_Back_Shantz]

Originally Posted by GGG

But if he was going to sell his car on Kijiji he would have listed it for the price he listed.

So had he not had the accident there is theoretically a car available for purchase at that price. Its an add not a forged bill of sale.

Edit: If the person doing it thought it was fraud its probably fraud. Though I think you would need to prove the market value of the car was less then Calgaryblood received. Otherwise his insurance was supposed to pay him market value and he received market value so he did not gain anything through the deception.

Well theoretically my car is worth $1,000,000 by that logic.

When you send something to an adjuster and say "Here are some comparables I found" when what you really mean is, "here is a bunch of made up information I'm using to deceive you", that is fraud.

He knows it, and apparently doesn't care.

[CorsiHockeyLeague]

Originally Posted by GGG

Edit: If the person doing it thought it was fraud its probably fraud. Though I think you would need to prove the market value of the car was less then Calgaryblood received. Otherwise his insurance was supposed to pay him market value and he received market value so he did not gain anything through the deception.

No. What matters is the act and the intent. The act is to do something dishonest or deceitful to gain money. Calgaryblood gained more money than he otherwise would have with his tactic. His tactic was deceitful, because he was representing that there were cars out there for sale at price X by sending in ads, while he knew that those ads were fake. He did all of this knowingly and intentionally.

What you're talking about is whether the insurer was harmed by the action. That's not relevant when you're talking about fraud. Either you're talking about a breach of the policy - in which case you get no recovery - or you're talking about a criminal act, in which case the harm isn't relevant to whether you did it.