I see that the owner has been charged with fraud, car was insured for 2.2 mil. Might have got away with it had it not been for the original vid. Karma

http://www.foxnews.com/leisure/2014/...bugatti-crash/

Saw that as well, seems the high performance car in hobby has more in common with performance boating than I thought

Sounds like an insurance company trying to typically weisel out of payment. Descrapancies in his story from an iPhone video? Yea, sure.

Dude paid a lot of cash to insure it for 2.2mil. I don't give a crap if he drive it into the lake on purpose. It's I insured, he paid to have it insured and they insured him. End of story.


Car still brought 277k at auction!!

I don't understand why the tow company didn't at least take it out of gear before pulling it out of the water....

It was a different car that was auctioned for 277k

Not sure I agree.....they agreed to cover an accident not a 1.2mm profit when you intentionally drive into the water! Water is like arson, they cover fire/theft and you torch the car then you get arrested for arson regardless of what the insurance coverage is.

I was being sarcastic about purposely driving into the water. Obviously policy don't cover deliberate actions. However, why'd they cover the car for 2.2mil if it was a problem? They didn't baulk at insuring it for the agreed upon value (most likely replacement value plus presumed increase in value of such a collectible), or at taking what I presume was a heafty monthly insurance premium. they only baulk at paying out when it was time.

Maybe I just don't understand the dynamics of the incident. But as I see it, it's BS the insurance company is trying to back out.

Guy paid 1 mil for car and insured it for 2.2 mil. 1 month later it ends up in the water. Guy claims he swerved to avoid bird and/ or lost control looking for dropped phone. Video taken by some kids who liked the car shows up on YouTube proving his claims to be untrue. I think that's roughly the story.

Story I heard was he was reaching for his phone (at least that's what the article says) never heard the bird story. Watched the video. Can't tell f*ck all what he's doing inside. And again, insurance company insured it for double it's value, that's on them. Whether he wrecked it driving out off the lot the instant he got the policy or 5 years from now. I tend to believe his story after watching the slow drift right off the shoulder. Done that reaching for something on the floorboard many times myself.

I'm not 100 % but I think the initial story was the bird and the video disproved that so it changed to looking for cell phone which I guess the video also disproved? Edit- the story above makes no mention of the bird but I could swear I recall that being reported at the time.