Talk:diminished value
Latest comment: 9 years ago by BD2412 in topic diminished value
Deletion discussion
editThe following information passed a request for deletion.
This discussion is no longer live and is left here as an archive. Please do not modify this conversation, but feel free to discuss its conclusions.
SoP SemperBlotto (talk) 09:10, 8 April 2015 (UTC)
- w:Diminished value says that diminished value is different from depreciation which is when the value diminishes with the passage of time, like a second-hand car being worth less than a new car. Renard Migrant (talk) 10:57, 8 April 2015 (UTC)
- To me it seems that the entry is a misconception. Diminished value is that which is left after a loss, not the loss itself. In accounting the loss may be called impairment, write-down or revaluation. --Hekaheka (talk) 07:50, 9 April 2015 (UTC)
- I think it's worth keeping, but maybe some rewording is necessary. Donnanz (talk) 09:06, 12 April 2015 (UTC)
- Diminished value on Wikipedia.Wikipedia (which has "issues") implies that diminution of value is a synonym. I don't find an entry for diminished value at OneLook, so one would have to look elsewhere for an insurance-industry glossary for help. If it is not a term of art but is intended for normal people to understand then the components + the context should directly provide the meaning, ie, SoP. DCDuring TALK 15:05, 12 April 2015 (UTC)
- I think it's worth keeping, but maybe some rewording is necessary. Donnanz (talk) 09:06, 12 April 2015 (UTC)
- To me it seems that the entry is a misconception. Diminished value is that which is left after a loss, not the loss itself. In accounting the loss may be called impairment, write-down or revaluation. --Hekaheka (talk) 07:50, 9 April 2015 (UTC)
I take back my previous comment. After taking a closer look, it seems that the term has a specific legal sense comparable to "damages". I did some rewording and added two quotes. --Hekaheka (talk) 05:57, 15 April 2015 (UTC)
- @Hekaheka: So, are you saying that, in actual usage, the equation "original value" - "diminution of value" = "diminished value" is not true? The WP article's assertion that "diminished value" is synonymous with "diminution of value" makes no sense to me. Is this the product of the lack of knowledge of arithmetic, failure to understand the ordinary meaning of "diminution" or "diminished", or willful abuse of language by advocates? DCDuring TALK 01:13, 16 April 2015 (UTC)
- @DCDuring: Your equation is true also, but it is a SOP sense. The non-SOP sense appeared illogical to me as well on the first sight, but if you google up "pay diminished value", you'll get convinced that it is used that way in the insurance business (it would make absolutely no sense to pay the remaining value as compensation for the loss). As I wrote, the usage seems comparable - not completely similar - to that of "damages", which in addition to it's "normal" usage is defined as "money paid or awarded to a claimant (in England), a pursuer (in Scotland) or a plaintiff (in the US) in a civil action as compensation for a loss suffered by the same". --Hekaheka (talk) 03:29, 16 April 2015 (UTC)
- Of your three alternative explanations I would put my bets on "willful abuse of language by advocates". More seriously, I would say they use "diminish" as transitive verb. --Hekaheka (talk) 03:42, 16 April 2015 (UTC)
- If you look at the edit history, the original entry had a very non-lexicographical description of what diminished value is in the insurance context, liberally sprinkled with links to a commercial website. I did my best to prune it down to an actual definition, but I still have no clue as to exactly what they were trying to say. The commercial site does have explanations, but they're likewise not very well-written. I should probably have hidden the original edits as promotional material, but I hoped someone would have more luck making something coherent out of the entry if they had access to the original version. Chuck Entz (talk) 04:14, 16 April 2015 (UTC)
- Did you check the definition as it is now after my edits? Is it still incoherent? --Hekaheka (talk) 07:53, 16 April 2015 (UTC)
- I am feeling a strong urge to prescribe here. Perhaps I should lie down until the feeling passes. DCDuring TALK 08:37, 16 April 2015 (UTC)
- Did you check the definition as it is now after my edits? Is it still incoherent? --Hekaheka (talk) 07:53, 16 April 2015 (UTC)
- @DCDuring: Your equation is true also, but it is a SOP sense. The non-SOP sense appeared illogical to me as well on the first sight, but if you google up "pay diminished value", you'll get convinced that it is used that way in the insurance business (it would make absolutely no sense to pay the remaining value as compensation for the loss). As I wrote, the usage seems comparable - not completely similar - to that of "damages", which in addition to it's "normal" usage is defined as "money paid or awarded to a claimant (in England), a pursuer (in Scotland) or a plaintiff (in the US) in a civil action as compensation for a loss suffered by the same". --Hekaheka (talk) 03:29, 16 April 2015 (UTC)
- I would keep as a set phrase in the law. For example:
- 1905, In re the Income Tax Cases, Hydraulics Company Case, in Supreme Court of Victoria (Australia), The Victorian Law Reports, p. 186:
- In assessing the income of the company for taxation the Commissioner allowed the claim for deduction for the actual cost of repairs and renewals, but did not allow any claim for diminished value.
- 1905, In re the Income Tax Cases, Hydraulics Company Case, in Supreme Court of Victoria (Australia), The Victorian Law Reports, p. 186:
No consensus to delete. bd2412 T 19:23, 31 May 2015 (UTC)