Sounds like more than normal buisness is going on...

 

Lgear summed up the definition before my post. If insurance pays you to fix the car, they dont really care what you do with it. Their obligation to pay for repairs done to the vehicle has been met. In fact, theyd rather pay you out since you will have little to no recourse if your car has problems later on. If you bend a tie rod and they fix that, and then your rack breaks later, if they determine the initial wreck was to blame then they would have to shell out the cost again, but with a cashout there are more hoops to jump through to get the insurance to do this. This is all coming from the adjuster who handled my claim. I cashed out and fixed things my own way, and no FBI agents have been at my doorstep lately.


If Im incorrect, prove it. Otherwise keep off the reply button.


Or hookers and blow, it doesnt matter.

 

I think this is the incriminating part -

"Him and i both knew that the damages were not even close to what the insurance gave me"

 

Its possible, just depends how they arrived to that conclusion.

If they added unecessary work to the claim then absolutely. If they get oem-like or aftermarket for cheaper and do some extra modding with the spare money, more power to them.

We would need to know more about how the quote was written before anyone can cry foul.

 

/thread.

I'm just upset I won't be around to see it when OP and natural selection cross paths...

 

It takes a big man to cry, but it takes a bigger man to laugh at that man.
Deep Thoughts (1992)

 

This is what it sounde like to me. Insurance totaled the car, op told them he wanted to keep the car. So he got the value of the car (9500), and keep the car. So no fraud. He has the car and cash to do what ever he wants. It is very common for a body shop to say that they can fix it for less and thats probaly wherer the money under the table came from, not under the table it is his money. Now i dont understand how the shop got the check cut in his or her name. It should have been in the ops name. I work at a local shop and see alot of this crap.

OP im glad you did not kill yourself or anyone else....

 

You should be lucky that you are alive

 

Incorrect assumption.

1) He specifically states that he was able to keep a clean title and not a salvage/rebuild title. That means that the car was not totaled, but that insurance paid him based on the estimated cost of repairs. The fact that they wrote the check to the repair shop is further evidence of this fact. They do that in an attempt to prevent fraud by the policy owner, since it would require collusion with a body shop in order to commit the fraud.

2) He states that his friend and he colluded so that he would receive "money under the table" as part of the deal - INSURANCE FRAUD, INCOME TAX EVATION

3) He states that both his friend and himself were well aware that the actual cost of repair (parts and labor) was well below what the insurance was being taken for and that he was able to pick and choose his claimed parts - INSURANCE FRAUD

4) He stated in the "close call" thread that the accident occurred as a result of street racing an SRT4, but then later changes his story. And it looks like the story that he told the cops and insurance did not mention street racing - INSURANCE FRAUD, FALSE STATEMENTS/FALSIFYING A POLICE REPORT, STREET RACING

I don't see how this is not insurance fraud, along with a few other charges. His friend that owns a body shop inflated the estimated cost of repairs so that they could both profit in this scam. I bet that he isn't planning on claiming that money as income, which it should be if he receives payment from that guy's business. Add that to his original description in the "close call" thread that all of this happened due to him street racing an SRT4 (which would make his insurance claim 100% null and void), and it's not only insurance fraud but making false statements to the police.

After seeing that the OP thought this would be a cool starry bro to share with everyone on the Internet - one might make the assumption that this kid is not the brightest bulb on the tree.

 

Since all of the above is IMO illegal…

I'll be sending a copy and link of this thread to the previously mentioned parties responsible for handling insurance fraud, and we can let them figure it all out.

/thread