Hit and Run
10-12-2002, 02:35 AM
#22
Registered User
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Seattle
Posts: 84
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Diminished Value
Durio, I am glad that you insurance company has cooperated with getting your ride repaired. However, my man, in this day and age of CARFAX, you car, even after the hopefully stellar repair, is now valued less than it was before the accident. And this, my fellow Z'ers is called Diminished Value. It is the dirty little secret that the insurance industry hopes you do not hear about.
Consider this: 2 one-month-old Z's equally beautiful cosmetically. They are for sale. Z #1 has never been in a fender bender. It is Rightous! Z #2, although it looks to the novice eye, identical to Z#1, has had $5,000 in repairs. For a reasonable and prudent buyer, at what level below MSRP would you have to go before the buyer would be willing to purchase your damaged-repaired vehicle instead of the virgin ride????
To protect yourself, immediately after repair, have your car carefully analysed and appraised by an independent body shop licensed to do post repair appraisals. There are several national franchises that charge approx $200 for this legally recognized appraisal. Two come to mind: WreckCheck.COM & Accident Check.Com.
There are three components to Diminished Value. The first, is what I just described and is called "Inherent Diminished Value" (DV). There is also the likelihood of "Body Shop"-related DV, which is damage caused by or not repaired properly by the body shop and "Insurance Related-DV", repairs not authorized by the Insurance company, typically bypassed to minimize costs. All three together comprise your total Diminished Value.
There are two categories of claims.
A first-party claimant is the person asking regress from their own insurance company, because they wrecked their own car OR they were hit by an uninsured motorist, or hit and run. The insurance companies would have you believe, and the courts have most often sided with them, in the contention that the insurance company and the injured party (you) are "bound by the language within the four corners of the contract", i.e. the insurance policy itself. The insurance industry has been very self serving in writing exclusionary clauses into the policies against payment of DV. HOWEVER, in a recent landmark case in Georgia, the local courts, followed by affirmation in State Supreme Court, have found that the Insurance company IS responsible for DV, above and beyond actual repair costs. To learn more, go to GOOGLE and enter "Diminished Value" Georgia.
A third-party claimant is a person injured or damaged due to the action of another party (the "tortfeasor"), and making a claim against the offending tortfeasor, and by extention, his insurance company. This is a no brainer for the injured party because the injury (your Fu*?ed-up car) falls under the legal precedences found within TORT LAW. Specifically, the court will automatically rule that "THE TORTFEASOR MUST MAKE THE PERSON WHOLE".
The courts across the US have consistently ruled that this includes, not only repairing the vehicle, but pay the injured party for the "diminshed value" of their repaired vehicle.
Consider this: No autobody shop, no matter how skilled, can duplicate the precision and safety procedures inherent in the original automobile manufacturing process where multimillion dollar, computerized equipment and rigid production standards are de rigour de la jour.
For more information on the dirty little secret of the auto insurance industry, once again, go to Google and simply search on "Diminished Value".
Last year, 5 weeks after I purchased a new Chrysler 300M, I was rear-ended by a big, heavy Silverado Pickup doing about 30MPH. Needless to say, my **** was rendered bigger at the little, than bottom at the top!
It took the body shop 10 weeks to repair the damage due to a shortage of parts for the brand new 2002 vehicle and cost the Tortfeasors insurance company $12,000, plus another $2,500 for a rental car.
Incidently, while I thought the body shop did a very good job of restoring my vehicle, I, nonetheless took it immediately to a licensed Wreck Check facility. They spent over two hours pouring over my car, plugging all sorts of figures into their computerized appraisal model and came up with Diminished Value of $8,500.
This was detailed in writing in a formal Diminshed Value Appraisal. The Tortfeasors insurance company initially rejected my claim for DV. That drove me to the local District Court library where my research revealed that they had paid another 3rd party claimant the maximum small claims court award of $4,000, on the court house steps, before the case even when into session.
Confronted with my knowledge of "their acknowledgement of DV" and my threat to hire an attorney, they settled with me for a negotiated settlement of $7,000, which satisfied me.
My suggestion to all that read this post, is to research this pregnant issue via Google or the local law library and then get after your state legislators and Insurance Commissioners to write into law protections for the consumer regarding Diminshed Value.
Believe me when I say, if you don't get behind this grassroots movement to reform state insurance laws, you may very well be on the short end of the stick when you go to sell your damage-repaired Z, only to find out that the ENTIRE world (thanks to Carfax and other internet resources) knows that your car has sustained significant damages and ain't worth as much as you would like them to believe.
So, Durio, as the aging newscaster exclaimed in the movie, "Network", "I'm mad as Hell and I not gonna put up with it!"
It's tough enough to get your crown jewel hammered in a hit-and-run, don't let the insurance company deny you your legal right to Diminished Value. Do your research and then steel yourself for a fight. Let this Z community know how you are healing and progressing.
As the Jets proclaimed in "West Side Story", "You go brothers around, you're a family man!" Good luck. Go get'em.
Consider this: 2 one-month-old Z's equally beautiful cosmetically. They are for sale. Z #1 has never been in a fender bender. It is Rightous! Z #2, although it looks to the novice eye, identical to Z#1, has had $5,000 in repairs. For a reasonable and prudent buyer, at what level below MSRP would you have to go before the buyer would be willing to purchase your damaged-repaired vehicle instead of the virgin ride????
To protect yourself, immediately after repair, have your car carefully analysed and appraised by an independent body shop licensed to do post repair appraisals. There are several national franchises that charge approx $200 for this legally recognized appraisal. Two come to mind: WreckCheck.COM & Accident Check.Com.
There are three components to Diminished Value. The first, is what I just described and is called "Inherent Diminished Value" (DV). There is also the likelihood of "Body Shop"-related DV, which is damage caused by or not repaired properly by the body shop and "Insurance Related-DV", repairs not authorized by the Insurance company, typically bypassed to minimize costs. All three together comprise your total Diminished Value.
There are two categories of claims.
A first-party claimant is the person asking regress from their own insurance company, because they wrecked their own car OR they were hit by an uninsured motorist, or hit and run. The insurance companies would have you believe, and the courts have most often sided with them, in the contention that the insurance company and the injured party (you) are "bound by the language within the four corners of the contract", i.e. the insurance policy itself. The insurance industry has been very self serving in writing exclusionary clauses into the policies against payment of DV. HOWEVER, in a recent landmark case in Georgia, the local courts, followed by affirmation in State Supreme Court, have found that the Insurance company IS responsible for DV, above and beyond actual repair costs. To learn more, go to GOOGLE and enter "Diminished Value" Georgia.
A third-party claimant is a person injured or damaged due to the action of another party (the "tortfeasor"), and making a claim against the offending tortfeasor, and by extention, his insurance company. This is a no brainer for the injured party because the injury (your Fu*?ed-up car) falls under the legal precedences found within TORT LAW. Specifically, the court will automatically rule that "THE TORTFEASOR MUST MAKE THE PERSON WHOLE".
The courts across the US have consistently ruled that this includes, not only repairing the vehicle, but pay the injured party for the "diminshed value" of their repaired vehicle.
Consider this: No autobody shop, no matter how skilled, can duplicate the precision and safety procedures inherent in the original automobile manufacturing process where multimillion dollar, computerized equipment and rigid production standards are de rigour de la jour.
For more information on the dirty little secret of the auto insurance industry, once again, go to Google and simply search on "Diminished Value".
Last year, 5 weeks after I purchased a new Chrysler 300M, I was rear-ended by a big, heavy Silverado Pickup doing about 30MPH. Needless to say, my **** was rendered bigger at the little, than bottom at the top!
It took the body shop 10 weeks to repair the damage due to a shortage of parts for the brand new 2002 vehicle and cost the Tortfeasors insurance company $12,000, plus another $2,500 for a rental car.
Incidently, while I thought the body shop did a very good job of restoring my vehicle, I, nonetheless took it immediately to a licensed Wreck Check facility. They spent over two hours pouring over my car, plugging all sorts of figures into their computerized appraisal model and came up with Diminished Value of $8,500.
This was detailed in writing in a formal Diminshed Value Appraisal. The Tortfeasors insurance company initially rejected my claim for DV. That drove me to the local District Court library where my research revealed that they had paid another 3rd party claimant the maximum small claims court award of $4,000, on the court house steps, before the case even when into session.
Confronted with my knowledge of "their acknowledgement of DV" and my threat to hire an attorney, they settled with me for a negotiated settlement of $7,000, which satisfied me.
My suggestion to all that read this post, is to research this pregnant issue via Google or the local law library and then get after your state legislators and Insurance Commissioners to write into law protections for the consumer regarding Diminshed Value.
Believe me when I say, if you don't get behind this grassroots movement to reform state insurance laws, you may very well be on the short end of the stick when you go to sell your damage-repaired Z, only to find out that the ENTIRE world (thanks to Carfax and other internet resources) knows that your car has sustained significant damages and ain't worth as much as you would like them to believe.
So, Durio, as the aging newscaster exclaimed in the movie, "Network", "I'm mad as Hell and I not gonna put up with it!"
It's tough enough to get your crown jewel hammered in a hit-and-run, don't let the insurance company deny you your legal right to Diminished Value. Do your research and then steel yourself for a fight. Let this Z community know how you are healing and progressing.
As the Jets proclaimed in "West Side Story", "You go brothers around, you're a family man!" Good luck. Go get'em.
10-12-2002, 03:31 AM
#23
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Down South
Posts: 4,335
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bjmnzzzz,
That is an excellent explanation of diminution of value law and should go into a FAQ on insurance issues for this forum (if we had one, that is...) As a lawyer, I can tell you that the law varies by State. For example, here in Florida, the courts have upheld diminution of value in third party cases, but not in first party cases. Nevertheless, congratulations on your success and your enriching contribution to this community.
That is an excellent explanation of diminution of value law and should go into a FAQ on insurance issues for this forum (if we had one, that is...) As a lawyer, I can tell you that the law varies by State. For example, here in Florida, the courts have upheld diminution of value in third party cases, but not in first party cases. Nevertheless, congratulations on your success and your enriching contribution to this community.
10-12-2002, 05:45 AM
#25
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Northern Virginia
Posts: 65
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I can affirm that with or without Carfax, the pros in the business can tell if you have had body work. My wife's car was rear ended three days after we picked it up new from the dealership. The repairs were done as well as they could be done, even with a pearl white paint color and they were pretty hard to detect on casual observation. However, the good folks at CarMax, put it up on a rack and noted that the 'frame' had been 'grabbed' by a straightening machine. They used that information to justify a diminished trade in offer. Folks in the business also look for paint overspray on the rubber gaskets around windows, door handles, and in wheel wells, etc. to identify possible body work.
As an aside, I remember looking at a late model BMW 7 series a that had been traded in at a Nissan dealership some years ago that had white paint overspray in all four wheel wells, where the color is normally black. Can you imagine what that car had been through? it was being offered for more money than any new car they had for sale on the lot! Strange.
As an aside, I remember looking at a late model BMW 7 series a that had been traded in at a Nissan dealership some years ago that had white paint overspray in all four wheel wells, where the color is normally black. Can you imagine what that car had been through? it was being offered for more money than any new car they had for sale on the lot! Strange.
10-12-2002, 07:54 AM
#26
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Cincinnati, OH
Posts: 312
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
That sucks!
Getting hit in a rear quarter is the worst. That is not a bolt on part like a door or front end piece. A new quarter will need to be welded on and everything connected w/o a seam will be repainted. A deer charged into the rear quarter of my wife's car and caused thousands of dollars in damage because of this. Nothing was damaged except the rear quarter, which was caved in.
The wheel is evidence of what happens when aluminum suspension parts are put under stress. I hope none of the mounting points were bent.
Other that the fact that the rear quarter is damaged, the car should be okay. I highly doubt there is any frame damage or anything else beyond the quarter panel and wheel. Look at the tail light and hatch. They are both fine.
Good luck with the repair and I hope you are able to find the person who did this.
-TB
The wheel is evidence of what happens when aluminum suspension parts are put under stress. I hope none of the mounting points were bent.
Other that the fact that the rear quarter is damaged, the car should be okay. I highly doubt there is any frame damage or anything else beyond the quarter panel and wheel. Look at the tail light and hatch. They are both fine.
Good luck with the repair and I hope you are able to find the person who did this.
-TB
10-12-2002, 08:09 AM
#27
Registered User
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Orlando, Fl
Posts: 550
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Am I looking at this wrong, or did the accident also trash the rear wheel suspension? How did the rear tire get sideways like that? Looks a lot more than cosmetic if your rear suspension is toast.
10-12-2002, 08:52 AM
#28
Registered User
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Seattle
Posts: 84
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Diminished Value
Thanks for your kind words, Skooly. Although too long by half, in my post I was striving to shed some light on a little known, nor often remembered insurance minefield. A subject not easily compressed into 2 sentences and a smiley.
Yes, Florida is a prime example of a state where the insurance lobbyists have gotten to the legislature, the FL Insurance Commisioner, and quite possible to the Bench. (You gotta love those good ole boys in Tallahasee).
The class action suit filed on behalf of the 1st Party insureds in Florida was bamboozled by the High Court in what was a pretty unfathomable logic, given the spirit of the Tort Law precedent - "make the injured party whole" - which has been passed down from common law. I know Tort Law does not apply in Contract Law, however, one would hope that the learned and honorable judges of the Florida State Supreme Court could take a hint. You know, like in hanging chads.
Be that as it may, I highly suggest that, even in Florida, if your car is involved in an accident requiring substantial damage repair, give serious consideration to investing the $150-200 in a post accident diagnostic. 3rd party claims should prevail and, in states similarly afflicted like Florida, you can at least make a strong legal case to recover damages resulting from the other two types of Diminished Value - Body Shop-related & Insurance-related.
Drive defensively and carry a big stick!
Yes, Florida is a prime example of a state where the insurance lobbyists have gotten to the legislature, the FL Insurance Commisioner, and quite possible to the Bench. (You gotta love those good ole boys in Tallahasee).
The class action suit filed on behalf of the 1st Party insureds in Florida was bamboozled by the High Court in what was a pretty unfathomable logic, given the spirit of the Tort Law precedent - "make the injured party whole" - which has been passed down from common law. I know Tort Law does not apply in Contract Law, however, one would hope that the learned and honorable judges of the Florida State Supreme Court could take a hint. You know, like in hanging chads.
Be that as it may, I highly suggest that, even in Florida, if your car is involved in an accident requiring substantial damage repair, give serious consideration to investing the $150-200 in a post accident diagnostic. 3rd party claims should prevail and, in states similarly afflicted like Florida, you can at least make a strong legal case to recover damages resulting from the other two types of Diminished Value - Body Shop-related & Insurance-related.
Drive defensively and carry a big stick!
10-12-2002, 12:37 PM
#29
Originally posted by SunsetZ
Am I looking at this wrong, or did the accident also trash the rear wheel suspension? How did the rear tire get sideways like that? Looks a lot more than cosmetic if your rear suspension is toast.
Am I looking at this wrong, or did the accident also trash the rear wheel suspension? How did the rear tire get sideways like that? Looks a lot more than cosmetic if your rear suspension is toast.
10-12-2002, 02:27 PM
#30
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 94
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My heart goes out to your new Z Durio :-(
Great information Bjmnzzz. After reading the above post I have two questions:
1) Does anyone know of any kind of DV precedence cases in California, or how CA insurance law may view this?
2) Should one pursue DV issues only if there are significant damages? (i.e. in the thousands?) I ask this question because my 3 year old Acura TL was rear-ended in a minor accident about a month ago, but the damage only amount to about $500 and the offender's insurance company paid for it. Damages were the bumper (plastic all scratched up) and bumper bracket. Would it be worth my time to even ponder pursing DV issues in such a scenario?
Any feed back greatly appreciated.
--
Zzyzx
Silverstone 6MT Touring (due in 12/02)
Great information Bjmnzzz. After reading the above post I have two questions:
1) Does anyone know of any kind of DV precedence cases in California, or how CA insurance law may view this?
2) Should one pursue DV issues only if there are significant damages? (i.e. in the thousands?) I ask this question because my 3 year old Acura TL was rear-ended in a minor accident about a month ago, but the damage only amount to about $500 and the offender's insurance company paid for it. Damages were the bumper (plastic all scratched up) and bumper bracket. Would it be worth my time to even ponder pursing DV issues in such a scenario?
Any feed back greatly appreciated.
--
Zzyzx
Silverstone 6MT Touring (due in 12/02)
10-12-2002, 04:06 PM
#32
Registered User
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Seattle
Posts: 84
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Diminished Value
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Zzyzx
[B]My heart goes out to your new Z Durio :-(
1) Does anyone know of any kind of DV precedence cases in California, or how CA insurance law may view this?
2) Should one pursue DV issues only if there are significant damages? (i.e. in the thousands?) I ask this question because my 3 year old Acura TL was rear-ended in a minor accident about a month ago, but the damage only amount to about $500 and the offender's insurance company paid for it. Damages were the bumper (plastic all scratched up) and bumper bracket. Would it be worth my time to even ponder pursing DV issues in such a scenario?
Zzyzx,
California definitely is in play regarding the rights of injured parties (3rd Party Claimants) in auto accidents. However, the amount of damage you cite on a 3 year old vehicle may be somewhat borderline in order to justify paying $150-200 in appraisal fees to determine DV. Alternatively, you could query a couple of local Acura Dealers to ask for a written estimate of any DV that they might ascribe to a rearend accident of your magnitude. In that scenario, the dealer would only be assessing the "Inherent" DV, not the Bodyshop-related or InsCo-related DV.
What I would do is go to Goldcar.com discussion group and ask for a referral to a local WreckCheck facility. I have spoken with several of these DV folks across the country and they have been very, friendly, supportive, and willing to help. Ask your local DV facility if your relatively minor damage on a 3yr old car would be worth the appraisal fee.
It's likely on you Acura that any DV appraisal amount will fall under the max for small claims court and if that is the case, it is very inexpensive and relatively simple to file your case against the. Tort Law rules since you were rearended. Likelihood is, if you have a dealer statement and/or a DV appraisal from a licensed facility, that the tortfeasor's insurance company will make a settlement offer without going to trial. If you must go to small claims court, then so be it. It is a worthwhile experience just to learn the process and may be valuable to you sometime in the future. Besides, if you have independent, written appraisals, you should win your case.
As to whether it is worth your time to pursue... that would depend upon the amount of the DV you can document and the credibility of your "expert" appraisers.
Best of luck.
[B]My heart goes out to your new Z Durio :-(
1) Does anyone know of any kind of DV precedence cases in California, or how CA insurance law may view this?
2) Should one pursue DV issues only if there are significant damages? (i.e. in the thousands?) I ask this question because my 3 year old Acura TL was rear-ended in a minor accident about a month ago, but the damage only amount to about $500 and the offender's insurance company paid for it. Damages were the bumper (plastic all scratched up) and bumper bracket. Would it be worth my time to even ponder pursing DV issues in such a scenario?
Zzyzx,
California definitely is in play regarding the rights of injured parties (3rd Party Claimants) in auto accidents. However, the amount of damage you cite on a 3 year old vehicle may be somewhat borderline in order to justify paying $150-200 in appraisal fees to determine DV. Alternatively, you could query a couple of local Acura Dealers to ask for a written estimate of any DV that they might ascribe to a rearend accident of your magnitude. In that scenario, the dealer would only be assessing the "Inherent" DV, not the Bodyshop-related or InsCo-related DV.
What I would do is go to Goldcar.com discussion group and ask for a referral to a local WreckCheck facility. I have spoken with several of these DV folks across the country and they have been very, friendly, supportive, and willing to help. Ask your local DV facility if your relatively minor damage on a 3yr old car would be worth the appraisal fee.
It's likely on you Acura that any DV appraisal amount will fall under the max for small claims court and if that is the case, it is very inexpensive and relatively simple to file your case against the. Tort Law rules since you were rearended. Likelihood is, if you have a dealer statement and/or a DV appraisal from a licensed facility, that the tortfeasor's insurance company will make a settlement offer without going to trial. If you must go to small claims court, then so be it. It is a worthwhile experience just to learn the process and may be valuable to you sometime in the future. Besides, if you have independent, written appraisals, you should win your case.
As to whether it is worth your time to pursue... that would depend upon the amount of the DV you can document and the credibility of your "expert" appraisers.
Best of luck.
OUCH!
10-12-2002, 05:22 PM
#34
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Conover, NC
Posts: 73
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just to Give a Different perspective.. No-Flaming Please..
As a Insurance Claims Professional, I agree that after a accident there is a potential for DV, though this is quite a subjective issue. Each case is different and has to be viewed individually; type of damage, quality of parts used, and repair techniques all are variables. An example would be, say $6000.00 damage to a Honda Civic vs. the same amount of damage to a Porsche 911. The Honda Civic may have severe structural damage and need major body panels replaced, vs. the Porsche which may only need a set of headlamps(close to $1400.00 each for HID), bumper, fender, and hood. In my opinion the Honda has suffered a greater loss than the Porsche, as the Porsche parts are essentially only bolt-on parts.
Also if you plan on keeping the vehicle a long period of time, then the potential is there that over time the DV will be reduced. You only suffer the loss once you sell the vehicle. Example: Immediately after the accident you sell your vehicle vs. selling the same vehicle 10 years from now, your potential for DV is greater the newer the vehicle is. In N.C. if you had not sold the vehicle before you pled your case to the Magistrate, and by selling the vehicle you actually suffered a loss, then he would immediately dismiss the case.
In 3rd-party claims it is appropriate for DV to be considered in the claims settlement process if requested, as stated before this is supported in "Tort Law".
Now in 1st-Party claims is where we ALL need to be careful, lest we all enjoy paying increased insurance premiums!! As long as your company uses OEM or Used OEM parts on the repair of your vehicle you should be happy. This is were State Farm got themselves in trouble in Georgia, they required that aftermarket body panels be used in the repair of their insureds vehicles. Therefore they did not indemnify their insureds. Most policies cover you for direct physical damage only, DV is indirect damage. State Farm did not fulfill the insurance contrat for the direct damage, as they used aftermarket body panels.
In the end, the lawyers got rich, the insureds got a little money back, and everyone's Insurance premiums went up. If YOUR insurance company is to pay YOU a 1st-Party DV claim every time YOU back YOUR CAR in to a pole, YOU run off the road, or YOU hit someone else, then they will have to charge YOU accordingly. Cost of collision insurance is based on the costs the company incurs when paying collision clams on specific types of vehicles. Increase the cost of 1st-Party claims, then the premium will need to be increased also, so in the future more 1-st Party DV claims may be paid.
I think everyone has to take responsibility when they cause a accident. DV is fine in 3rd-party caims, but keep it out of 1st-Party claims.
troy49er..
2003 Silverstone 350Z Enthusiast 6-Spd, on-order still waiting..
As a Insurance Claims Professional, I agree that after a accident there is a potential for DV, though this is quite a subjective issue. Each case is different and has to be viewed individually; type of damage, quality of parts used, and repair techniques all are variables. An example would be, say $6000.00 damage to a Honda Civic vs. the same amount of damage to a Porsche 911. The Honda Civic may have severe structural damage and need major body panels replaced, vs. the Porsche which may only need a set of headlamps(close to $1400.00 each for HID), bumper, fender, and hood. In my opinion the Honda has suffered a greater loss than the Porsche, as the Porsche parts are essentially only bolt-on parts.
Also if you plan on keeping the vehicle a long period of time, then the potential is there that over time the DV will be reduced. You only suffer the loss once you sell the vehicle. Example: Immediately after the accident you sell your vehicle vs. selling the same vehicle 10 years from now, your potential for DV is greater the newer the vehicle is. In N.C. if you had not sold the vehicle before you pled your case to the Magistrate, and by selling the vehicle you actually suffered a loss, then he would immediately dismiss the case.
In 3rd-party claims it is appropriate for DV to be considered in the claims settlement process if requested, as stated before this is supported in "Tort Law".
Now in 1st-Party claims is where we ALL need to be careful, lest we all enjoy paying increased insurance premiums!! As long as your company uses OEM or Used OEM parts on the repair of your vehicle you should be happy. This is were State Farm got themselves in trouble in Georgia, they required that aftermarket body panels be used in the repair of their insureds vehicles. Therefore they did not indemnify their insureds. Most policies cover you for direct physical damage only, DV is indirect damage. State Farm did not fulfill the insurance contrat for the direct damage, as they used aftermarket body panels.
In the end, the lawyers got rich, the insureds got a little money back, and everyone's Insurance premiums went up. If YOUR insurance company is to pay YOU a 1st-Party DV claim every time YOU back YOUR CAR in to a pole, YOU run off the road, or YOU hit someone else, then they will have to charge YOU accordingly. Cost of collision insurance is based on the costs the company incurs when paying collision clams on specific types of vehicles. Increase the cost of 1st-Party claims, then the premium will need to be increased also, so in the future more 1-st Party DV claims may be paid.
I think everyone has to take responsibility when they cause a accident. DV is fine in 3rd-party caims, but keep it out of 1st-Party claims.
troy49er..
2003 Silverstone 350Z Enthusiast 6-Spd, on-order still waiting..
Last edited by troy49er; 10-12-2002 at 05:29 PM.
10-12-2002, 05:42 PM
#35
Registered User
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Seattle
Posts: 84
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Diminished Value
Well said troy49er. No flames from me. In fact, I welcome your considered perspective from the Insurance Industry side. Much of what you say makes a lot of sense.
My complaint with the industry is the absolute stonewalling by the insurance companies, even when the injured party is a 3rd Party claimant. If one does not fight for their rights under Tort Law, the insurance companies will do all within their power to skirt their financial obligations under DV. They certainly will not step up to the plate and *initiate* a fair settlement for DV. The policy seems to be "if the injured party doesn't demand DV, we pretend that it does not exist." Is that good public policy? How about treating all injured parties with the same ethical standards?
One other point, the courts have ruled that the injured party does not have to sell their vehicle to establish DV, but rather the true measure of DV is the fair market value of the vehicle prior to the accident minus the fair market value immediately following repair.
My complaint with the industry is the absolute stonewalling by the insurance companies, even when the injured party is a 3rd Party claimant. If one does not fight for their rights under Tort Law, the insurance companies will do all within their power to skirt their financial obligations under DV. They certainly will not step up to the plate and *initiate* a fair settlement for DV. The policy seems to be "if the injured party doesn't demand DV, we pretend that it does not exist." Is that good public policy? How about treating all injured parties with the same ethical standards?
One other point, the courts have ruled that the injured party does not have to sell their vehicle to establish DV, but rather the true measure of DV is the fair market value of the vehicle prior to the accident minus the fair market value immediately following repair.
10-12-2002, 07:03 PM
#36
Originally posted by Bjmnzzzz
...My complaint with the industry is the absolute stonewalling by the insurance companies, even when the injured party is a 3rd Party claimant. If one does not fight for their rights under Tort Law, the insurance companies will do all within their power to skirt their financial obligations...
...My complaint with the industry is the absolute stonewalling by the insurance companies, even when the injured party is a 3rd Party claimant. If one does not fight for their rights under Tort Law, the insurance companies will do all within their power to skirt their financial obligations...
Our car had to be towed ($75 out of pocket) and, not knowing that we should let OUR insurance company handle it, contacted their insurance company the next day to find out how the matter was to be settled and to make arrangements for a rental car. The claims processor was a complete jerk and said that it would take them a couple of weeks to assess the situation and discover who was actually at fault. Even though their client was cited for two violations they still needed a couple of weeks to review the police report, etc. etc. Bottom line we ended up eating about $300 in rental car fees (we didn't have "car rental insurance" because you can't rent a car for $15 a day so I opted out of it) and the towing fee after THEY determined that my wife was responsible for 25% of the accident!!! I finally gave up leaving messages for their claims adjuster who determined my wife's amount of guilt.
The car was never the same after we got it back (made a "clunking" noise somewhere under the car, the inside panels in the back would always "pop" open going over a bump, the "trunk" would rattle and a host of other things I don't care to remember). Yes I could have taken it back to the shop, but dealing with the claims adjuster was such a bad experience and my wife and I both work full time, that I decided to just move on. We ended up buying a new one, but definitely took it on the chin when we disclosed the accident (and repairs) and sold it for ~$8,000 less than blue book. To this day I dream of finding that claims adjuster and kicking the crap out him!
As far as abuse of the insurance companies, I agree with Troy49er that 1st Party claims would become quite prevalent and another source of income for the "cheats" of society. Obviously this would only cause everyone's insurance rates to go up, but the present system leaves much to be desired.
Originally posted by Dr Bonz
AAAHHHHHHH! BRICKYARD Looks more like JUNKYARD!!!!!
AAAHHHHHHH! BRICKYARD Looks more like JUNKYARD!!!!!
10-12-2002, 08:14 PM
#37
That's it!
I took a big risk driving my car to work. Fortunately, nothing happened to it.
However, someone hitting you at red light sounds like it was done on purpose. I can't believe such a thing can happen.
I tell everyone I'm nervous about driving this car not because of my driving, but because of other people on the road.
That's it! I'm not taking a risk... the only place this baby is being parked is in my garage. Everywhere else, I'll drive in the vicinity of my neighborhood. I'm goin to avoid traffic, too, at all costs. I took a risk by driving on main road because I wanted to test myself... now I'm scared.
Fawk it... no place is safe.
However, someone hitting you at red light sounds like it was done on purpose. I can't believe such a thing can happen.
I tell everyone I'm nervous about driving this car not because of my driving, but because of other people on the road.
That's it! I'm not taking a risk... the only place this baby is being parked is in my garage. Everywhere else, I'll drive in the vicinity of my neighborhood. I'm goin to avoid traffic, too, at all costs. I took a risk by driving on main road because I wanted to test myself... now I'm scared.
Fawk it... no place is safe.
10-12-2002, 08:18 PM
#38
New Member
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Boston
Posts: 241
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I never knew anything about this DV thing. I live in Massachusetts and last December somone rear ended my Celica and it was in shop for a month. When I got it back repairs were ok but not great. some cabin noises and such. When I tried to trade my Celica for the Z, the salemans pointed out that the whole car had been repainted and he showed me that it wasnt a great job either. Paint job had bumps and some errant paint here and there. Because of this I was getting a really low trade value and decided not to trade in my Celica. Now I am selling my Celica myself.
My question is this. Can I go after DV even though accident/repairs were done in January/December? Who do I go to? As I said, I live in Massachusetts.
My question is this. Can I go after DV even though accident/repairs were done in January/December? Who do I go to? As I said, I live in Massachusetts.
10-13-2002, 08:20 AM
#39
Guest
Posts: n/a
VIN History fatality felonious. She's been marked for life and carries the Scarlet letter for evermore. "Has the car ever been in a wreck" 'YES' Ouch!!!!!
Sell it. Fast! Get rid of it. It's got bad luck. It will never be the same even with Nissan parts. She's damaged goods. I would name her 'Christine'. That rear end gonna go bad fast. Probably right after the warranty runs out. Did you get the extended?
Poor guy, I know it's hard to let her go but believe me, and I know about these things, push her away, tell her to 'GET' and whatever you do don't look back!
Get ole Brickyard, GET! Poos ole Briackyard go bit by a skunk and now she's rabies.
Sell it. Fast! Get rid of it. It's got bad luck. It will never be the same even with Nissan parts. She's damaged goods. I would name her 'Christine'. That rear end gonna go bad fast. Probably right after the warranty runs out. Did you get the extended?
Poor guy, I know it's hard to let her go but believe me, and I know about these things, push her away, tell her to 'GET' and whatever you do don't look back!
Get ole Brickyard, GET! Poos ole Briackyard go bit by a skunk and now she's rabies.
10-13-2002, 09:35 AM
#40
Registered User
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Seattle
Posts: 84
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Diminished Value
Originally posted by Zboy
I never knew anything about this DV thing. I live in Massachusetts and last December somone rear ended my Celica and it was in shop for a month. When I got it back repairs were ok but not great. some cabin noises and such. When I tried to trade my Celica for the Z, the salemans pointed out that the whole car had been repainted and he showed me that it wasnt a great job either. Paint job had bumps and some errant paint here and there. Because of this I was getting a really low trade value and decided not to trade in my Celica. Now I am selling my Celica myself.
My question is this. Can I go after DV even though accident/repairs were done in January/December? Who do I go to? As I said, I live in Massachusetts.
I never knew anything about this DV thing. I live in Massachusetts and last December somone rear ended my Celica and it was in shop for a month. When I got it back repairs were ok but not great. some cabin noises and such. When I tried to trade my Celica for the Z, the salemans pointed out that the whole car had been repainted and he showed me that it wasnt a great job either. Paint job had bumps and some errant paint here and there. Because of this I was getting a really low trade value and decided not to trade in my Celica. Now I am selling my Celica myself.
My question is this. Can I go after DV even though accident/repairs were done in January/December? Who do I go to? As I said, I live in Massachusetts.
1. When you picked up your car upon repair, did you sign a complete release with the insurance company absolving the tortfeasor and the InsCo of any future claims? If so, sorry, but you likely are hosed. Even so, I would run the release past your legal counsel to determine is there is any wiggle room based upon laws in your state.
2. Check the Statute of Limitations on Tort claims in your state. In my state, the injured party has three years to file law suit. From the timing you indicate, you are probably A-OKAY to file, IF you have not already relinquished your rights in #1 above.
3. Damage to your Celica was sufficient enough and repairs extensive enough to sustain a sizeable claim of DV.
Assuming you can proceed, I see three strategic actions you should take:
A. Take the vehicle to a DV franchise for appraisal. And,
B. Go back to the Nissan dealer who discovered the evidence of a prior wreck. Because you are now his "Z" customer, he should be prepared to help you by giving a written statement in dealership letterhead of the reason he "diminished" the trade-in offer. Ask him to go pack to Dec 2001 NADA or Kelly Blue Book v to determine the pre-accident Retail Market Value (Dec) and then to estimate what he would have had to price you damage-repaired car for in January (after repairs) in order to sell it promptly. The difference between the two would be your DV figure that he should attest to in the letter. Finally,
C. I would take the Celica to one or two Toyota dealers asking them to do the same.
Armed with a written DV assessment and a couple dealership letters, you should consider sueing the tortfeasor in small claims court, where your case should fall on sympathetic ears. In my state, neither party may use an attorney in a small claims action. Hopefully, when presented with the evidence in A, B, & C above the InsCo will throw in the towel and offer a settlement amount.
Good luck in whatever you decide Zboy. We all liked to get kissed before that particular event happens to us!
The best news is that for you now, life beZZZZZZ good!
