Posted: Fri May 23, 2008 7:52 pm Post subject: Variation on this insurance claim
I was one of several cars hit from behind by a school bus. The insurance company for the bus has determined that my car is worth less than the repair value, and thus want's to write me a check and be done with it. I guess that works out well for them, so naturally they would go this way since they have a financial incentive. Therein lies my problem - the conflict of interest here.
I believe the car is worth more than the repair estimate. They claim the car is work $6500 (using some other resource and then applying "discounts") and that the repair is $7000. I believe the car is worth $12,000 based on Kelly Blue Book. By writing me a check for $6500, they avoid paying a rental car for 3 weeks AND any posibility that the repair fee goes up. It all comes down to the issue of them being in a position to assess the value. I call bullshit.
I want to dispute (in court if necessary) their claim the car is worth $6500. I then want them to fix the car.
First, they owe (by law) either the cost to repair the vehicle or it's value. No more, no less.
Why such the discrepancy in the value of the vehicle? You really need to see a copy of their report and see if it's accurate! It's possible that they are not including all the options or even have the right model.
If your looking at KBB (which I'm told you should not), are you looking at the retail value? If so, this is not the correct amount. Read what KBB has to define retail value. That does not match your car.
the KBB value is the retail value (what it would cost me to replace the vehicle). The resale value is about $10,500 ($1500 less), still much higher than their assessed value. _________________ Register Now to have your Insurance queries solved.
Again, read directly from KBB what retail value means. Better yet, I'll quote it:"This value assumes the vehicle has received the cosmetic and/or mechanical reconditioning needed to qualify it as "Excellent". This is not a transaction value; it is representative of a dealer's asking price and the starting point for negotiation."
The used to have a longer definition that pointed out that dealer's are the ones using retail values and that these vehicles usually have a warranty along with them.
So as you can see, the retail value is the sticker price that no one actually pays. The about the vehicle really sells for is much less. Also, did your vehicle have any type of warranty on it? I'm doubting it did. So it's not a fair comparison.
I know of no carrier that uses Kelly...check it on NADA or even Edmunds...if you'd like post yr/make/model/mileage/and ALL options...also is there by chance any PRIOR (to the accident) UNREPAIRED damage? if so then a percentage of this will come off of the vehicles ACV (actual cash value)...I like tcope am perplexed at the differences...generally do not see such a wide gap...somethings missing...again if you'd like I'd be happy to check the value based on the data base I have.... _________________ Have you been helped by a poster? Do you want to show your appreciation? YOU CAN !! Just simply click on the donate button and send them some coin!
It is a 2001 Volvo T5 with 130k miles. It has all options except CD changer and upgraded Audio. Has sunroof, thirdseat, roofracks. 1 owner and extremely well maintained.
THanks for any help you can provide. I really liked the car and driving it. To replace it would cost me far more than the $6500 they are offering - I don't understand where that figure comes from. _________________ Register Now to have your Insurance queries solved.
Lancer I posted on your other thread too....but if it's a v70-5cly, 4door turbo T5 wagon, then I get 9025.00 no addition for any of the options you have listed other than power sunroof...check the other thread and update the options please. _________________ Have you been helped by a poster? Do you want to show your appreciation? YOU CAN !! Just simply click on the donate button and send them some coin!
Also keep in mind that settlements on auto insurance physical damage is not based on the replacement cost of the car- it's based on the Actual Cash Value, or ACV at the time of the loss. Think depreciation and a whole lot more. The way I used to explain it to my insureds was based on what a dealer would pay you for the car (that's not exactly right, but it's close, and good enough for discussion purposes).
A lot of people are under the impression that the at-fault party's insurance company should pay to REPLACE my car, as that is what I would have to do if it were totalled. Please keep in mind that market conditions will also affect the value of the car. As an example, big old gas-sucking SUVs are NOT being valued at book right now. Dealers in my area are giving (easily) less than 85% of NADA book right now due to the cost of gasoline. Conversely, vehicles with great gas mileage are at a premium. I am not sure whether this will affect insurance settlements, but I have a feeling it might.
I have a feeling that LORI will chime in here at some point with additional info, and she really knows what's going on with this stuff.
Again- they aren't going to pay you the retail replacement cost. That's not how it works, unfortunately. As well, Lori- can you explain "diminished value" to our forum members? That anticipates that you are aware, and I hope that I haven't put you on the spot here.
As well, Lori- can you explain "diminished value" to our forum members
well I could, but more than likely another fifty page thread would occur... It wouldn't apply in this instance, the vehicle is totaled right? Diminished value would/could only be considered if repaired.. _________________ Have you been helped by a poster? Do you want to show your appreciation? YOU CAN !! Just simply click on the donate button and send them some coin!
keep in mind that betterment/depreciation (ACV) and diminishment of value are completely different things.
yeah, buddy and all don't apply if repaired or totaled _________________ Have you been helped by a poster? Do you want to show your appreciation? YOU CAN !! Just simply click on the donate button and send them some coin!
I am aware of the differences between ACV, diminished value, total loss of a vehicle based upon cost to repair, and all of those things...but if you'll read the OP, you'll see that it was challenging the insurer's determination of a total loss.
The OP is stating that he doesn't think the car should be considered a total loss. In the event of repair, he (due to the diminished value of the car) may be entitled to additional compensation for his loss over and above the repair costs. Lori lent credibility to the OPs argument in finding a value well in excess of what the carrier offered to pay. The carrier offered a settlement value of $6500, Lori found a value of $9025 for the same car. That is a distinct difference- roughly 30% which COULD be a determining factor in the decision whether to repair or cash out as a total.....
THAT is what I was referring to, and not contesting the information within the thread itself. So...I hope that I have made my concerns clearer.
With 7k in damages (then 'if' diminished value is applicable or considered) and rental this puppy is totaled more than likely...so I was going on that assumption (totaled) re: my statement of
Quote:
It wouldn't apply in this instance, the vehicle is totaled right? Diminished value would/could only be considered if repaired
Quote:
I am aware of the differences between ACV, diminished value, total loss of a vehicle based upon cost to repair, and all of those things...
Oh my gosh Ins. teacher !!! I never meant to give you the impression that I was questioning your understanding of pretty much 'anything' Please don't think I meant that! _________________ Have you been helped by a poster? Do you want to show your appreciation? YOU CAN !! Just simply click on the donate button and send them some coin!
It wouldn't apply in this instance, the vehicle is totaled right? Diminished value would/could only be considered if repaired..
