by simonb » Thu Dec 04, 2008 04:29 pm
My isurance company says my car is a total loss.They want to give me 5k less than the value I researced. The method they are using is called Audatex. The insurance adjuster is not budging off his numbers and only giving me 3 days to except thier offer. Should I settle or get a lawyer.
Posted: Thu Dec 04, 2008 08:55 pm Post Subject:
Poster if they want to move your vehicle because of accruing storage costs, let them sign a waiver to bring it back to you if you can not agree as to the acv. If they move your car, that only gives them more leverage. If you can not agree as to the value and you later decide to use your own coverage, the other insurer has successfully removed your property from you without settling and may charge you fees for storage to return it to you.
I'd recommend you submit a letter, similar to below, to the appraiser that wants to move it or refuses to pay storage. Use and modify at your own risk. If you do not assert your rights you are likely to lose them. If your insurer has to inspect your damaged vehicle and it is 150 miles away at some storage facility used by insurers other than your own, how are you going to protect your property or allow your insurer to inspect without traveling?
Date
Claimant: xxxxxxxxxxxx
Claim #. 11111111111111
XYZ Claims adjuster in charge of my claim,
I have been asked to have my vehicle removed from the body shop that has prepared an estimate and stored my damaged vehicle for which your insured is responsible for all losses incurred by me as a result of their negligence or I have been informed that I may be responsible for any additional storage charge for failing to accept XYZ Insurance Company's offer for total loss settlement. Although I have not received a settlement offer to which I believe compensates me for my actual cash value, XYZ Insurance Company is offering to store my vehicle at no charge to me and is willing to bring back to me in the event we cannot reach an agreed price as to pre loss fair market value of the vehicle for purpose of settlement at no expense to me.
XYZ insurer promises to deliver to me my vehicle upon request free from any additional damage, storage, towing, administrative costs or any other fees in the event I do not agree with the settlement proposed.
I understand that titles take time to obtain for proper ownership so that an insurer can dispose of the property by selling the salvage. These costs will not be assessed and or deducted from the pre loss fair market value of my vehicle. Pre-existing tow, storage, and administrative charges cannot and will not be assessed or deducted from my settlement and will not be used as leverage by XYZ Insurance to persuade me to take an amount for settlement that is less than the fair market pre loss value.
It will be understood that I am to be compensated for all loss of use of my vehicle until such time that I have received a fair market value settlement for my loss and the settlement offered is written and mailed to me and I have received such notice. The offer will contain vehicles comparable to my damaged vehicle that I can ascertain their availability and that the options and conditions are equal to the vehicle that the negligent party has damaged.
Signed this day__________________ by (vehicle owner)
And agreed to by XYZ claims representative______________________ this date_________________.
Posted: Thu Dec 04, 2008 08:56 pm Post Subject:
Understood. I'll put it into perspective....
I can't tell you the number of times I've made an offer on a total loss vehicle, has the person tell me it was too low and when I asked them what the value was, they could not tell me. I've had many cases (and we've seen it here) where people owe much more then they vehicle is worth. They want to be paid more just because the owe more. I could go on and on but the result is the same... the person does not want to settle. Now, in every case and even the one here, the adjuster could simply pay the person less the salvage (and current towing/storage) and be done with the claim. But that is not done as it's just not the right way to do things. Usually both parties work together to resolve the issue. But I can only say that if the adjuster feels that there is an impasse and nothing is going to change, they can bottom line the claim.
But I did not just state what you quoted. It does not have the same meaning without the context. In this case the person stated that they told the adjuster that they'd have an attorney handle the matter. What is going to happen when/if an attoney does not call? The adjuster is going to understand that the OP is just wasting their time with threats. I'm simpling pointing out that telling an adjuster you are going to get an attorney and then not following through could make the situation worse.
Posted: Thu Dec 04, 2008 09:18 pm Post Subject:
Poster if they want to move your vehicle because of accruing storage costs, let them sign a waiver to bring it back to you if you can not agree as to the acv.
Can't hurt to try. Would I sign it? Nope.... as I really have nothing to gain and everything to loose. There is some extremely open ended working in that letter that I'd not want to commit to.Bottom line... the owner of the vehicle is responsible for excessive storage charges on the vehicle, the insurance company has offered to pay to have it moved to a storage free facility and there is nothing that states the insurance company needs to take possession of the salvage anyway.
Again, we have two separate issues here... the value of the vehicle and the storage charges.
If the OP wants to go pick up the vehicle, he/she can. I have no doubt that the insurance company would address the current towing/storage changes if the OP submits the bill.
Posted: Thu Dec 04, 2008 09:30 pm Post Subject:
FK, I did forget to mention that the insurance company has every right to ask for a property damage release and not issue payment until it's signed. But they almost always forgo a release in order to get the claim settled. But without it, the OP could accept the money and then still file suit. So the insurance company is still leaving themselves wide open for a continuation of the claim even after they make a payment. Releases are usually not obtained in these situations as it is not worth the resistance to settling the claim. But it's a right the insurance company and that they waive. I'm just pointing this out as it's not like the insurance company is holding all the power. Not having a waiver signed leaves them wide open.
Posted: Thu Dec 04, 2008 09:36 pm Post Subject:
I'd recommend the action not be taken unless the poster actually could establish that the offer was being lowballed substantially as in the 28,000 vs 23,000 settlement in the earlier post. Do I think the insurer would sign such an agreement? Not likely, but it might reveal the insurer's intent.
If the intent of the insurer was to resolve the issue of accruing storage which might lower their profit from the resell of the salvage later, it might behoove them to come to the bargaining table in a fair manner if they had not before. If an impass came, it could be proven in court that the claimant attempted to mitigate the storage in a reasonable manner. There might be other reasons for preserving salvage as well. If there were bodily injuries, the attorney might want the salvage preserved so it could be inspected by an expert. What better way to elimate that issue than by reselling the salvage and destroying it or selling to a rebuilder.
I'd still rather deal with my own insurer in either event. I have a contract with them and there are no artificial deadlines imposed other than the state requiring settlements to be made in a timely manner.
Posted: Fri Dec 05, 2008 02:24 am Post Subject:
Used accurately these programs may offer a realistic value for your loss, but most often they are undervaluing your loss due to the user of the program or information used that is inaccurate.
Couldn't agree with you more Mike..Have to disagree here though...
artificial deadlines
first and third party claimants all have a duty to mitigate their damages...I have never understood why people thought not allowing their vehicle to be moved would really make an adjuster increase an offer...when more times than not the opposite result is what happens...OP release the vehicle to a tow free lot...YOUR HOUSE...I've done this several times...if someone has 'this issue' then fine, how about I pay to tow it to your house...done, you have the car where you can guard it...it costs nothing to set there, you can have whomever you want come over to see it...then when this is finally settled we'll come get it and haul it to the auction...problem solved...As to the rental see this is how statements are turned and twisted around the adjuster never said
,The insurance adjuster is not budging off his numbers and only giving me 3 days to except thier offer
or even 'accept my offer or you're out of the rental' you're out of the rental in three days period whether you accept it or not...and the same thing would happen with your own carrier...the adjuster on either side can add a day or two IF THEY WANT TO..but it's the same, and in no way matters whether or not you accept or reject the offer.For some unknown reason the general public is under the misconception that threatening to hire an attorney will make an adjuster qiver in their boots and open up the check book wider...not so...while we are 'supposed' to act as if it's our own check book in some ways, we certainly know different, I mean really it's not my money..and frankly in a lot of instances I'm thrilled to pieces if some insureds/claimants actually do get an attorney...makes my job a lot easier, because the attorney typcially KNOWS how claims work and what we need to settle them...also most attorneys will not even take a property damage claim such as this...or if they do it will be for a flat rate or by the billable hour...and no you can't recover those fees..so if you pay an attorney 2k to work on this, (that's only about 8 hours or so)...and you are 3k apart, well you got 1k more...
OP I'd be happy to run a value for you (with a different program that the one this company used) if you provide either the VIN or yr/make/model/series/I'll need all options and mileage, also is there any UNREPAIRED prior damage? also the state this occured in.
Something else to consider, as others have said, check with your own carrier, most carriers if they have a liability commitment (and they would in your case) will waive your deductible or the other carrier will front it.
Also just an fyi, either carrier will also owe you (in one form or another) the sales tax for the final ACV as well as title transfering etc.
Hopefully you will get this resolved soon, and we will gladly provide any help and information we can..
One more thing, (and for the record I hate these evaulation programs, however I must admit they follow the fluctuating market closer)...5k is a long way apart even for one of these programs..it couldn't be that your vehicle is a giant suv or some other gas hawg is it? I ask because as we all know the market for these vehicles fell through the floor when gas hit 3buck, and they went into the basement when it hit 4 bucks a gallon, now that it's back down no one trusts (yet) that it will stay down..(I predict after the holidays it will be back up by valentines day). This 'might' be the reason that nada or edmunds values are still up when actual market surveys (what that program is supposed to do) would be much much lower and follow the market much closer.
Posted: Fri Dec 05, 2008 04:20 am Post Subject:
how about I pay to tow it to your house...done, you have the car where you can guard it...it costs nothing to set there, you can have whomever you want come over to see it...then when this is finally settled we'll come get it and haul it to the auction...problem solved...
Better check with your community ordinances. An inoperative vehicle can be considered a nuisance as it is in my city and you would be subject to a fine and court costs if you park it in your yard or drive. If you cant garage the damaged vehicle, you'd better consider other options. But then again the city fine may only be 25.00 for a fifteen day violation, as opposed to twenty five a day in the local storage facility. But then again, if you fail to move it after the violation the city will move it for you where it will be stored and you will be charged with the city storage and towing fees along with your fine.
Posted: Fri Dec 05, 2008 10:19 am Post Subject:
ok mike...'IF' it's not against a city ordin. or 'IF' you have a garage...sorry thought that went without saying.. :roll:
Posted: Fri Dec 05, 2008 10:43 am Post Subject:
.
.
.
Tcope,
A revisit to a comment you made earlier in this thread:
""Keep in mind that the insurance company can also deduct the salvage value of the vehicle and issue
payment to, in their view, settle the claim. They can also then send a letter to the state to inform them that the vehicle was a total loss (as they may be required to do).""
Thinking about the above a little further... it would seem that at first an insured would be intimidated by the thought of their insurer cutting off a good faith negotiation abruptly and slamming them out of a fair settlement leaving the insured out in the cold with an low ball check.. as in slam dunk insured looses.
But on second thought... such an action by the insurer could possibly hand the "Insured" a Slam Dunk Bad Faith case in a court of law.
Do you know of any Case Law where the above has occurred??
FK,
Posted: Fri Dec 05, 2008 10:50 am Post Subject:
I'm going to jump in on this question fred, and i'm sure todd will respond as well...first of all you 'can' do that, but it is a last resort only (IMO) in over twenty years I've done it maybe three times..and it was more that the owners would flat not return calls respond etc...if they say, 'that's too low' etc, but provide no proof of same, (which is always asked for) and then don't return calls etc...you can deduct the salvage amount and issue payment as owner retain, now they don't have to cash the draft...this usually causes one of two things to happen, either the owner will call back and want to discuss it further, which is what i wanted anyway...or they know their value had no merit or there was no proof to substantiate it or it was unreasonable and they cash it and go on...
I personally don't know of any case law, nor would i consider this bad faith, if done as a last resort, which it (i would think) would have to be...
Add your comment