Auto insurance claim check - When is it issued?

Submitted by daveyzus on Tue, 05/19/2009 - 01:14

Hi, my car got damaged by another driver. His insurance company, Farmers, had an adjuster come and inspect my car. They sent me a check of $2400 the same day. I haven’t cashed it. I took my car to 2 body shop repairs to get my own estimates. The first shop estimated the damages to double the amount ($4800) of the auto insurance claim check and the second to even more ($5000). I called the insurance company and they want me to take the car to a shop to get it repaired and they will send somebody there to make arrangements. However, I do not want to repair the car because I am thinking about selling it as is to a friend and buying another one. Do I have the right to ask the insurance company to send me an adjustment check?

Thanks!

Posted: 19 May 2009 01:30 Post Subject: well..

Only if you were to repair the vehicle they will readjust the claim amount if the place of repair is not trying to rip them off. They do reserve the right to refuse to pay you more if you in fact do have no intentions of actually repairing the vehicle. If you do tell them that you want to repair the vehicle the only way they will pay out the difference is AFTER the work is done. You do not have to repair the vehicle but it may be in your best interest to re shop around and see who will do the work for the cheapest price. Since you are selling the vehicle if you do not repair it you will probably not get much money with damage to it. At this point it is really up to you.

~Do you want to keep the auto insurance claim check and the vehicle.
~Keep the check and sell the can and get almost no money for it.
~Or repair the vehicle and then refile the claim with the insurance company to get the vehicle fixed 100%

I think you should probably keep the vehicle, shop around for a better price, and get the insurance company to fix the rest. Since now thevehicle has been in an accident it will decrease the overall value of the vehicle dramaticly...remmeber just because the vehicle is worth a lot to you does not mean it is not worth a lot to a buyer. YOU MUST DISCLOSE THAT THE VEHICLE HAS BEEN IN AN ACCIDENT if you sel it.

Good luck

Posted: 19 May 2009 04:55 Post Subject:

Agent007,

They sent me a check of $2400 the same day. I haven’t cashed it. I took my car to 2 body shop repairs to get my own estimates. The first shop estimated the damages to double the amount ($4800) of the check and the second to even more ($5000).



Doesn't that make one wonder that the insurance companies are more interested in getting rid of the claims than compensating the claimant appropriately?

It seems that proper evaluation wasn't done before writing the auto insurance claim check. Agent007, what do you think could be the reason for the adjuster to write the check in haste?

Posted: 19 May 2009 10:59 Post Subject:

Do I have the right to ask the insurance company to send me an adjustment check?

An adjustment for your auto insurance claim check would depend on what these differences are...many times when an estimate is written in the field (opposed to being in a shop and torn down)...many things can be missed...also an adjuster can only write what they can see...a shop tends to write anything that 'might' be wrong even if they can't see it...many times they are correct, but in ins..if you can't see (and take a picture) of the damaged part we can't pay for it...

I need to correct a few things by some other posters then will get back to this.....

They do reserve the right to refuse to pay you more if you in fact do have no intentions of actually repairing the vehicle.


Sorry Agent but this is untrue and against the fair claims practice laws...the can refuse to pay for the additional if they cannot see the damage...but not because he's not repairing, no company can force anyone to repair their vehicle. that in no way obsolves them from compensating the 'injured' party their damage..

If you do tell them that you want to repair the vehicle the only way they will pay out the difference is AFTER the work is done

again, sorry this is incorrect..they most certainly will not pay AFTER it's repaired, because they need to see the supplemental damaged parts..prior to them being replaced or repaired...

Or repair the vehicle and then refile the claim with the insurance company to get the vehicle fixed 100%

I can all but guarantee if you try this they won't pay a dime, and you'll be stuck with the supplement...only 'possible' exception would be if repaired in one of this carriers direct repair shops...

Since now thevehicle has been in an accident it will decrease the overall value of the vehicle dramaticly

Not necessarily it depends on the vehicle, and the repair...and if your state allows diminished value, (which you most certainly won't have a claim for if you do not repair)....

YOU MUST DISCLOSE THAT THE VEHICLE HAS BEEN IN AN ACCIDENT if you sel it

not in my state unless your a dealer...

Ok dave, back to you...are you able to read the estimates to see what the actual differences are? if not and you are able to post of link them I'd be happy to look at them to see the difference... Could be that the adjuster wrote used or aftermarket parts the shops wrote new oem....

Another thing you might try...is ask a shop what they would charge you to tear your vehicle down (and put it back together remember to tell them that...makes a huge difference in how they dis-assemble it)...after tear down you can get the adjuster back to the shop to write a supplement and pay for what they missed...The difference are pretty drastic in the estimates from the shop and the adjuster...I'd really like to see those, or know what the differences are..

Posted: 19 May 2009 05:01 Post Subject: Lori

In my state California that is how this works...

the adjuster will inspect the vehicle prior to complete repair I just skipped that though because of what the poster said....


and no she does not have the right to get a larger auto insurance claim check if she is not fixing the vehicle. Maybe in your state this is the practice but in my state and other states that I have worked in what I stated is the practice.


The reason they cut the check In haste is to shut her up....flat out

Posted: 19 May 2009 11:29 Post Subject:

and no she does not have the right to get a larger check if she is not fixing the vehicle. Maybe in your state this is the practice but in my state and other states that I have worked in what I stated is the practice.

I'm sorry, but anyone, first or third party is entitled to be compensated for the damages they suffered...period...makes no difference if the vehicle is repaired or not...i'll review CA's fair claims practice laws tomorrow am, but I can gaurantee you that, no insurance company can refuse to pay their auto insurance claim check for known damages to a vehicle because the party is not repairing them.

Posted: 19 May 2009 11:54 Post Subject:

Thanks for your answers. I added links to my car damages, the insurance estimate and my estimate.

Car Damages
http://s384.photobucket.com/albums/oo289/daveyzus/Damages/

Insurance Estimate
http://s384.photobucket.com/albums/oo289/daveyzus/Insurance%20Estimate/

Body Shop Repair Estimate
http://s384.photobucket.com/albums/oo289/daveyzus/My%20Estimate/

Hope this will be enough for you to decide on the true worth of my Auto insurance claim check now.
Thanks,
David

Posted: 20 May 2009 03:07 Post Subject:

I forgot to mention the accident occurred in Seattle, Washington

Posted: 20 May 2009 03:43 Post Subject:

The reason they cut the check In haste is to shut herup....flat out



Well, doesn't it then go against the 'fair claim practice act'? This would make one feel that whenever the adjuster is writing an auto insurance claim check on the spot you are being low balled.

You always then have to take the vehicle of the bodyshop for the estimate even when you could have easily saved the trouble if the adjuster been honest at compensating you.

Posted: 20 May 2009 06:54 Post Subject:

Something that hasn't been mentioned here is that Farmers Insurance does not owe you any money. The at fault driver is who owes you for the repairs and the contract of insurance is between the at fault party and Farmers. The policy normally reads that the insurance company will pay the insured for any damages they become liable for. Farmers has no right to even inspect your car. Send a demand letter to the at fault party for whatever the repair cost is at your preferred repair facility

Posted: 20 May 2009 08:50 Post Subject: insurance

WOW!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Lots of different views in THIS one. Ok.....so, should the ask her Insurance company for more money OR should she sue the OTHER driver? OP, how did the Insurance company come up with an amount of $2400.00 on the auto insurance claim check ? ..just by looking at it ( hopefully they looked at the frame AND the outside of it). Would the repairs to the car 'outweigh' the car's value? Just alot for you to think about.

Posted: 20 May 2009 10:12 Post Subject:

He's wrong again simon this isn't the reason

The reason they cut the check In haste is to shut herup....flat out

hergwapo, he doesn't want to repair it.

Would the repairs to the car 'outweigh' the car's value?

no it won't...


Ok dave, here are the main differences I see...number one the carriers rates (rates they used when completing the estimate) are 48.00 for body, 52. frame, and 24 paint and material..the shops rates? 52.00 66.00 and 26.00 pretty significant differences..ins companys write the 'prevailing rate' for the area..this you might not get over especially since you don't want to repair the vehicle with what you get out of your auto insurance claim check...so those difference (whatever the amount is ) you may as well write off...the shop wrote new oem cover, the ins company after market...same with the tail lamps, shop new ins company reman...one of the larges differences is the ins company wrote to repair the rear body panel, the rear body panel the shop to replace it, the shop all wrote to blend both 1/4s and the aperture panels...very excessive especially if this vehicle is true black...if the car is true flat black there should be no blend on the estimate at all..(ins est would be correct)...the shop further has damage on the rt 1/4 that apparently the adjuster didn't see...I can not see it in the pic, or the rear body panel..doesn't mean it's not there i just can't see it...shop wants way more frame time...shop replaced the latch and striker on the deck lid, ins adj missed it...(needs it)...as to the rear body panel whether it needs replaced or repaired, I can't tell you cause I can't see it...the shop also replaced the rebar, the adjuster missed it, i'd bet it needs it, and by the way the bumper is setting on the car the adjuster should've seen it..All I can say for sure that the adjuster missed is rebar, latch, striker, some bumper brackets.

so now what do you do about it? Well as I said, you might see what a shop would charge you to remove the rear bumper AND put it back on...personally I'd call the adjuster say, 'look I've got this bumper off the car and you've missed some damage, can you come back out and look at this?" The problem is you may not know what you point to so and say, 'see=see that?'....the shops estimate might be over the top (it is if that car's true black-not metal fl. and even they IMO they're over the top on their blend BIG TIME)....I have no idea of the prevailing rates etc. in your area...you could too i guess call and say, 'hey you missed replacing the rebar, decklid latch and striker, and are you sure we shouldn't replace this rear body panel?"....again, make sure you know which parts those are before meeting with the adjuster....

What do you know about this shop? I mean when people don't want to fix their cars but go estimate shopping they typcially go to the highest priced shop they can find..is that the case here? (rates are just TOO far apart)..

Posted: 20 May 2009 10:49 Post Subject:

For our CA agent:

CA fair claims practices state (in part here's the link http://www.insurance.ca.gov/0100-consumers/0060-information-guides/0040-residential/fair-claims-settlement-regs.cfm)

(s) "Proof of claim" means any documentation in the claimant's possession submitted to the insurer which provides any evidence of the claim and that supports the magnitude or the amount of the claimed loss.

don't see anything there that says, 'unless you're not fixing it'

(g) No insurer shall attempt to settle a claim by making a settlement offer that is unreasonably low. The Commissioner shall consider any admissible evidence offered regarding the following factors in determining whether or not a settlement offer is unreasonably low:(1) the extent to which the insurer considered evidence submitted by the claimant to support the value of the claim;

(2) the extent to which the insurer considered evidence made known to it or reasonably available;

(3) the extent to which the insurer considered the advice of its claims adjuster as to the amount of damages;5) the procedures used by the insurer in determining the dollar amount of property damage;7) any other credible evidence presented to the Commissioner that demonstrates that the final amount offered in settlement of the claim by the insurer is below the amount that a reasonable person with knowledge of the facts and circumstances would have offered in settlement of the claim.

e)

No insurer shall:

(1) require that an automobile be repaired at a specific repair shop; or,

(2) direct, suggest or recommend that an automobile be repaired at a specific repair shop, unless,

(A) such referral is expressly requested by the claimant; or,

(B) the claimant has been informed in writing of the right to select the repair facility; and,

(C) the insurer that elects to repair a vehicle or directs, suggests or recommends that a specific repair shop be used, shall cause the damaged vehicle to be restored to its condition prior to the loss at no additional cost to the claimant other than as stated in the policy or as otherwise allowed by these regulations.




TA-DA!

(f) if partial losses are settled on the basis of a written estimate prepared by or for the insurer, the insurer shall supply the claimant with a copy of the estimate upon which the settlement is based. The estimate prepared by or for the insurer shall be in accordance with applicable policy provisions, and of an amount which will allow for repairs to be made in a workmanlike manner. If the claimant subsequently claims, based upon a written estimate which he or she obtains, that necessary repairs will exceed the written estimate prepared by or for the insurer, the insurer shall:
(1) pay the difference between the written estimate and a higher estimate obtained by the claimant; or,

(2) promptly provide the claimant with the name of at least one repair shop, if requested by the claimant pursuant to subsection 2695.8(e)(2), that will make the repairs for the amount of the written estimate. If the insurer designates fewer than three repair shops, the insurer shall assure that the repairs are performed in a workmanlike manner. The insurer shall maintain documentation of all such communications; or,

(3) reasonably adjust any written estimates prepared by the repair shop of the insured's choice.

ONCE AGAIN...NOT ONE MENTION OF 'HAVING' TO REPAIR...HMMMMMMMMMMMM. imagine that!

ok dave, I got caught up in my little thread war...all the above is CA, however all states fair claims practice laws are similar. I did look up diminished value claims for Washington, and they do have to honor one, however that cannot kick in unless your car is repaired...

Share what the adjuster says regarding your auto insurance claim check adjustment and let us know if we can be of further assistance.

Posted: 20 May 2009 07:06 Post Subject:

THAT IS FOR YOUR STATE!!!!!

Posted: 20 May 2009 08:41 Post Subject:

Another avenue is if he don't want it repaired is that the insurance company owes him the difference in value of the car immediately before the accident and after the accident. His auto insurance claim check should count on this one too. There are case sites on this. So if car is worth 10,000 and repairs are 5,000 but it only brings 3500 at an arms length sale then he is owed 6500.

Posted: 20 May 2009 10:05 Post Subject:

THAT IS FOR YOUR STATE!!!!!



NO Einstein, read it AGAIN...it's for YOUR state...right straight from the Fair Claims Practices for the state of CA....geeeeeeze dude, either educate yourself, or at least read the post...or stop this...did ja' miss this part ?? it's right at the beginning, remember I promised links and everything :roll:

[b]CA fair claims practices state (in part here's the link http://www.insurance.ca.gov/0100-consumers/0060-information-guides/004 0-residential/fair-claims-settlement-regs.cfm)



Clearly you either have not been in this business for very long AT ALL...simply didn't absorb what you were taught, or thick as a brick I can't decide which....Seriously Dude, what's your problem? You're wearing me out with your over zealous INCORRECT information..what gives? ...this is the state of CA not Missouri....remember the state you have under your name? How on earth do you NOT know this?

Now what will your response be? Seen it in other states? (none by the way) :roll: :roll: :roll:



hergwapo, I believe you are talking about diminished value, think I mentioned that to him as well...BUT in order to claim diminished value you HAVE to have the vehicle repaired...

Posted: 20 May 2009 11:33 Post Subject:

I

I did look up diminished value claims for Washington, and they do have to honor one, however that cannot kick in unless your car is repaired...



That statement is definately innacurate in the state you are employed, and I would be willing to bet if I read the measure of damages for Washington that it would be likewise in Washington.

If you make a claim under someone else’s policy (e.g. your auto is damaged because someone else hit you),
Missouri courts have included diminished value as recoverable damages - Rook V. John F. Oliver Trucking
Company, 566 S.W.2d 200 (Mo. App. 1977). In this case, the court said the amount of damage should be
measured from the fair market value immediately before the collision and the fair market value immediately
after the collision. However, if repairs have been made to the auto as a result of the accident, the court said
that the dimished value should be the difference between the fair market value immediately before the collision
and the fair market value after the repairs.
What is Actual Cash Value?
The insurance company is required to pay the fair market value of a vehicle. The fair market value of your
vehicle can be found by surveying dealers in your area, receiving information from recognized groups such as
“CCC”, “ADP AutoSource”, or one of the industry guides, such as “NADA” to determine the average retail
price. When disputing the company’s offer of settlement, it is up to you to prove that your vehicle is worth
more than what the company is offering.
The insurance company will adjust the value based on physical wear and tear as well as any pre-existing
damage. If the company determines some replacement items are better than the ones damaged, they may
apply “betterment.” Betterment is an improvement that increases the value of property and is more extensive
than mere repairs. You would be responsible for those charges. For example, if the tires are damaged or the
battery or mechanical parts must be replaced, the company may replace new for old. The betterment would
depend on the age of the older item being replaced.



In other words the measure of damages included diminishment of value regardless of whether you repair the damage or not.

Posted: 21 May 2009 11:45 Post Subject:

That statement is definately innacurate in the state you are employed, and I would be willing to bet if I read the measure of damages for Washington that it would be likewise in Washington.

Mike, all the info I read, (re: washington state) had the working, 'repaired', or diminished value 'after repair'....Good Lord knows I couldn't read everything that's printed about it....You know better than I how to find this information, if you have time and can check on that for the OP (re: Washington's regulations for DV, if vehicle does not have to be repaired). I'm sure he would be much obliged..(and so would i :wink: )

Posted: 21 May 2009 06:23 Post Subject:

Lori, you sound a little stressed in your posts of late. Have they been making you work storm claims down here in the southern part of Missouri? I know we've been covered up with tree limb damage and vehicles that were converted to lowriders from the weight of sycamores and oaks. I'd be disappointed if you got this close and didn't stop by for a cup of decaf. I'm working on getting that Washington state info.

Posted: 22 May 2009 02:33 Post Subject:

Lori, you sound a little stressed in your posts of late.

Just in reponse to a few (or maybe one :wink: ) My post in reponse to yours wasn't meant that way AT ALL Mike, sorry if you took it that way...(seriously)...

Have they been making you work storm claims down here in the southern part of Missouri?

No, we are of course under staffed like all claims dept. we got hit with a storm up here last friday...but no, no more stress than the past year.. :wink:

I know we've been covered up with tree limb damage and vehicles that were converted to lowriders from the weight of sycamores and oaks.

:wink: :lol:

I'd be disappointed if you got this close and didn't stop by for a cup of decaf

Believe it or not Mike, I wouldn't get near the big "J" without looking you up...that my friend is a promise.

I'm working on getting that Washington state info.

Thanks Mike.

Posted: 09 Jun 2009 07:12 Post Subject: Can I keep the money from a car accident claim without repai

Recently, someone backed into the side door of my car. Their fault. YES I OWN THE CAR! They did approx $2,000 worth of damage. The adjuster came out & estimated the damage & sent a check for a small amount. Its currently at the body shop now for an final estimate. However, I am not sure I want to repair the car. When I told the adjustor on the phone today that I am @ the repair shop getting a final estimate. He got pissy & said, "i already gave you an estimate, so you dont need another estimate. they are just looking to see if there is anymore damage and if there is I will write them a supplement check to fix it." I said, "ok well I don't care if it's called an estimate or a fart, I will get all that is owed to me." Do I have the option to just keep the money and live with the damages or do I have to have the vehicle repaired in order to go through with the claim? The adjustor is making me feel like I have to get it fixed and he is making it seem like he wont write a check to me, ONLY to the shop. How do I fight this is he give me problems?

There are other adjusters & people in the "insurance" business on Yahoo answers trying to tell me that, the adjuster will pay the body shop to repair the damages and if I decide against repairing my car OH WELL I'll just have to settle for the original small check from the first estimate.

IS THIS TRUE OR JUST SOMETHING THEY WANT TO MAKE YOU BELIEVE? HOW DO I GET AROUND IT?

Posted: 09 Jun 2009 07:32 Post Subject: Thanks for the fair claims post

Lori you're WONDERFUL girl :: does it say in FLORIDA I'd have to repair my car?

Posted: 09 Jun 2009 07:41 Post Subject:

Well, no one can actually force you to repair the vehicle. Ask the adjuster if she can be at the bodyshop when they would tear down the vehicle. It'd save a lot of time on both parts.

BTW, have you obtained her estimate and checked for missing information?

Posted: 09 Jun 2009 11:56 Post Subject:

Do I have the option to just keep the money and live with the damages

yes,

or do I have to have the vehicle repaired in order to go through with the claim?

no..

The adjustor is making me feel like I have to get it fixed and he is making it seem like he wont write a check to me, ONLY to the shop. How do I fight this is he give me problems

Well, I guess I don't understand by what you mean by 'final estimate'...is the shop tearing down the vehicle to make all potential damage visable? Does the shop know that you have no intentions of having them repair your vehicle? If not then you can bet the shop is going to charge you for their time, and disassembly and re-assembly if that's possible...I guess what I need to know to help you out is ... What did you tell the shop when you dropped off your vehicle? And what did they tell you?
Most of the time, if a vehicle is left at a shop, to be torn down for a complete estimate, the shop likely thinks they 'have the job'...when removing damaged parts the utmost care is not given UNLESS the shop KNOWS ahead of time that they will have to put these damaged parts back on the vehicle...they also will not do this for free...so let me know what you told the shop...

There are other adjusters & people in the "insurance" business on Yahoo answers trying to tell me that, the adjuster will pay the body shop to repair the damages and if I decide against repairing my car OH WELL I'll just have to settle for the original small check from the first estimate

This could (and is most of the time) be true in first party claims, not in third party which is what your claim is...

Exactly what 'kind' of damage are we talking about here? Look at the estimate the adjuster wrote, how much was it? What are the parts being repaired or replaced? That might help me try to figure out what the shop is doing....

Posted: 12 Jun 2009 09:56 Post Subject: Having some similar issues

A person hit me, and my insurance adjuster came and estimated it at around 1500 minus 500 for our deductible. They issued a check out in my husband and the car repair place name. We wanted to wait to get it fixed b/c of our deductible and the agent said that if we could work it out w/the repair place he didn''t see a problem w/us just depositing it in our bank account until we are ready. But the car repair place doesn''t want to endorse the check. Is there a way to get another check issued? The agent said that we would have to wait for the other check to expire (150 days from the date of the check). Any way around this? What would we have to do? We are in CA. Thanks!!')

Posted: 12 Jun 2009 11:53 Post Subject:

Mikasweet, your agent is a bonehead. Or I'm guessing that you were not speaking to your agent directly and only someone occupying a desk.

I'm guessing you have a lien on the vehicle? If so, the check either needs t have the body shops name or your lien holders name on it. Both are going to require that the vehicle be repaired before they will sign the check. Your insurance company has a legal obligation to protect the vehicle for your lien holder. That is, they need to make sure that the money is _only_ used to repair the vehicle. As long as your going to do this, there is no reason that one of those parties cannot be on the check.

Posted: 13 Jun 2009 01:10 Post Subject:

LOL Welll who's to say it wasn't him. But there isn't a lien holder on our car its paid off. Also if we wanted to make sure that we are getting the best deal when it comes to repairs we wanted to look around. I don't know, they just put it in their name and picked them.

Posted: 13 Jun 2009 03:03 Post Subject:

If there is no lien on the vehicle then the check should be made payable to the owner and only the owner. Only reason why not is if you agreed to take it to preferred shop. Even then, you can still return the check and ask for a new one in your name only. This can be done at any time.

Posted: 13 Jun 2009 02:30 Post Subject:

As long as they receive the check back, there is no reason for them to not issue a new one. I was dealing with a company that issued me a check that had my name grossly misspelled. So bad, in fact, that the bank would not allow me to cash or deposit it! I called the company and explained the situation and was told that they would have to let the check expire (in this case 90 days) and then they would send a replacement check.

I, of course, jumped all over them and sent the check back registered mail and had a new one in my hand within the week.

The more I think about it though...if a company sends a check (refund, reimbursement, etc.) and then somebody believes them that they have to wait 150, 180 days or whatever...GENIUS! This is one way to help with cash flow on the business end...an interest free loan for 6 months!

Good luck!

Posted: 14 Jun 2009 12:17 Post Subject:

It's ridiculous for any carrier (P&C) to tell you that you have to wait for the draft to expire, with a couple of keystrokes, they can ascertain the draft has not cleared a couple of more strokes and they stop pay that draft, few more and they have reissued another draft in it's replacement...bing,bam,bomb, your'e done...I have to do this for one reason or another, about 50 times a year probably...the whole thing takes maybe 5 minutes.

I agree with T if their is no lein holder, and the carrier knows this, your name is all they need to put on the draft, if the carrier still shows a lein holder, (that too happens a LOT), then you will have to prove the lein's released, which is easily done by faxing a copy ofthe lein release...

Posted: 15 Jun 2009 07:19 Post Subject:

But the car repair place doesn''t want to endorse the check.



And, why that is so? Have you inquired with them?

Next, if there is no lien on the car why the name of the bodyshop was included in it? Have you taken the car to their preferred shop as Tcope has mentioned?

Posted: 15 Jun 2009 11:11 Post Subject:

And, why that is so? Have you inquired with them?

I can tell you why because they are going to get a W2 on that draft...that's why....if there is no lein have it reissued, if there is a lein have it made to you and the lein holder...those (if there is a lein) are your ONLY two choices...

Posted: 24 Oct 2010 02:11 Post Subject: Sort of the same boat here...

Hi all, I've read through the responses here, and Lori, you seem very knowledgeable, maybe you can give me advice with a similar situation.

I have car that I am leasing and it was very recently vandalized. I am thinking of filing a claim and getting some estimates from insurers. Am I obligated to fix the damage? From what I read in this message thread, I am unsure (because the car is leased).

Ideally I'd like to get some estimates and have the insurance company send me a check to have it repaired. However, I have a neighbor who used to do vehicle restorations and he is quite handy with a paint gun and buffer.

Could I cash the insurance check and choose to just have my neighbor repair the car wherein I can just pay him cash or mow his lawn or other neighborly favor, (the check's value I assume would be at whatever the estimates were from the body shops). I thought of this when reading one of the earlier posts in the thread that indicated that I am not obligated to have it repaired, (but I will in some way have it repaired, at the latest before I turn it back in after lease, possibly painted by my neighbor).

Posted: 24 Oct 2010 02:16 Post Subject: in a similar boat here...

Hi all, I've read through the responses here, and Lori, you seem very knowledgeable, maybe you can give me advice with a similar situation.

I have car that I am leasing and it was very recently vandalized. I am thinking of filing a claim and getting some estimates from insurers. Am I obligated to fix the damage? From what I read in this message thread, I am unsure (because the car is leased).

Ideally I'd like to get some estimates and have the insurance company send me a check to have it repaired. However, I have a neighbor who used to do vehicle restorations and he is quite handy with a paint gun and buffer.

Could I cash the insurance check and choose to just have my neighbor repair the car wherein I can just pay him cash or mow his lawn or other neighborly favor, (the check's value I assume would be at whatever the estimates were from the body shops). I thought of this when reading one of the earlier posts in the thread that indicated that I am not obligated to have it repaired, (but I will in some way have it repaired, at the latest before I turn it back in after lease, possibly painted by my neighbor).

Posted: 24 Oct 2010 03:56 Post Subject:

Could I cash the insurance check and choose to just have my neighbor repair the car wherein I can just pay him cash or mow his lawn or other neighborly favor...


You already posted this as a separate thread, which is the correct way to post:

http://www.ampminsure.org/start/about14730.html#86312

Posted: 24 Oct 2010 05:02 Post Subject:

Hey, yeah, I realized that posting a fresh post probably makes more sense. Thanks

Posted: 05 Jul 2012 04:46 Post Subject: Car accident

I had an accident with my car, rear end it other car. My car had sustainable damage to the front, air bags deployed, frame damage and many others. The insurance decided that is not a total loss and wants to fix the car. The value of the car is 25k and the repairs to the car are 15 k. Can I refuse the car and tell them I don't want it anymore, so they can pay it off to the bank?

Posted: 08 Jul 2012 04:33 Post Subject:

Can I refuse the car and tell them I don't want it anymore, so they can pay it off to the bank?


NO! It's not your game. You have a contract that tells you what the insurance company's responsibility to you is. Repair, replacement, or actual cash value. The choice is THEIRS, not yours. If you don't want the vehicle, let them repair it and then sell it. Use the proceeds to pay off your lender and any remainder can be used as a down payment on another vehicle.

Most states require declaring a vehicle a total loss only when the repairable damage exceeds 70% to 80% of the ACV. 15,000/25,000 is only 60% of ACV. Not even close to a total loss.

You could have a "diminished value" claim if, after repairs are completed, the vehicle would only sell if the price were set well below other similar vehicles without the damage.

Add new comment

Restricted HTML

  • Allowed HTML tags: <a href hreflang> <em> <strong> <cite> <blockquote cite> <code> <ul type> <ol start type> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd> <h2 id> <h3 id> <h4 id> <h5 id> <h6 id>
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
  • Web page addresses and email addresses turn into links automatically.