by Guest » Thu May 15, 2008 04:49 am
Hi!
I am hoping someone can help me on this!
I was involved in an accident on Dec. 1 07. I was rearended by a Hummer going approx 45 mph. My minivan had approx 11,500 in damage (it is a custom 07 Sienna) and I had a rental car for 12 weeks. After the accident, I had to take my 4 kids (ages 6,4, 2, 6 mths) to the er and then one to the pediatrician 4 days later. Two were treated with whiplash and had chiro for about 5 months. Medical bills totaled 2950. Lost wages to take the kids were approx 680, diminished value on my vehicle is about 4K. They also didn't pay the car rental bill for 6 weeks and it was charged to me so I paid an over the limit fee and lost my 0% promotional rate due to default (even though the charge has been reversed.) The insurance company offered me an accident settlement of 2,150 and then they were going to pay the 1500 of chiro (there is a lein and that is included in the 2950) I told them I was looking for around 16300 (four times medical bills, 4K in diminished value, lost wages and over the limit fee.) Am I asking too much? They told me I was being unreasonable and that Missouri doesn't recognize diminished value. My insurance company says they do. What is a fair accident settlement amount?
I am hoping someone can help me on this!
I was involved in an accident on Dec. 1 07. I was rearended by a Hummer going approx 45 mph. My minivan had approx 11,500 in damage (it is a custom 07 Sienna) and I had a rental car for 12 weeks. After the accident, I had to take my 4 kids (ages 6,4, 2, 6 mths) to the er and then one to the pediatrician 4 days later. Two were treated with whiplash and had chiro for about 5 months. Medical bills totaled 2950. Lost wages to take the kids were approx 680, diminished value on my vehicle is about 4K. They also didn't pay the car rental bill for 6 weeks and it was charged to me so I paid an over the limit fee and lost my 0% promotional rate due to default (even though the charge has been reversed.) The insurance company offered me an accident settlement of 2,150 and then they were going to pay the 1500 of chiro (there is a lein and that is included in the 2950) I told them I was looking for around 16300 (four times medical bills, 4K in diminished value, lost wages and over the limit fee.) Am I asking too much? They told me I was being unreasonable and that Missouri doesn't recognize diminished value. My insurance company says they do. What is a fair accident settlement amount?
Posted: Mon May 19, 2008 09:55 pm Post Subject:
Independent appraisers make anywhere from 50 to 150 and up for inspections and appraisals for insurers. Why would you expect to pay anything less to assess the proper cost of repairs in addition to what the supposed independent appraiser working under insurance company criteria missed. Make note of the flaws and poor repairs made by some shop looking to cut corners to work for what the insurer was willing to pay. In addition research comps, prepare a report in a manner that can be introduced and not refuted in court as evidence and to have someone that is willing to be deposed to justify those figures.
PLP,,,,You will want to use an attorney after reviewing your original post that Lori was quickly inclined to point out that I overlooked. Your case for diminished value in excess of 7500.00 will require a professional to seek a demand for your damages. Even with attorneys, the nimrods that have been assigned to handle the diminished value losses only speak in terms of circular logic and do not believe it exists but will eventually extend a putrid embarrassing offer to make you go away.
In addition, an attorney that works thousands of these cases annually would pay for the assessment up front and you would not be required any out of pocket expenses. This is definately a case that at least one attorney I work for would take on contingency.
I would post my services or the attorney's website but that is prohibited according to forum rules I believe. You will want to consult an attorney, before you settle on your personal injury as well. In Missouri, if you are going to sue for personal injury you must sue for other losses at the same time. You cannot sue someone twice for the same damages.
Your claims handler may even admit they owe you some loss of value and they will use a formula to calculate the loss that has been easily proved to be erroneous in court. The Georgia 17c formula that they use, was only meant to be used in absence of any other calculations and not as the standard for assessing the loss.
Posted: Tue May 20, 2008 09:14 am Post Subject:
I'm only going to point out one of the huge inaccuracy in Mike's last post, you already know he personally gains by these claims whether they are paid or not..
In Missouri, if you are going to sue for personal injury you must sue for other losses at the same time. You cannot sue someone twice for the same damages.
This is TOTALLY incorrect....you have TWO SEPARATE claims in this state (to my knowledge Mike repairs cars for a fee and will type up a diminished value claim for a fee, but has never settled a claim in his life nor worked for an insurance company)....Your vehicle damage including any diminished value claim are Property Damage claims, yours and your childrens injuries are Bodily Injury claims, not only are they required by law to be kept separate, it happens daily. A person may settle the PD portion and then want rep'd for a BI portion or visa versa. To say that youIn Missouri, if you are going to sue for personal injury you must sue for other losses at the same time.
Is a ridiculously incorrect statement.This statement is true
You cannot sue someone twice for the same damages.
However they are not the same damages...You'll have to decide if you want to hire an attorney figure what his fee and all the ''other'' fees will be an if you are more comfortable going that way, then you certainly should.
Posted: Tue May 20, 2008 02:22 pm Post Subject: You could be wrong?
I think you are incorrect, you might want to discuss it with your legal department in Missouri. The loss of value and the collision claim and the personal injury all occured at the moment of impact and is due to the negligence of one act. How can you sue for personal injury and then sue later for DV or the property damage. You would be suing a party for essentially the same negligent act twice. You might settle at different times but if there is not potentiality for litigation, what would motivate an insurer to pay for additional DV losses later.
It is true I am compensated for my work in cases in which I do not perform the collision repair. I am supposed to donate my time to help people recover moneys rightly owed to them by your insured's negligence?
In cases where I repair vehicles and the owners are seeking for loss of value due to the inherent loss of value, I waive my fee and additional four hours of work as a courtesy to my valued customer. Why should I extend the same waiver to a vehicle I was never employed to repair.
Good grief Lori, you certainly have the mentality that capitalism, sole proprietorship, or collision repar owners only should be compensated for what you feel is merited. Profit is not a dirty word apparently, if you are in the collision repair business trying to help vehicle owners recover what is rightfully owed them. Typical notions of those who sit in positions of authority to make decisions for their employer in order to safeguard and shepherd the billiions in insurance profits.
Posted: Thu May 22, 2008 11:35 am Post Subject:
I think you are incorrect, you might want to discuss it with your legal department in Missouri. The loss of value and the collision claim and the personal injury all occured at the moment of impact and is due to the negligence of one act. How can you sue for personal injury and then sue later for DV or the property damage.
Well I'm not, this isn't double jeopardy Mike...In fact it is against every states fair claims practice to combine the two (injury and physcial damage)....I'm not saying that a person cannot sue for all at the same time, I am saying it is not required....Good grief Lori, you certainly have the mentality that capitalism, sole proprietorship, or collision repar owners only should be compensated for what you feel is merited.
Nope, for what they do and is required to do to repair a vehicle....However, I will never understand how a body shop owner (especially) thinks that they cannot restore a vehicle to pre-loss condition (thus diminished value)...unless...oh yeah there's money in it for them.Posted: Thu May 22, 2008 04:41 pm Post Subject:
Hi,
You have both been very helpful to me! I can appreciate both perspectives. I am waiting to hear back from the insurance co. as I type.
Lori-on diminished value-isn't there now a "tick" mark against the vehicle since it sustained 12k in damage? I think the body shop did the best they could but there are things that are off, for example, the gaps between the panels are larger on one side than the other etc. If the vehicle wasn't 8 months old at the time, I wouldn't even think about it, but since it was custom built and still so new...
Posted: Thu May 22, 2008 07:18 pm Post Subject: You are missing my point
Well I'm not, this isn't double jeopardy Mike...In fact it is against every states fair claims practice to combine the two (injury and physcial damage)....I'm not saying that a person cannot sue for all at the same time, I am saying it is not required....
I am not saying an insurer can not settle on property damage or force the damaged party to settle the personal injury before they will pay for the property damage. I am aware of all the unfair claims practices acts and how often they are abused.
I am saying according to more than one attorney's commentary on the matter, that you can not sue for property damage today to collect the dificiency in what the insurer paid, or for DV, or loss of use, and to expect to be able to sue the negligent party at a later date for the personal injury. In some states you might. Unless Missouri has recently changed that ruling, I believe you are mistaken.
You have attorneys in your company, simply ask them and report the truth. I just did and my local attorney confimed my assertion.
Posted: Fri May 23, 2008 11:52 am Post Subject:
Lori-on diminished value-isn't there now a "tick" mark against the vehicle since it sustained 12k in damage?
Not sure what you mean by that...some states, (not ours) like Iowa (i think) if a vehicle has damage that is 50% or more of the ACV this must be disclosed to prospective buyers....is that what you mean by 'tick'? I've not heard the term.I think the body shop did the best they could but there are things that are off, for example, the gaps between the panels are larger on one side than the other etc.
First, I'd have that car right back to the shop and have anything and everything fixed/adjusted whatever needs to happen to my satisfaction....If the vehicle wasn't 8 months old at the time, I wouldn't even think about it,
I totally understand and were I in your position I would definately proceed with a diminished value claim (the way I told you though, about collecting proof of same, rather than the way your were :wink: )but since it was custom built and still so new...
???? :? ''Custom built''? What do you mean by that?Have you heard anymore out of the adjuster ??
I am saying according to more than one attorney's commentary on the matter, that you can not sue for property damage today to collect the dificiency in what the insurer paid, or for DV, or loss of use, and to expect to be able to sue the negligent party at a later date for the personal injury.
again wrong...You have attorneys in your company, simply ask them and report the truth. I just did and my local attorney confimed my assertion.
Is this the same one that said you can't collect med pay and a bi settlement in MO?Look, what I'm saying is more 'liberal' or claimant bent than what you are saying...can't win with you....Most people would (if they can't reach an agreement) combine both, but it is not REQUIRED....I can sue you for the damage you caused to my vehicle...then a year and a half from now sue you for the injury....
Posted: Fri May 23, 2008 03:08 pm Post Subject: You are incorrect.
You can not sue two different times for the same negligent act in Missouri.
Is this the same one that said you can't collect med pay and a bi settlement in MO?
Never made the above statement, I know in fact that you can double dip and collect med pay and sue for bodily injury, I am in the very process of doing the same. Please quote my post. If I alluded to that , and I don't believe I did, that statement would be wrong.
I think the body shop did the best they could but there are things that are off, for example, the gaps between the panels are larger on one side than the other etc.
good time to find out how well that Insurance guarantee on their shop works if you were referred to them. If not have a post repair inspection by a quality shop to see if all the repairs restored you to pre-loss condion. Those remaing flaws and defects are the very factors that drive the value down of previously wrecked and repaired vehicles. Not a perception, you can acctually see remaing flaws.
I thought Lori, said vehicles can be restored flawlessly.
If the shop did the repairs with flaws and obvious defects remaing to the non repair expert's eyes, imagine how a car dealer will point those out when you attempt to trade it. The shop could be responsible for some diminishment of value as well.
Posted: Sat May 24, 2008 02:12 pm Post Subject:
Please quote my post. If I alluded to that , and I don't believe I did, that statement would be wrong.
Sorry Mike, I didn't remember it correctly...It was the brillant legal mind that told you that you can use medpay to pay your own employees wages... :shock: :roll: here's the post per your request...My attorney has informed me that he carries 200,000 in med pay so that if he can not work, he can pay his staff and cover medical treatments so as to not use his health and accident coverage who might place a lein on a personal injury settlement subrogated against the other insurer.
good time to find out how well that Insurance guarantee on their shop works if you were referred to them.
I absolutely agree! If you were referred to a DRP shop, I think you should START with your adjuster they should know there is a repair satisfaction issue....if it's a DRP then they should have given you a warranty when you picked up your vehicle( or all I know of do)....you have a right to have that vehicle repaired back to prior loss condition...and I'd not settle for less (IMO)Not a perception, you can acctually see remaing flaws.
Of a poor repair!! Which of course diminishes value, duh...a bad paint job on a house does too...but the shop owes this one! NOT the carrier...If the shop did the repairs with flaws and obvious defects remaing to the non repair expert's eyes, imagine how a car dealer will point those out when you attempt to trade it. The shop could be responsible for some diminishment of value as well.
WOW! Everyone back away from your screen...a statement by Mike I actually agree with! :wink:Posted: Sat May 24, 2008 05:18 pm Post Subject:
Plp, I hope you get your vehicle issues taken care of and resolved. I know how frustrating it is for vehicle owners to be in your condition. The insurer may or may not refer you to their preferred vendor in exchange for concessions. This tactic was used by the mafia very successfully and it seems to work well for insurers. Hopefully you were able to pick the shop that repaired your vehicle yourself and they will want to correct those flaws and defects that could put yourself or others in harms way and contribute to lowering the vehices value. Just think though, those are just the flaws that you can see from the outside, who knows what may be covered up by shortcutted repairs that you can not see. I sincerely hope this is not the case and your shop is reputable and was not coerced into taking those shortcuts to help save the insurer money.
If it was the insurer preferred shop or the insurer interfered by writing an estimate of their own requiring the shop to perform repairs they knew may not be factory recommended, you will encounter the shop and insurer placing you in the middle and sending you back and forth to each other rather than resolve your issues. You see when an insurer promises to guarantee your repair, what they mean to say is, we'll lean on that shop to make it right or they will be faced with the possibility of being removed from their programs. Not likely. What happens a lot sadly, is that the adjuster may call the shop and ask what the problem is and the shop will say it's the loose nut behind the wheel and we simply can't please them.
In frustration many people notify the local paper, or the local news affiliate and to save face the shop will blame the insurer, and vice versa. The car will often times be bought back by the shop to remain on the program or bought back by the insurer and sold at auction for some other unsuspecting person to have problems with.
You always have the option and are entitled to be compensated for all your losses including the loss of value your vehicle suffers. How much it suffers a loss will be dependent on the quality of the repair, the willingness of an insurer to repair it with original quality parts when appropriate as in the case of vehicles still under warranty. Were you aware that if the insurer or shop places a part not made by your manufacturer such as a radiator or condenser, the dealer most likely will attribute any failure in the system to the insurer mandated part, thus ruining your warranty.
Let's hope that you may never have issues like this again, but you will have a better knowledge of what to demand and expect if faced again with another accidental loss in the future.
Add your comment