Posted: 27 Mar 2013 06:55 Post Subject:
Using the state guidelines, I am above the loss threshold by $40 of repairsDespite language to the contrary, your policy almost certain includes language that makes it conform to state law.
Since their total loss offer is still too low, I just want to have it repaired and submit the bill to USAA as long as it is below the state thresholdNot your call. You can arrange to purchase the vehicle from the insurance company as a salvage and use the balance of funds any way you choose to effect repairs.
Your only dispute is over the value of the vehicle. If you provide a better set of comps to support your higher valuation, they may be willing to increase the loss valuation.
You can always file a complaint with your state's dept of insurance.
Posted: 27 Mar 2013 08:31 Post Subject:
USAA's actions regarding this claim are not exactly above board. Some of them are downright fraudulent. No matter how much they wish, USAA cannot arbitrarily abrogate the policy language and declare a vehicle a total loss if the cost to repair is less than the ACV minus salvage, so I would say it is "not THEIR call" to declare it a total loss, especially given they inflated the repair estimate and deflated the ACV in an attempt to get it to a total loss. If I remove replacement of one hubcap from the repair estimate that was not damaged or even scratched in the accident that they falsely included, both policy language and state regulation agree that this is not a total loss.
Now how reasonable is USAA being if they insist a hubcap that was not damaged needs to be replaced and refuses to correct this? I have sent them additional LOCAL comps and they refuse to include them. It seems they only follow thier valuation process when THEY control the variables, not the insured. After I caught them in the $1300 condition fraud, they refused to make any other changes to the valuation, including removing vehicles with prioir accidents from 150 miles away that are obviously not comps.
My question is how to proceed with complying with the policy provisions and having the car repaired given USAA has chosen not to and displaying bad faith in delaying payment. I have raised the issues to the state dept of insurance and have submitted a request for hearing based on USAA's violations and the state's failure to enforce their regulations. I await the state's reply, but hey this is Alabama, so I don't hold out much hope for that route.
Posted: 28 Mar 2013 01:34 Post Subject:
No matter how much they wish, USAA cannot arbitrarily abrogate the policy language and declare a vehicle a total loss if the cost to repair is less than the ACV minus salvage, so I would say it is "not THEIR call" to declare it a total loss
Moot point from their view. I have no doubt that the numbers they are coming up with allow them to pay for the vehicle as a total loss. It's just that _you_ are stating that those numbers are incorrect. Two different things there.
I'm not sure I follow your post. You seem to be saying that they are inflating the repair cost in order to consider the vehicle a total loss. But then you also state they are under evaluating the value. These things would go against each other. It would be tough to hit the sweet spot that would over-evaluate the repair amount and under evaluate the value so as to work in USAA's favor both ways.
My question is how to proceed with complying with the policy provisions and having the car repaired given USAA has chosen not to and displaying bad faith in delaying payment
If I recall correctly, your policy spells this out. I'm pretty sure there is an appraisal clause.
Usually when a person complains that the carrier is over-evaluating the repair cost (i.e. it can be repaired for less) I tell them to take the total loss amount and have the vehicle repaired. They can then pocket the difference. But in this case you seem to be saying that they are also paying less then the value... but are they still under their repair cost?
You are not giving enough information (i.e. real numbers).
Appraisal clause would be stymied by lack of agreement on umpire
I've attempted for forsee the future but it never has worked out for me. Why do you think you could not agree to an umpire? You submit a list of parties that would be acceptable. It's then USAA's choice to either agree to one of those or to submit their own list to you. Technically, your appraiser and their appraiser need to agree. You and USAA don't actually agree. If you have an independent party agreeing to be your appraiser then I'd recommend you read the appraisal clause to see if this then means that USAA needs to hire an appraiser. That is, not the USAA employee.
Posted: 28 Mar 2013 11:48 Post Subject:
No matter how much they wish, USAA cannot arbitrarily abrogate the policy language and declare a vehicle a total lossAs tcope has said, from USAA's perspective, they are not violating the language of the contract. You apparently disagree. So you can fight them until you turn blue.
It seems they only follow thier valuation process when THEY control the variables, not the insuredThis is insurance, not Burger King. You don't get it your way.
What exactly do you want? Repairs or money? Do you want to keep the car?
As I surmised in my previous response, if you want to keep the car, the only sticking point is the value of the vehicle. You provide absolutely no information here that could lead to estimating the value of the vehicle (mileage, market, equipment, etc). I'm guessing they are valuing the vehicle around $5000-$6000 and you think it should be valued at $6300-$7300. An independent appraisal would settle that discussion, but you don't seem to want to go down that path.
You don't think USAA is being reasonable, and it appears that you aren't either. But you like to use cute phrases like "fraud" and "abrogate the policy language". That can happen from your side of the contract, too, you know.
My question is how to proceed with complying with the policy provisions and having the car repaired given USAA has chosen not toIt's Scion XB -- an unsightly little box of a vehicle without any damage. Maybe that's the reason they want to declare it a total loss. What more can I say?
Your question has already been answered. Salvage the vehicle, negotiate a salvage amount, which will be deducted from the ACV of the vehicle, and you will get a check for the difference. With that money, you can fix or not fix, replace or not replace, any part of the vehicle you choose -- now it's like Burger King, because insurance is no longer involved.
Your repaired vehicle will have to pass DMV inspection to receive a clear salvage title. Make sure all of the hubcaps are in compliance.
Posted: 28 Mar 2013 03:18 Post Subject:
First total loss valuation $8667 (includes tax & title). Repair estimate $6658 , so the ratio is 76.8% = total loss. Obviously they tried to hit a *very* sweet spot for themselves. Next iteration with the adjustor supervisor after I pointed out errors was Total Loss $8878, repair $7763 = 87% (once they figured out I was scrutinizing the numbers). Third iteration after I pointed out the condition fraud in the total loss vaulation is Total loss $10282, repair $7763 = 75.50%. Now they are back on the margin, and I'm pointing out other problems with comps so they stand firm against any other changes. A repair cost of $7711 (a difference of $52) would result in a repair not total loss. Coincidentially, the hubcap that does not need replacing is $53. The rocker panel moulding that was not even scratched is $393, and there is more. Average market value around here for equal condition (CCC excellent) vehicle is $11000+ with tax and title. I know the book value is lower but apparently they sell for more than book here. USAA does not use book value because they can't manipulate the variables. In 99.99% of the cases, it yields a lower ACV because they under grade the loss vehicle and cherry pick comps. This is the one case where following the process (correctly) is gonna cost them more, and they hate it. I have been somewhat successful in forcing them to use their method fairly, and as a result am close to a fair valuation. If they would remove the $800 baseline adjustement, we would be there. Since my vehicle is superior to the condition of probably all the (uninspected) dealer comps the used, there should be no adjustment for making it "dealer ready". They have to protect the CCC valuation integrity for the industry, so they will never agree to remove this fake adjustment. Even though state requires them to, they will not give me the CCC condition evaluation guidelines and associated values, so I think there is still some fudging there (can anyone provide this?). Don't hate me cuz I was able to use their process against them. BTW, did you know 100% of their employees received an 18% (yes 18%) bonus last year? This is a mutual insurance company, and I'm not feeling the love. I would rather receive the (correct) ACV, but I am not going to let them rip me off after 30 years of paying premiums without a claim. The appraisal clause is a joke and does not call for independent unbiassed appraisers, so their employee would appraise, I would act as my own appraiser, and I would never agree to use one of their umpires as this stacks it 2 against 1, and I am sure they would not agree to use mine, so stymied. In fact they have involked the clause themselves, so I know who it is designed to benefit. Even though they involked the clause, they did not send a check for the undisputed amount, so again, bad faith. Bottom line, I can spend $800+ to get a similar vehicle in lesser condition, or spend nothing *shop will pay deductible* and get it repaired without a salvage title and drive the wheels off it. What I can't understand is why USAA won't beg to have it repaired now that their supposed claim costs (ACV - $1800 salvage) would be $8500 vs $7763 for repair. I think they lowballed the salvage value to make the numbers work in their favor for total loss, before they found out I was gonna make them follow their method properly. Once they gave me the salvage value, they could not change it. Screwing the policyholder is a numbers balancing game (hit that sweet spot), but I also know numbers and the valuation process well. I have managed to screw this up for them, and they don't like it. My way is to follow the policy provisions and state regulations, so yes, I am going to have it my way and USAA is going to have to make a fair payout whether it is for ACV or repair.
Posted: 28 Mar 2013 11:20 Post Subject:
First total loss valuation $8667 (includes tax & title). Repair estimate $6658 , so the ratio is 76.8% = total loss. Obviously they tried to hit a *very* sweet spot for themselves. Next iteration with the adjustor supervisor after I pointed out errors was Total Loss $8878, repair $7763 = 87% (once they figured out I was scrutinizing the numbers).Okay... so you pointed out errors and the value increased by $200 and the repair cost jumped by $1100. So it appears you got them to increase the repair cost by a lot and the value by next to nothing.
Third iteration after I pointed out the condition fraud in the total loss vaulation is Total loss $10282, repair $7763 = 75.50%.
So now the value increased by about $1,800 and the repair cost stayed the same. This is where I'm confused.... first your complaint increased the repair cost then your complaint increased the value (pretty much cancelling themselves out). It seems to me that you have just been shooting yourself in the foot. The ratio started aty 76.8% and ended up at 75.5% (pretty much the same).
At one point you got them to increase the repair cost (appears to be something you did not want) but you are now complaining that they are including repairs that are not needed.
Since my vehicle is superior to the condition of probably all the (uninspected) dealer comps the used, there should be no adjustment for making it "dealer ready". They have to protect the CCC valuation integrity for the industry, so they will never agree to remove this fake adjustment.
Yup. CCC values are _crap_ and USAA's "baseline" adjustment is incorrect. My friend just sued USAA over this "baseline" adjustment and won in small claims court. The attorney USAA hired stated USAA would probably appeal but they did not and USAA paid the judgement.
Even though they involked the clause, they did not send a check for the undisputed amount, so again, bad faith.Yup, they did this to my friend as well. When he pointed this out (and that interest was owed) they paid the undisputed amount plus interest (prior to any judgement).
Posted: 29 Mar 2013 12:12 Post Subject:
My initial intent was to point out errors to reduce the repair and bring it back from total loss, as they weren't offering me anything realistic as ACV. Once they figured this out, they sent in the big gun to up the repair cost by $1100, instead of reducing it as I had intended by pointing out some errors. They took out those errors and inserted even more questionable stuff which they refused to remove. So I gave up on repair and went for getting a realistic ACV. This is where I got them to go up by pointing out the grading fraud. Of course, since I don't have the dollar amounts associated with the grades, I don't know if the $1800 value is correct for the top grade. They might have fudged those numbers to keep the ratio above 75%. Now since they are so close to 75%, and their repair estimate is still wrong, I might as well just get it fixed. Suing over the baseline adjustement sounds like a good idea in my case, since given the condition, it cannot be justified. What rationale did your friend use in his case? Did he sue after or before claim settlement?
Posted: 29 Mar 2013 03:36 Post Subject:
fraudYou keep using this word without any evidence of intent. Without intent, there is no fraud, but there could be a case of bad faith. The two are not the same.
Again, and for the last time, your issue concerns the ACV of the vehicle, not the repairs or the repair cost, since whatever is wrong you believe can be fixed for less money. So if they won't come to terms with you over the ACV, then you simply sue them and hope that your evidence to support your claim is stronger than theirs that supports a lower value.
The bigger issue behind this is that your talking about a value that far exceeds the Small Claims Court's jurisdiction. To take this to the next level can be done in pro persona, but you are going to be completely overwhelmed by the insurance company's attorney, who will be able cite numerous examples of case law that support the company's position, and you will probably be ill-equipped at best to respond appropriately to those citations.
The end result would be that you would win, but you would only win what the insurance company is already prepared to offer, and maybe a smidgeon more if the court takes pity on you. With an attorney, you will come away with even less than could be in your pocket today, because the attorney will get 30%-40% of the judgment/settlement. Pressing a case for bad faith, and your likelihood of prevailing in that is minimal at this point.
Your best bet is to simply hold out for a better ACV, and to do that, you will have to supply valid documentation that more adequately supports your contention as to the value of the vehicle. The longer they take to settle, the stronger your bad faith case might become. But from my point of view, there is no fraud here.
Posted: 29 Mar 2013 02:04 Post Subject:
It would be helpful if you or someone could provide me with the CCC condition guidelines and associated dollar adjustments. Do you have access to these? USAA treats them like they are top secret, even though the CCC valuation report I received has a blank column where they should be. Whether it is fraud or bad faith does not really matter to me. What matters is that this is a strong indication on how USAA's representatives have and most likley will continue to treat this claim. I have requested this info from USAA, and have submitted better comps to support raising the ACV both in writing. That was over two months ago. All I have received is a short letter (as required by state regulations, but late) acknowledging my request and stating that it is "under review". They sent me a letter involking the appraisal clause. I responded acknowledging their request and stating that it is "under review" pending receipt of the information I requested from them first. My mistake was letting them move the vehicle from my repair facility to the copart lot after the accident. I lost a lot of leverage when that happened. At the time I trusted them. Lesson learned.
Posted: 29 Mar 2013 03:52 Post Subject:
Whether it is fraud or bad faith does not really matter to meIt matters to the court.
Posted: 29 Mar 2013 04:20 Post Subject:
What rationale did your friend use in his case? Did he sue after or before claim settlement?
I don't recall the exact details but it was over the baseline adjustment. USAA has CCC take comps but then the apply a "baseline" adjustment. They claim this is done as the insured's vehicle is less then the comp vehicles. His argument was that this is incorrect, that the comps are the market value and there should be no baseline deduction. He submitted comps and asked that the claim be paid. When it was not, he told them that the undisputed amount should have been paid and under state law he was entitled to interest. They paid the undisputed amount and interest. He then filed suit for the difference plus expenses/costs. Suit was filed in small claims court and USAA hired an attorney to attend (costing them way more then the claim). I think he asked for about $4,000 and was awarded that amount.
My mistake was letting them move the vehicle from my repair facility to the copart lot after the accident. I lost a lot of leverage when that happened. At the time I trusted themActually this offers no leverage as USAA would have sent you letter stating that they would not pay any storage fees on the vehicle. If you had left it there, it would not have changed anything other then you'd be stuck with any fees the shop charged.
My recommendation at this point is that you back up your comps with a formal demand for a dollar amount. I'd also point out that they are acting in Bad Faith in not paying the undisputed amount and demand that they pay this plus interest as allowed in your state (look up what the post judgement interest allowed is). Give them 20 days to pay that amount. Basically, you are setting them up for a small claims suit if you wish to file.
Posted: 29 Mar 2013 04:58 Post Subject:
Will I have to go through with the appraisal clause before I file any small claim suit?
Posted: 29 Mar 2013 06:33 Post Subject:
If there are any conditions outlined in the contract that you fail to perform, the case will get tossed for not having exhausted all your "administrative" appeals. Once you've complied with all aspects of the contract, then you are free to sue. However, you may want to read the contract, because some include language that requires you to give them 60 days' advance notice of any legal action. Miss on that one, and the case gets tossed.
If you want someone who knows how to read and understand insurance contracts to find these little "gems" to give it a look, feel free to scan and email a copy of the complete contract, including the DEC page.to me using the link below.
As for my earlier comment about taking the total claim to court, tcope's example is a better route to take, because you get most of your money up front, and the smaller remnant then falls within the limits of the Small Claims Court jurisdiction -- so you avoid becoming entangled with legal fees and get to keep 100% of whatever you are awarded.
The insurance company will still send a "corporate officer" who just happens to be an attorney, as their representative. But the rules of evidence in Small Claims Court are much more relaxed and the judge is not going to let the attorney start spouting case law citations, leaving you on fairly even footing.
Posted: 01 Apr 2013 02:15 Post Subject:
I will try to email the dec. page and policy tonight. Thanks.
Posted: 23 Apr 2013 03:28 Post Subject:
Update: I mailed the demand for undisputed amount payment, and received a call today. This is a total loss settlement. In exchange for the undisputed amount, USAA is requesting the title to the vehicle. I just want to make sure it is ok to give them the title, and then proceed to challenge the valuation (specifically the baseline adjustment deduction) in small claims court as tcope mentioned his friend did. Is it ok to surrender the title, and am I required to surrender the title in exchage for the undisputed amount, or do I have other options? I am in Alabama.
Posted: 26 Apr 2013 01:52 Post Subject:
You can give them the title so they can pay you. If they don't, then they should still pay you the undisputed amount. This then should be the amount owed less the salvage value. But you then should put this in writing. At the end of the day will you be keeping the vehicle? If not, let them take it and move forward with your dispute.
Posted: 21 Apr 2017 07:21 Post Subject: Resolved - Follow Up Info
Just to follow up: It has been four years, and it looks like we will be settling for $1300 - the initial amount I claimed that USAA undervalued the total loss. I spend $166 in small claims filing fees. I learned alot along the way - I filed in small claims court, USAA delayed and delayed, but I did not care because I took your advice and requested the undisputed amount up front. Meanwhile the vehicle sat for 4 years rusting and losing salvage value in a Copart lot until the case is closed. USAA spent $$ on an attorney, first tried to force appraisal - which did not work - and in the end proposed mediation, which they then decided they did not want to pay for - and finally agreed to settle when I pointed out that even if I were to lose in small claims, Alabama allows the appeal to be heard de novo, and how easy it would be to show they breached the contract by declaring a total loss instead of repairing (using their own numbers) , so I would have another opportunity, in front of a more knowledgeable and receptive judge, with the option of a jury. I have some tips on fighting these total loss undervaluations that I would like to share:
Examine the insurance contract (your policy) for breach. If you only disagree with the amount paid you on your claim, expect USAA to invoke the appraisal clause in the policy.
In my case, USAA clearly violated the contract clause that dictates whether to repair or declare as a total loss. The insurance policy states: â€œWe will declare your covered auto to be a total loss if in our judgment the cost to repair it would be greater than its actual cash value minus its salvage value after the lossâ€. Their own calculations showed cost to repair was less than ACV minus Salvage value.
If your only beef is over the valuation of your total loss, and you file in court, expect USAA to request the judge enforce the appraisal clause in the contract first. This will delay and may eventually derail your small claims case, but read on for tips on how to resolve this.
The Appraisal clause is USAAâ€™s home turf. USAA has carefully constructed the appraisal clause language and procedures to their advantage. For more information, google and read â€œSalvaging the Total Loss Claimâ€ by Stephen Ryan. Knowing this information is key: This is USAAâ€™s playbook, and you can use it to your advantage.
If you are forced into appraisal by the court (or the insurance contract) your best strategy is not to play to win, (because the â€œgameâ€ is fixed) but to play to tie or delay. USAA will NOT let you win an appraisal, but if you understand their strategies, you can successfully delay appraisal for many months and/or derail it through a stalemate (tie) and proceed in court. You can force them to pay legal fees to their local lawyer while you proceed per se in small claims court at minimal cost. Why delay? If you have requested USAA pay the â€œundisputedâ€ amount, then you can reasonably expect there is only a very small chance you will recover more. The real reason to delay is to make USAAâ€™s financial strategy (the whole reason they undervalued your loss) unworkable. By now your â€œtotal lossâ€ vehicle is sitting in some salvage yard (probably COPART) awaiting auction. USAA wants to sell it fast, to get the salvage value and minimize storage expenses. The vehicle canâ€™t be auctioned for salvage until the claim, appraisal or lawsuit is finished. The salvage value of that vehicle (and demand for it) goes down every month while the age goes up. I was able to delay USAAâ€™s sale of my total loss vehicle more than four years costing them hundreds of dollars. I also caused them hundreds of dollars in lawyer fees. I also recovered an additional $1300 in the settlement. I have succeeded in foiling their scheme to profit by undervaluing my total loss.
USAAâ€™s Auto insurance appraisal clause is unfair to the policyholder. Do your own research, but my experience validates what others have written. NOTE: the appraisal clause DOES NOT require either party to use an unbiased appraiser OR umpire. This is key to USAAâ€™s strategy. Expect USAA to attempt to force you to name your appraiser FIRST. There is no requirement you name your appraiser first. By forcing you to name your appraiser first, you are financially committed IF you hire an appraiser. Also, you will be outraged when you find out that USAA will be naming one of their own employeeâ€™s as their appraiser, so better to have you name your (paid appraiser) first. Appraisal strategy part A: delay, delay, delay. Force USAA to name their appraiser first. This can take months, because USAA really, really does not want to go first. Always deal in writing using snail mail. USAA must have a policy of waiting about 20 days to respond to any letter you send them. This is why you make them pay the undisputed amount of the loss up front. Use the same 20 day delay in responding to USAA and work USAAâ€™s delay policy to your advantage to burn as much time as possible. Appraisal strategy part B: Once USAA finally names their own employee as their appraiser, challenge them. Tell them flat out that they cannot name their own employee as their appraiser (they tried this tactic when I named myself as my appraiser). 1. Ask them to name an independent appraiser. 2. Ask for the qualifications (competence) of their nominated appraiser (even their own employee). 3. Ask for a copy of their state adjuster license, 4. appraiser certifications, etc. etc. Ask each question one at a time in separate letters each requiring a response thereby dragging it out over several more months.
Once you hit a dead end on USAA naming their own employee as their appraiser (they wonâ€™t back down), name yourself or a confidant as YOUR appraiser. Expect USAA to claim that â€œyou cannot act as your own appraiserâ€, or you are not qualified. This is a lie. If USAA can act as their own appraiser, using an unlicensed employee, so can you. Even lawyers routinely act as appraisers. As you will see later, you wonâ€™t really have to appraise anything. Expect several more rounds of letters while USAA and their attorney try to browbeat or otherwise convince you (or the court) that you cannot act as your own appraiser. There is a copy of USAA letter posted on a diminished value website where USAA specifically acknowledges policyholders can be their own appraiser. Find it and use it in court if necessary.
Got your free appraiser just like USAA? Ok, then on to the next step, agreeing (or more likely stalemating) on an Umpire. The contract requires that this happen BEFORE any appraising begins. USAAâ€™s strategy is to convince you to use one of their â€œapprovedâ€ umpires, usually some local lawyer whose firm they have financially supported. Note that USAAâ€™s appraisal clause does not require a disinterested or competent umpire, so expect USAA to name lawyers and retired judges and others that have worked well for them in the past. You may use an umpire once in your lifetime, while USAA uses many over the course of a year. If you earn your living as a â€œdisinterestedâ€ umpire, are you more likely to rule in USAAâ€™s favor or in the policyholderâ€™s favor, knowing that USAA will never use you again? I canâ€™t make this any clearer: DO NOT agree to use any umpire USAA proposes. Instead do this: go online and find/propose an insurance consumer advocate or appraiser/public adjuster who specializes in working only with policyholders and not for the insurance industry. Many of these types know how USAA and other insurance companies operate and have even written about their tactics to educate the public. If you know an auto dealer, auto buyer or auto body repair shop expert, and they agree, put their name forth. It really doesnâ€™t matter who you nominate because USAA will not agree to them, not ever. USAA wants to guarantee they will win by stacking the appraisal in their favor. Their employee appraiser will not agree with your appraiser on the value of the loss, thereby forcing it to the their favored umpire for a decision. USAA wants to assure themselves of a favorable outcome. USAA wonâ€™t agree to use one of the umpires you propose (propose one at a time using snail mail), and you wonâ€™t agree to use any they propose, then you have a stalemated appraisal process. IMPORTANT: the policy does not have a remedy for a stalemated appraisal process, so it becomes appraisal becomes null. Head back to court and lay out everything you have done to make the process work (very important), and how USAA has been unwilling to cooperate, and how the process does not have a contractual remedy for stalemate. You have now complied with the contract and are free to sue. USAA may ask the judge to â€œappointâ€ one of their favored umpires, usually a person well known to the judge. The appraisal clause (by USAAâ€™s design) DOES NOT have any provision for a judge to name an umpire, so donâ€™t let USAAâ€™s lawyer try to convince the judge to name one of â€œtheirâ€ umpires. If you feel bold, beat them to the punch and ask the judge to name one of YOUR umpires. The judge does not have the power to name an umpire and cannot overrule or rewrite the insurance contract. If USAA had wanted the judge to be able to name the umpire, they would have written it into the contract, just like they do in the appraisal clause in theirr homeownerâ€™s policies. The insurance policy is a â€œcontract of adhesionâ€, so any ambiguities are interpreted in your favor.
By now, if you have done everything above, you may have burned many months and several billable hours of USAAâ€™s lawyerâ€™s time. Meanwhile, your total loss vehicle will have been rusting away in some corner of COPARTâ€™s lot waiting. You may still win the lawsuit, or settle. Even if you donâ€™t, you have succeeded in using USAAâ€™s unfair tactics against them. It might cost you a couple hundred in court fees and postage to do so, but it will cost them a couple thousand, and if it happens often enough, perhaps things will change. A variation on this strategy would be to invoke the appraisal clause without the lawsuit, and delay, delay, stalemate, and then (optional) head to court, but watch the statute of limitations for filing does not pass.
If more people did this with USAA/CCC and others who undervalue total losses, then they would abandon this strategy.