Questions About Auto Insurance and Accidents

the_big_al

I think you are in the wrong forum... might want to head to the ford focus forum, but here's a quick answer... Most likely if you have a good alternator and good battery, something is draining the battery while the car is off. A shorted radio circuit, lights left on, dome light etc. Not sure about the focus, but I know that some Ford's had issues with a door sensor not registering the door closed, thus the dome light and on trucks, the lights by the 3rd brake light would stay on...

marsha7

Another possibility is that you might have a bad cell in the battery that does not yet show up on any meter because there is just enough "surface charge" to read OK on a meter...my mother's Lexus ES330 had just such a problem...she'd go out to the car and batt would not crank the starter...jump battery, drive to lexus, they check battery, "within normal limits"...2 days later, batt is dead and will not crank...jump start, drive to lexus, same thing...FINALLY, we pleaded with lexus that a car this nice should not be going dead so often...they agreed...whatever they did, they finally diagnosed a marginally bad cell that could hold a surface charge but would go dead...new battery, problem fixed...just something you might consider, even if this is the wrong forum...

random987

I was recently involved in a accident where the other driver ran a red light and T-boned by newly purchased CPO BMW X5. Although the other driver did have insurance, he carried the minimum coverage for my State. The damage on the X5 is significant and may be totaled. The tortfeasor's insurer is taking the position that the property damage claim will certainly exceed their limits, so I need to look to my policy. As it turns out, I only have undersinsured coverage for personal injury claims, not property damage. So, I guess I have to go through my collision coverage for this claim.

As you can imagine, at this point I hope the car is "totaled", but if it isn't, I was wondering if I can do this (assuming the repairs are $20k+):

Seek diminished value from the tort feasor's policy knowing that there is coverage for it as a third party claim.

Seek the repair costs from my insurance company.

My concern is particularly important as I had a pristine X5 that was still under factory warranty and will have a extended warranty as part of the CPO program. Now, I will have an X5 that has an ugly repair history. This is a significant difference in terms of the resale value.

Any thoughts? Can I make such an election?

imidazol97

The person driving is responsible for damage. It is not just whatever they chose to insure for. If your collision pays, they will go after the other person. You may have that choice yourself, if not restricted by your having used your collision coverage.

euphonium

If the PD exceeds the TF's limits of Liability, how will the TF carrier have any funds to pay Diminished Value after your company subrogates the maximum from the TF's carrrier. DV is not paid under Bodily Injury Liability.

When your carrier issues a draft to cover the repair or replacement of your vehicle, there will be up to three names on the draft. Yours, the repair shop, & the lien holder. Your loan agreement may require you to have the car repaired.

You do have an option of applying the cost of repair insurance draft towards a replacement coupling with the damaged X5 as payment towards a replacement. Sometimes a dealer will take in a damaged car & its insurance check in trade because it will keep their body shop busy.

DV is subjective to say the least and there can be a lot of wiggle room in that.

Good Luck.

random987

Thanks for the quick responses. Here is what I am hoping for in a "settlement" of my claim.

The TF needs to make me "whole". Unfortunately, he doesn't have insurance coverage to cover this loss (he also doesn't have any assets to pursue). His insurance companies duty is to take him out of harms way. Let's say the cost to repair the X5 is $30,000 (so, significant, but not a total loss). If it is repaired, I will have a difficult time in selling the car with the accident, as opposed to a very clean CPO car. So, let's assume that there is $7,000 in diminished value.

Of course I will push my carrier for a total loss. So, I am wondering if there would be some flexibility to negotiate a deal with both carriers. I am willing to take $7,000 from the TF's carrier to "allow" (or not fight) my carrier to repair the car for $30,000 (as opposed to totaling it for $48K).

Mr_Shiftright

Insurance companies are all about "bottom line". You are really pretty powerless against them *as an individual*. You need powerful allies. If they "do the right thing" by you, it's because it's also best for them; if they don't offer you a good deal, they aren't being mean or spiteful. Emotion, fairness, none of that matters in these cases---it's all about "bottom line"---black ink at the end of the year.

I'm bringing this up so that when you negotiate, or "fight", you do so from this prospective---an economic argument, not a moral one, not a "fairness" one. This is the type of argument, IMO, they understand and will respond to.

If it is in their interests to total the car, they will (and if the damage is severe, they might just write it off). Why wouldn't they fix a newly new car? Because their bottom line tells them that they could be liable for all kinds of additional, follow-up issues after trauma to a very complex machine.

You will face DV---as others have said, DV sounds scientific, but it isn't at all--it's completely wide open to interpretation. There are no Federal or state standards for it, only some vague guidelines and one old formula that hardly works at all. Also, insurance companies hate DV and generally dig their claws in against such claims. Your DV must be against third party. Your state insurance regulations (written, oddly enough, by insurance companies), generally prohibit you suing your own company for DV.

I don't wish to appear cynical, just realistic. Prepare your arguments in terms of numbers and I think you'll be on much firmer ground. Of course, if you have access to sound legal advice, then legal arguments are also part of the insurance companies' language. They perk up when they hear this as well, because legal challenges also threaten bottom line.

houdini1

One more thing to keep in mind that might be helpful. If they do total the vehicle and you have only had it for a very short while, you might be able to recover the sales tax and registration fees that you paid. Just something to keep in mind that most people never think of. Also that is very good advice from Shifty. Good luck

Mr_Shiftright

Yes, all settlements on total loss include taxes and license fees, so that's good for another 10% over settlement price.

Now if you financed the vehicle, it's possible you are "under water" on the loan and the settlement might not equal your loan payoff.

marsha7

And THAT is when you'll wish you had GAP insurance, which I hope you purchased when you financed the vehicle...

Mr_Shiftright

"making you whole" does not include your finance charges. That's also in the insurance laws, which were written by you know who.

If you don't have GAP insurance, you might have to prepare yourself to come up a little short in this deal.

stever

Confessions of an Auto Claims Adjuster

"How To Negotiate for the Full Value of Your Car"

Mr_Shiftright

Well, it's not a terribly optimistic article, but it does emphasize, and rightly, that you "attack" the insurance company with facts and numbers.

random987

Thanks for the quick responses. I appreciate the help. My general theory of attack is that DV should be recoverable under the TF's policy (with low limits). My right to be "made whole" should trump the subrogation rights of my carrier. So if my damages are 7K in diminished value and it costs 30K to repair, my total damages are 37K ish. My carrier would be committing bad faith if they structure the deal to exclude recovery of DV, i.e. pay repair costs (says DV is excluded by my policy) and then seek subrogation up to the TF's policy limits.

(this is just hypothetical, of course, I am not alleging bad faith at this early stage of the case)

robr2

But is DV even available in your state?

Here in MA, it is not.

Mr_Shiftright

If you're going to seek DV from the other side, be prepared for a lengthy battle and, I trust, a successful one. You may require the resources of an attorney.

random987

DV is available against the tortfeasor in order for me to be "made whole". Especially when I had a pristine CPO under factory warranty and now I have a severely damaged, potentially compromised vehicle. Whether or not it is available through my collision coverage is another story. It probably is not.

From the TF's insurer's viewpoint, they are going to be out their $10K regardless, whether through payment to my insurer by way of subrogation or through payment of a diminished value claim. I doubt they would fight too hard. It is my insurer that I worry about.

euphonium

Does your policy include Underinsured Motorist Property Damage Liability?

random987

No, only for bodily injury. Not even sure that Geico offers property coverage, it is not one of the available options when formulating your policy.

marsha7

Here in Ga, when you buy U/M coverage, it is sold exactly like liability insurance, say 50/100/50, because if the other driver is uninsured/underinsured, then the UM insurance will cover liability and PD, just as tho the other driver's ins would if he had it...

random987

Yep, I double checked the policy and it is a bodily injury underinsured provision. We also have an umbrella policy, but that appears the "follow form" of the underlying insurance.

lilyowen

I know this sounds counterproductive, but it's unlikely that the TF's insurance carrier will pay anyone without a release from your carrier AND you.

I don't really see an easy way out of this for you but to litigate (did I say easy?) ... and then the TF needs to have assets for it to be worth your while. And then you'll likely end up spending 1/2 of your recovery on attorney's fees.

See, if you don't make your DV claim in a timely manner, or advise the other carrier up front that you intend to make a DV claim, they will attempt to resolve your carrier's subrogation claim for a full and final release ... your carrier may bite, they may not ... it depends on the TF's bank account mostly. But if they do settle for limits then you will have to go directly to the TF to secure your DV (if TF carrier did not require YOU to sign a release as well) ... that will almost 100% require litigation, and good evidence on your part to illustrate the DV (trust me when I tell you an online service will be insufficient).

If you do make the DV claim in a timely manner, the other carrier will try to secure releases from both of you ... which, from what I'm reading here, will not happen ... you will again end up in litigation.

I would put my money on you not making any DV claim and/or making a claim and then dropping it after six to eight months of frustration. I'm sorry to say this, you have a legit claim, but the TF doesn't appear to have money, and you will be left holding the bag for that unfortunately.

euphonium

I agree with your post that the TF nor his company appear to have money for DV for

"If the PD exceeds the TF's limits of Liability, how will the TF carrier have any funds to pay Diminished Value after your company subrogates the maximum from the TF's carrrier."

random987

I would argue that my carrier doesn't have a right of subrogation until I am "made whole" or my right to be made whole has priority over their right of subrogation. If they want subrogation, then pay me DV. If they take a coverage position that DV is not recoverable under my collision coverage, then they shouldn't get the benefit of subgrogation prior to me getting my DV from the TF's carrier. (at least that may be my argument).

Hopefully I will find out tomorrow that the car is totaled, so I don't have to worry about it.

mikefm58

Same here in Florida, and I believe there is a cap of something like 5 or 10 grand. And with Florida being a no fault state where I have to buy PIP, this is why I never buy the U/M coverage. It's not cheap either. I also have medical ins. through work. How many freaking ins. policies do I need to cover my medical costs?

marsha7

Certainly FL is different from GA, but if I posted my "escape clauses" every post I would go nuts...

In a no-fault state like FL, I believe you are required to buy PIP, so you have injury protection by law...in a fault state like GA, coverage for injuries is optional, not mandatory, so I ALWAYS recommend that folks buy a minimum of $25K medpay, try and go for $50K, which costs about $5-7 per month, under $100 yearly (except Progressive which charges about $400 yearly and no one knows why)

We were no-fault until 1991...

euphonium

Your opinion is admired, but please read the Subrogation Agreement in your policy. It would apprear that your carrier's rights trump your attempts of collecting DV. If the adverse carrier only had 10,000 PD and your collision carrier takes all of that, where is the source of a DV payment? Also, how can DV be considered under your Collision coverage?

Mr_Shiftright

I wonder if he can sue the party at fault directly for DV? That would be quite tricky but one could argue that an actual loss has occurred to the aggrieved party.

marsha7

You have a point...there is an actual loss, but proving the amount of damages may be tricky...then again, if the loss was substantial, it might pay to hire an expert to testify the amount of the loss...then there might be an opposing expert, but it would be hard to say there was NO loss, so they would be arguing numbers...

So, one expert says $4,000, another one says $8,000, a jury or judge just might split the difference...then you have to collect from the Defendant...then, before you can blink your eyes, the guy goes to some crummy bankruptcy lawyer (like me), files Chapter 7, and discharges the debt, and you are right back where you started...

Did someone say that the vehicle might be totalled???...if so, that would make all this a moot point...

lilyowen

A. Did Marsha7 just let that no UM comment fly without a 10 page diatribe? Weird.

B. You can always make a claim for DV, you can always sue the TF directly ... for damages that you have not been able to recover. The thing is, suing is not likely to be financially worth it to you, or any attorney ... and the TF carrier WILL NOT pay you before your carrier as they have just as much right to sue the TF as you do (unless they can get their insured on board with this somehow). Additionally, I would STRONGLY advise you to follow up on your policy before filing suit that may in some manner compromise your carriers ability to recover. Good luck.

houdini1

My son was recently on a business trip to Dallas. His rental van was broken into and his golf clubs were stolen.

My question is would his personal auto insurance company be liable for his personal effects stolen from a rental vehicle while on a business trip?

random987

Well, I just received word that my carrier is going to consider my vehicle to be a total loss. Happy and sad at the same time. Now, we need to negotiate ACV. This should be fun. I spent a few months finding the right car with the right options, so it will be interesting to see what type of Comps they come up with.

With respect to the other carrier, what are the odds that I get my deductible from them?

Mr_Shiftright

Oh I think you should be very happy indeed. You dodged a very nasty bullet there. Of course, I understand you ARE the victim here, but sometimes in the wild wonderful wacky world of insurance, the victim gets punished twice, just to make sure he's suffered enough. :P

If you don't like the ACV you can invoke your arbitration clause, which allows you to hire your own appraiser and take your case to a referee (whom you also have a hand in approving---both sides must agree to the referee, and BE CAREFUL who "they" pick. Corruption in the insurance industry is not unheard of). You can bounce as many referees as you wish, but if you bounce too many, the insurance company may ask that the courts appoint one. This is not necessarily good for you either. Often a good appraiser will know a "fair" referee acceptable to both sides.

Going to arbitration will cost you a) cost of your appraisal b) cost to have the appraiser deliver your case to the referee, either in person with you or by phone conference, so you'll get to have your say, and c) 1/2 the cost for the referee

So figure maybe $600 out of pocket to challenge the ACV in an arbitration hearing. At worst you'll come out even. If the ref doesn't like your argument, he will usually (but not always) assign you at least enough of a settlement to cover your costs to get there.

Your settlement MUST include sales tax and license, so make sure when they shoot you a number that they specify whether this number is with or without tax and license. If they lump it all together it might look like they are being generous, when in fact 10% of that sum is what you had coming anyway.

mikefm58

My experience has been that negotiating ACV isn't that difficult. They'll obviously lowball you first, but if you do your research, and present your evidence of other comparable vehicles and their asking price, you shouldn't have any problems.

And you shouldn't have any problems getting your deductible from them, as that's pretty standard. They might "forget", but just mentioned it to them.

marsha7

"A. Did Marsha7 just let that no UM comment fly without a 10 page diatribe? Weird"

And you thought miracles never happen in this day and era...

Mr_Shiftright

I am bringing sick people to the site for healing :P

dumont

Hi all, considering that I was in a bad accident (luckily nobody injured) and my car was deemed totalled I think I have a "good" problem and would like to know if anyone knows what the outcome should be. Even my experienced insurance guy was surprised and felt I should leave this alone until the ins pays the leasing company...

My car was totalled and the adjuster calulated the value at (approx) $18000, net after my deductable, which they will pay my leasing company. My leasing company says the current payoff of the car (ie the balance today to be satisfied in case I opted to buy the car before the end of the lease) is (approx) $17000.

So my question is, I think the leasing company has to refund me the difference, don't they? It should be considered an overpayment of the lease as in my mind it basically means that I overpaid for the (use of?) car.

Frankly if I just end up not having to pay for my deductible it's already a good thing and getting a refund would be the icing on the cake.

Anybody know how the insurance and leasing companies deal with the above situations?

Thanks
Dumont

mikefm58

I'm not 100% positive but i think you're out of the picture. Any overage will go to the leasing company. Legally it's their car and you're just renting it.

If the payment was the other way, do you think you should have to pay up? No, but that's why they usually require gap ins.

dumont

Thanks for your input Mike. So basically you are saying I should send a check to Honda and payoff the vehicle and then collect from the insurance? Probably too late to do that... But it seems I will still get out of paying my deductible, right?

I'd still like to hear from someone who's been in this situation.

Thanks again.

Diumont

baseballmom97

My 2008 GMC Acadia was in a serious accident. I was rear-ended by a van going 60 - 70 miles an hour. The at-fault-party's insurance company most likely will want to fix the vehicle. The back frame is bent and I feel the safety of the car will be compromised even after repair. I think the car should be totalled.

The Acadia is leased through GMAC Financing. My insurance agent thinks I should notify GMAC and have them go after the other insurance company to make sure the vehicle is repaired properly. He advised me of this, however, it sounded like this was his personal opinion rather than professional advice. Is this what I should do? Will the leasing company be able to have more of an impact on the other insurance company than I will?

houdini1

I am not positive, but if there was a shortage they would definitely come after you, so imo, it should work the same way if there is a overage it should go to you.

euphonium

If the leasing company owns the car, how would you describe your insurable interest?

houdini1

She probably made a down payment on the car and I am sure she is at least one of the named insureds. Also, she is paying the insurance premiums, and the leasing company is not.

To me, it is little different from buying a car and having it financed. In that case the bank would technically own the car, but she has an interest. I would think the check would have both their names on it.

mikefm58

The one time I leased a vehicle, I remember being told gap insurance is required on all leased vehicles. So if there was a shortage, then the gap policy would cover it. I'll be interested to see what a leasing expert would say here, but I "think" (IMHO) that an overage would go to the legal owner of the car, the leasing company.

houdini1

Yes, that is a darn good question. What do the experts say?

Mr_Shiftright

Well I don't claim to be an expert, but I'm seeing this issue as a fairly clear one myself. The leasee doesn't own the car, end of story.

Unless the leasee purchased the car from the leasing company at the residual price, I don't see why they are entitled to the overage. The car isn't theirs.

In my mind, the name on the title "rules".

dumont

Well I am happy to report (although I won't celebrate until I actually get a check) that the insurance adjuster confirmed to me that, if the payoff amount from the leasing company is less than the the value estimated by them, they will cut 2 checks, one to the leasing company and the other with the difference to me In my mind it makes sense, it's the same as if I bought out the car from the leasing company for $17000 and turned around and sold it for $18000. And as others mentioned I am paying the premiums thus the car is "mine" with the leasing company being the lead (?) benificiary. Anyway if the logic is flawed it doesn't matter as long as the check comes :P I'll report back when the matter is settled hopefully before the next lease payment is due (early July).

Dumont

houdini1

Congratulations, since you are the named insured I thought it would work that way.

Mr_Shiftright

Hey good for you!

Okay, I'll eat my hat (munch, munch) :P

Gotta say, though, I am surprised.

ponderpoint

Last Sunday an insurance agent got into his Toyota SUV and slammed into a Toyota Camry parked in the street in a subdivision in York, PA. The Camry then started rolling down the hill (a pretty steep grade) and slammed into a parked Toyota Pick-up (Tacoma)

Both vehicles were damaged significantly (Camry maybe a total write-off) and the insurance agents' vehicle? - a scoff on the bumper.

The insurance agent was the first to leave the scene after begrudgingly leaving information with the local police and left the other owners of the vehicles in the chain reaction waiting for the tow truck.... Even the cop waited around.

I don't know if you can post brand names or local insurance agencies (moderator?) but in my book - this is pretty poor form.

One vehicle is having significant problems getting fixed (the insurance agents company is saying "cosmetic" damage) because all body shops visited are saying "frame damage" when they first see the vehicle and won't repair it without more money.

The insurance agents company representatives have now scattered like rats on the claims and are non-communicative. One of the adjusters was particularly abusive.

Wow!