I don't want to say too much, but I do this for a living. I'm the bad guy. I defend a major insurance company from Bodily Injury claims. Part of any of these claims are the vehicle damages.

I can tell you that depending on which company you're dealing with, a DV claim can be quite a difficult process. We make it as difficult as we can for a person to bring a DV claim for the vehicle. In my entire time doing this, I've really only seen a few serious payouts over thousands of claims.

The ones that I've seen were mostly on old classic collector cars, or super high-end exotics. You might be able to get some for your Porsche as it's a higher end vehicle, but I wouldn't expect a ton, and it definitely won't be easy.

Your best bet is to go to several dealers and get in writing what they would give you for the car in trade in for the pre-crash condition. Then ask what they will give you for it knowing about the damages. This will be your best proof of the offset amount caused by the accident. This would be your starting off point and the Insurance compant will bargain it down from there.

You could get a laywer to help you recover as much as possible, but you had better be sure that it will be mathmatically logical to do so as you'll be paying 30% in legal fees, which may offset or override any additional money the laywer gets you.

Remember that the Insurance company has better resources and more money than you. The advantage will always be with them. However, if you're really willing to put in the time and jump through all of the hoops, you may collect something for the DV claim, I wouldn't expect the Ins Co to conceed to much though.

Let me know if you have any specific questions I can help with.

 

I had to fight this same deal for awhile. And, I think the answer will depend heavily on which state you are in.

Mine was hit by a guy with Progressive (F%^K Progressive btw). He ran a red light and hit my passenger rear quarter panel. Ended up causing about 30 k in damages.

I fought for diminished value. At first they said they don't pay that on third party claims (when someone else's insurance is paying for you). I referred them the department of insurance ruling where it said they had to pay diminshed value on third party claims. They then said that the most they ever pay on them is 10% of the damage value. So, I went and got three dealers to submit a quote on what they would pay me for the car if it wasn't wrecked and what they would pay me with a wreck. The three averaged out to 12k difference. I showed them that info and they budged to about 5k in diminshed value. Then I hired a third party company that specializes in diminshed value. Paid them a couple hundred dollars and then the company offered about 6k.

I finally sued them for about 30k including deceptive trade practices and my damages. Evidentally you can't do DTPA for third party claims. So, had to drop that cause. Anyway, we eventually settled for 10k.

In other words, it is a lot of work. But, keep after them and check with your department of insurance on their regulations.

Insurance companies do have more money than you. But, sometimes it is cheaper for them to write the check instead of continuing the fight. And, they don't want to take it to trial because if you do happen to win, there will be a good case on the books to help other people win against them.

Good luck. I feel your pain.

 

Colorado Silver you are a good man.

 

I appreciate that. Sometimes I try to explain that what I do isn't personal, even though it does effect people in a personal way. It's all business for me. Depending on the "totality of the circumstances", some claims are emotionally tougher than others.

That being said, I'm sure I'm on a few hit lists out there.

Outside of my job, I like to help people as much as I can when they have insurance claims. In the legal and insurance world, knowledge is power.

 

ColardoSilver. thank you very much for the info. I would like to solicit your help where I can hopefully not being too much of a pest.

Here is some information that may help:

I live in New Hampshire. My insurance company is Amica. I have filed claim via them for the damage to the car.

The car was hit in Mass. The driver of the car is covered by Commerce Insurance.

Car is being repaired by Hollis Autobody Hollis is very detail oriented and is expecting that they will have the car for 8 weeks plus

I contacted an internet diminished value Company. I have attached a PDF describing the service. They have advised me that I:

1. Should not bring the DV claim until the car has been repaired. At that time it will have to be appraised to determine the neg value impact.

2. Not to sell the car until I have the DV claim resolved and the check in the bank.

3. I should bring the DV claim directly against commerce insurance. Once the car has been repaired. It should not involve Amica.

 

I can testify to that....very safe cars......

 

Ok, lets start with Venue:
Even though your policy is written for you in NH (as that is where you live), the jurisdiction for this accident will be through Mass as that’s where the accident happened. So Mass law would apply to the accident. However, since it sounds like Commerce Ins has already accepted liability and the other driver was at fault, it doesn’t seem like there will be any legal issues here.
-----------------------------------------
Next, Repair Facility:
Most states have consumer rights laws that allow the owner of a vehicle to have their vehicle repaired wherever they want. An Insurance company cannot force you to take your car to one of their own contracted repair facilities for repair.
It was good that you have chosen to allow your own insurance company to pay for the repairs for your vehicle. This way, you won’t have to deal with it when Commerce Ins comes back later and says that the repair amount was too high and they dispute the amount. The only thing you’ll be out is your Collision Deductible and, in most cases, you should be able to get Commerce Ins to forward that amount back to you before your car is done with repairs as this will not be a disputed amount that is owed back to you.
______________________________________________
Info Provided by your DV Company:

1) They’re right. Wait for your car to be repaired to your satisfaction before bringing the DV claim. It should be appraised in the condition that it would be when you would sell it after all repairs are made so the quality and condition of the car are as good as they’re going to get.
2) They’re right. If you sell the car before your DV claim is completed, it could hinder the Ins company’s chances to do all of their due diligence on your car and use this as a way to further bargain down the price of the claim. You want that DV check in the bank and the claim closed before you sell the car.
3) They’re right. This one is a little more tricky. While your company will pay for your car repairs. They will then “subrogate” Commerce Ins. to get their money back in full for those repairs. As they will have a repair bill in hand for the total amount of the repairs (minus your deductible) they should have no problem recovering this amount. The DV claim, however, can be a highly disputed amount and there is far less of a chance to recover anything paid out for this. The claim for damages and the DV claim will be two separate claims at Commerce Ins. They will be all in the same file. But they are two different claims.


Were you hurt at all in this accident? That’s also going to be another issue. It won’t change anything having to do with your car repairs or DV claim, but just more issues to address for your bodily injury claim.

 

Does the OP need to be careful to preserve his right to press the DV claim and ensure that his insurance company doesn't 'settle' in his name?

Is it a "law" that determines "like kind and quality" is the standard for a rental car ..... or is this a policy restriction? if the latter, I never understood why the insurance policy can control the rental car liability. Or is this one of those things that everyone just goes along with it?

Thanks for posting...

A

 

His Insurance company will not settle the DV claim unless he brings it against his own insurance company and files a separate claim for that. They would never willingly open a DV claim on an insured vehicle that was damaged by another drivers negligence. So thats nothing he would have to worry about.

The rental "like kind and quality" is a state to state thing that would be dictated by the state Departmen of Insurance. Some states require this to be in the insured's policy. Other states leave it totally open to the insurance company as to what kind of rental they will provide. In UT, you could be driving a $150k Mercedes AWD AMG G Wagon that gets damaged, but your policy could very well put you into a Kia Rio for the time it's being repaired.

It all has to do with how consumer friendly your state is and how the Dept Of Ins in your state feels.

 

^ Great information...

We were offered a rental for my wife's minivan (by the other insurance company), which turned out to be a mid-size sedan. We said 'screw it' and turned the GT-R into the family car for TWO months (started to wear on us). We opted for the reimbursement fee (which is slightly below what it would've cost them to give us a rental for that period). We ended up with about $2500 or so (I can't remember how much per day).

(Again, used a lawyer to do my legwork)

Oh, and my lawyer fees were 30% of personal injury, and $250 for property loss (including diminished value claims). So I was pretty happy with the outcome.

 

ColoradoSilver rocks! Really nice of you to do what you have done with this thread. A class act!

 

No problem. I like to help out when I can.

 

I think you are missing the point of my question, or I am missing something....


I fail to see how the POLICY of either insurer will define my rights to transportation- or more accurately what the other party's laibility is to provide me with replacement transport.


Here is the scenario:


Say you wreck my MB AMG G Wagon- it is not drivable. I go out the next day and rent a G wagon and pay $200 a day. It takes you 3 weeks to decide to offer me $120k for my wrecked G wagon. I say "OK, I'll take $120K plus the 21 days I had to rent a replacement at $200 a day". You say "My insurance won't cover it" I say "so sorry, but that isn't my problem- YOUR contract with YOUR insurer is not binding on ME..... If your insurer wants they can pay $50 a day and YOU can pay the other $150 out of your pocket." "Whoa" you say. I reply, "If you'd like I can sue you for the $200, get a judgment (if the court agrees), and you can turn back to your insurance company and say 'I lost the lawsuit, the court said I was liable for $200 a day, and since you said you would cover my liability, please pay the man'.... and I can assure you that $200 for a AMG G wagon is a very good daily rate".
When YOU wreck MY car, YOU are liable- Insurance is involved only to make life easier- and to pay what YOU owe. Again, I do not have to abide by the policies of your insurance company. YOU may have to, I don't. Of course, my remedy is to sue, and many won't go that far-

My point being that people- seem to think the insurance policy somehow defines loss and liability. I can see how there may be state laws on what an insurer must cover in a policy, but again that policy does not apply to me in a 3rd party claim. My question to you are their state laws that limit 'replacement car liability' and not just regulations that define what policy language must include.


I just think people get way to tangled up in following insurance company's procedures and policies- F-em. Most of the sheep just go "Oh, OK- give me the Ford Taurus".

Have I got this wrong? Or is it a distinction in principle, but practically speaking not worth the effort?




Thanks!

A

 

CS thanks again for all the help.

I have received the AMICA estimate for repairs at about 20K. Hollis Auto has been a bit more exacting and the bill is about 30k It is not uncommon for Amica to be low. they have this as a history. Experience has shown me the body shop wins in the end.

I hate to admit it, but I have had 3 accidents in the last 2 years. None were mine.

1. Hit in my f150 front. Other driver had no insurance, affixed plates, unregistered car, and no drivers license (5th offense) He was not ticked by the officer. the officer let him drive away............

2, 18 year old girl on a cell phone..........do I have to say anything more? Hit the exact same spot on my F150. Must have idiot magnet option installed on right front of f150

3 this one

I have experience with Hollis and Amica, thus i know at the end of the day it will be paid + they are just going to kick it to commerce anyway. I have a lot of insurance with Amica they seem to like that. They quoted me 1700 a year for full insurance on a 430 scud based on my policies

I have not filed for the rental since I have another car, but I do like the idea of asking for the Cash will cover that with Amica on Monday.

I am told that hollis will return my car by December

 

Ok, I think I see what you're saying. And you're right. What the responsible party's Insurance owes you for rental is not based on that person's policy. It is based in state insurance law. In some states, like Montana (ultra liberal and consumer rights oriented) the state Dept of Ins says that the ins company will owe for "like kind and quality" meaning number of seats and drive type.

In other states like UT, there is no such wording, so the Ins Co can put you into that Kia for whatever time it takes to get your car fixes regardless of what kind of car was damaged.

So, if you're in a state where the state DOI does not mandate a LKQ rental policy for a claimant, The Ins company will only pay out what they would owe for the cheapest rental over the peroid of time for which your vehicle was determined to be non-drivable. If you rent a vehicle for $200/day for 21 days, you'll pay $4100. The Ins company will say, "Gee, we could have had you in the Kia for $30/day", therefore, they're only going to reimburse you for that amount which we would have paid ($630), and you'd be out the rest.

So yes, it all depends on what your state DOI law states about rental reimbursement, not the other guy's policy.

That being said, after the Dec page on any policy, the next thing is the "definitions" section that actually does define loss and liability as they apply to the insured's policy. But like you said, as you are a 3rd paty to the claim, this is not realivant to you. Unless tha company tries to deny liability.

Hope thats more in line with your question. Let me know if I'm still off the mark here.

M