Diminished Value

[Summertime2]

What is the name of your state? Washington

Date of Evaluation: July 1, 2005
Vehicle: 2005 Volvo XC90 4x4
Date of Loss: April 26, 2005
DOL: 9,982
Total Repairs: $16,973.00

The value a reputable Auto Company assessed my vehicle was worth was $43,870.00 prior to the accident, and estimated my post accident value at $32,902.00. Their opinion as a result of the April 26, 2005 collision my Volvo suffered diminution of the actual cash value in the amount of: $10,968.00.

O.K. here is my dilema ~ my case is far from settled for injuries and such. The other Insurance Company finally wants to settle on my claim for diminution of my Volvo.

Their Insurance Company claims the cost of the repairs were $16,684.55, because the tow bill of $307.75 needed to be deducted. They broke down the total cost of repairs: $7,343.12 parts, $4,651.20 labor, $2,865.60 paint and refinish, and $715 frame labor.

Their Insurance Company claims that the MSRP on April 26, 2005 which was sorted by Pacific NW Regional price variation, mileage, equipment, features and options was $36,615.00. That NADA Value for my Volvo XC90 was only $36,615.00 at the time of the accident. (I find this VERY hard to believe).

Their Insurance wants to settle my claim for $5,272.56.

I'm hoping someone can give some advice on what I should do prior to talking with my attorney. My attorney has stated that he has never done a Diminished Value Claim. I have pulled up the value of my vehicle today at the same mileage at Edmunds.com and they have the value listed for over $30,000 on 12/26/07.

Is this an average settlement? Should I except it? I just want to seem knowledgeable prior to talking with my attorney. Any info anyone can lend or feel is relevant I would gladly appreciate.

 

[ecmst12]

I don't know what "reputable auto company" valued your vehicle at $43k....hope it wasn't KBB. Their values are definitely inflated.

Towing is not part of repairs. Not that they're not responsible for the towing cost also, but it is a separate cost, even if it's listed on the same estimate.

It looks like Washington does recognize DV claims which is good. Ask to see their paperwork. If the NADA values are in order, I don't think it would be a bad idea to accept their offer.

 

[Summertime2]

I purchased my Volvo 11/04 for approximately $45,000 + taxes.

I had not even owned the car for 6 months yet. I guess my question is also how can their insurance company say the value of my car was only $36,615 at the time of the accident. When we pulled up Volvo's after the accident $43k+/- was the average used selling price.

KBB is not the one who did my diminished value~it was actually a friend of my fathers who used to work for their insurance company as an adjuster years back, who recommended the place I took my vehicle. Unfortunately he died last year from cancer and can't help me further on this.

Thank you for your input and help

 

[ecmst12]

A new car drops dramatically in value the moment you drive it off the lot. The first year after you buy it is the WORST time to get into an accident because of that. I find it hard to believe that used vehicles were selling for only $2k less than new ones - why wouldn't the buyer just buy a new one for that small amount more? $36k sounds much more reasonable. But you won't be able to fight that valuation without some kind of documentation/paperwork to support your claim that your vehicle was worth more.

 

[Summertime2]

We purchased two XC90's from Volvo within two months**************......one for my mother and one for me.

We actually were looking at used ones ~ yes, they were selling them (the veryfew that were available) 2K to 4K less than the new ones, which is why we purchased them new.

Does anyone know where I can find NADA price for the car for April of 2005?

Thank you~

 

[ecmst12]

NADA values are of limited use since most insurance companies don't go by it, but it's better than nothing.

The fact that the dealership was ASKING 43k for the same car used that you bought new doesn't mean anyone actually BOUGHT the car at that price. You need sales records, not asking prices, to determine actual value.

Did you look on nada.com?

How can I obtain a historical value from a previous month or year?


N.A.D.A. Appraisal Guides has an extensive Reference Library and offers its services to anyone in need of outdated information on vehicles, boats, motorcycles, manufactured homes, and much more. Values may be obtained for a prepaid fee of $30.00 per value. If the information you are requesting is available, requests will be processed within two (2) business days and may be faxed or mailed. If you are interested in this service please email [email protected].

 

[teflon_jones]

A new car drops dramatically in value the moment you drive it off the lot. The first year after you buy it is the WORST time to get into an accident because of that. I find it hard to believe that used vehicles were selling for only $2k less than new ones - why wouldn't the buyer just buy a new one for that small amount more? $36k sounds much more reasonable.

I agree 100%. While Volvos are known for maintaining their values very well, they don't lose only 5% upon being driven off the lot. Also, as you state yourself, the used vehicles were being offered for 2-4k less than new ones. So you need to at least use the average of these, if not the lower figure. Then you need to factor in that most used vehicles sell for 8-10% less than their asking price. So that puts us at $38k on a $45k stickered car, without taking into account mileage, condition, or desirability of the car due to the color and options.

You're taking the best case scenario for what you can expect rather than the realistic scenario. You need to look at this realistically.