not fixing your car

[pinecone]

What is the name of your state? NE

I was rear ended and took on some bumper damage. The car is a work car and I really don't care to go to the hassle of getting it fixed. My insurance company told me to get an estimate and then they'll run it through the at fault driver's insurance company. Once the other driver's insurance company agrees to the estimate, will they only pay directly to the repair shop or do they send me a check? I have heard of people getting in small wrecks or getting hail damage and just getting sent a check for the estimate amount. I have never been in an accident or filed a claim so I don't know how that all works out.

 

[seagoing]

In my case ,I was sent a check for the damages,like you I left the vehicle with the damage.If your damage would put yor vehicle in a state of totaled,there could be some complications,surely yours is not the case.

 

[JustAPal00]

It depends on your insurance company, some send you the check, some send it to the shop, and some will send it to you payable to both of you. It's insurance fraud if you don't repair the damage, which’s what they are paying you for, not the depreciation in your vehicle. I know a lot of people in the same position would not repair the damage, but it is fraud. What if you get hit there again, will you claim the cost to repair it to it previously damaged state? Odds are you will be fine no matter what you do, but if your insurance company finds out you kept the check and didn’t repair the damage they will probably cancel you.

 

[ecmst12]

That's not true at all, it is NOT fraud if you don't repair the damage. But YOUR insurance company will not pay you unless you can offer them proof that your car is paid off. The reason is if you have a loan on the car, your insurance company has an obligation to your loanholder as well as to you, and you have an obligation to the loanholder to keep the car in good repair.

The other person's insurance company, however, has no such obligation and should have no problem paying you directly.

 

[JustAPal00]

That's not true at all, it is NOT fraud if you don't repair the damage. But YOUR insurance company will not pay you unless you can offer them proof that your car is paid off. The reason is if you have a loan on the car, your insurance company has an obligation to your loanholder as well as to you, and you have an obligation to the loanholder to keep the car in good repair.

The other person's insurance company, however, has no such obligation and should have no problem paying you directly.

Yes it is fraud! If you have a car worth $10,000 and get hit in the rear bumper causing $1000 damage, that estimate is to repair that damage. The depriciation to the vehicle might be minimal due to the the fact that it hasn't hurt the utility of the car only the cosmetics. When you are in an accident and you file a claim to the other persons insurance company, you are submitting an estimate to repair the damage. If you then take the money and keep it you have fraudiently represented yourself to the company. It will be very difficult for them to prosecute you, they would probably not even bother, but it is fraud!

My company sends the check to me always!

 

[ecmst12]

You are wrong. If someone damages you, you are entitled to receive compensation for the value of the damages, that is how you are made whole. It is up to you what you want to DO with that compensation. The person who damaged you has fulfilled their obligation to make you whole as soon as payment is made (either by them or their insurance company).

 

[Zigner]

Justapal - ecmst12 is correct. It only becomes fraud if, down the road, you attempt to recover compensation for that same damage. So, let's say your car is worth $10,000 and someone causes $1,000 worth of damage. They pay you $1,000, but you decide to pocket it. Now your car is worth $9,000. So, 3 months later someone totally creams your car and totals it. You are only allowed to claim $9,000 as the total value of the car (due to the unrepaired prior damage.) If you claim $10,000 THEN you are committing fraud.

 

[JustAPal00]

Justapal - ecmst12 is correct. It only becomes fraud if, down the road, you attempt to recover compensation for that same damage. So, let's say your car is worth $10,000 and someone causes $1,000 worth of damage. They pay you $1,000, but you decide to pocket it. Now your car is worth $9,000. So, 3 months later someone totally creams your car and totals it. You are only allowed to claim $9,000 as the total value of the car (due to the unrepaired prior damage.) If you claim $10,000 THEN you are committing fraud.

The problem with that logic is that a $10,000 car that receives $1000 damage to say the rear bumper, is probably worth $9,500 or $9,600 so you only lost $400 or $500 but you pocketed $1000. You have pocketed more than your loss. Now if you're going to fix the car, then the insurance company is obligated to fix your car to the same condition that it was in before the accident which would require $1000!

 

[JustAPal00]

I've read through a bunch of states insurance guidelines, and they all have almost this same exact statement in them. After evaluating the damages to your vehicle, the insurance company has the option of repairing your vehicle, replacing your vehicle, or reimbursing you for the vehicle's actual cash value (ACV). Actual cash value is the amount your vehicle would have sold for on the date of the accident. Nowhere in there does it say giving you money equal to the amount of damages so you can profit from the accident!

 

[ecmst12]

You're not profitting from the accident. Value has still been deducted from your car. You have the choice whether to use the cash to make your car worth (approximately) what it was before, or you can do something else with it, but then your car will be worth less. You have been compensated for your loss.

 

[moburkes]

JustA: Your argument is useless. You're arguing with a claims adjuster, a person with common sense, and an insurance agent is jumping in. None of us are giving you incorrect information.

 

[Zigner]

The problem with that logic is that a $10,000 car that receives $1000 damage to say the rear bumper, is probably worth $9,500 or $9,600 so you only lost $400 or $500 but you pocketed $1000. You have pocketed more than your loss. Now if you're going to fix the car, then the insurance company is obligated to fix your car to the same condition that it was in before the accident which would require $1000!

There is no problem with my "logic". I was trying to keep it simple to help you understand. I used nice, even and round numbers. I also made sure to point out exact values. It's really not a difficult concept to understand...
Our OP has NO contract with the at-fault driver's insurance company. If the OP were being reimbursed by his own insurance, then your comments would make a little more sense, as we could assume that the OP's insurance company has the contractual obligation to either repair or pay (at their option.) But, that's not the case in this thread, as it's the at-fault's driver who is dealing with our OP.

 

[moburkes]

I've read through a bunch of states insurance guidelines, and they all have almost this same exact statement in them. After evaluating the damages to your vehicle, the insurance company has the option of repairing your vehicle, replacing your vehicle, or reimbursing you for the vehicle's actual cash value (ACV). Actual cash value is the amount your vehicle would have sold for on the date of the accident. Nowhere in there does it say giving you money equal to the amount of damages so you can profit from the accident!

By the way, guidelines and laws are 2 different things.

 

[JustAPal00]

Well gentlemen I guess we can agree to disagree! The OP asked if it was OK to just keep the money. As I stated I think it is insurance fraud to take money to repair damage and then not repair the damage. The whole premise of auto insurance is to pay the victim all costs that they incurred to bring their car back to pre accident condition. Every state that I could find has in their insurance laws a statement indicating After evaluating the damages to your vehicle, the insurance company has the option of repairing your vehicle, replacing your vehicle, or reimbursing you for the vehicle's actual cash value (ACV). Actual cash value is the amount your vehicle would have sold for on the date of the accident. Not one said the the insurance company had to pay the victim the amount of the damage. Can any one of you provide me one link, just one to any insurance law document that states anything like The victim has the right to chose whether or not to repair the damage The OP isn't going to fix the damage and won't get in any trouble for it. But just because the law doesn't do anything about it, doesn't make it right. After all going 56 in a 55 is still speeding!

 

[moburkes]

56 in a 55 is breaking the law. There is no law on the books that requires you to repair your vehicle.