• FreeAdvice has a new Terms of Service and Privacy Policy, effective May 25, 2018.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our Terms of Service and use of cookies.

Claim Trouble

Accident - Bankruptcy - Criminal Law / DUI - Business - Consumer - Employment - Family - Immigration - Real Estate - Tax - Traffic - Wills   Please click a topic or scroll down for more.

H

hansona

Guest
My wife was involved in an auto accident that was not her fault. We contacted our insurance the next business day. Since then, we were told that her car is repairable. We do not trust that. We want to have a car in the same condition it was in before it was hit. Our claim rep has instructed us that this is our only choice. I feel different. I want to seek councel to assist us in this case. My question is, do we have a case? My wife had only minor injuries. We just want the car replaced. The insurance company acted on their own to settle the entire case with out consulting us of the direction they were working in. What should we do? I thought our insurance was hired to protect us?
 


I AM ALWAYS LIABLE

Senior Member
<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Arial, Helvetica, Verdana">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by hansona:
My wife was involved in an auto accident that was not her fault. We contacted our insurance the next business day. Since then, we were told that her car is repairable. We do not trust that. We want to have a car in the same condition it was in before it was hit. Our claim rep has instructed us that this is our only choice. I feel different. I want to seek councel to assist us in this case. My question is, do we have a case? My wife had only minor injuries. We just want the car replaced. The insurance company acted on their own to settle the entire case with out consulting us of the direction they were working in. What should we do? I thought our insurance was hired to protect us?<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

My response:

I'm a bit confused by your post. First, you say: "My wife was involved in an auto accident that was not her fault" and then you say: "The insurance company acted on their own to settle the entire case . . ."

Usually, when an insurance company pays the "other guy," that means that your insurance company has decided, from its investigation, that the "other guy" was "not at fault" and that you, the insured, were the ones at fault. With the exception of certain "business" insurance policies, an auto liabitity insurance company has the right, under the policy provisions, to act on their own and pay out on your policy if an insured's liability is present. If you read your policy, you'll see that I'm correct. This, however, is undoubtedly what happened in your wife's case. Something was against your wife's version of the accident - - a collision report, witnesses, or something she said to the insurance adjuster when she spoke to the adjuster - - but something was amiss to make them pay the "other guy."

If you disagree with the insurance company concerning your car, again, if you look at your policy provisions, you'll see conditions for Arbitration. You might want to run your scenario by an attorney, and bring your policy with you for review. Perhaps the attorney can, at least, get them to change their mind on auto repair/replacement.

Good luck to you.

------------------
By reading the “Response” to your question or comment, you agree that: The opinions expressed herein by "I AM ALWAYS LIABLE" are designed to provide educational information only and are not intended to, nor do they, offer legal advice. Opinions expressed to you in this site are not intended to, nor does it, create an attorney-client relationship, nor does it constitute legal advice to any person reviewing such information. No electronic communication with "I AM ALWAYS LIABLE," on its own, will generate an attorney-client relationship, nor will it be considered an attorney-client privileged communication. You further agree that you will obtain your own attorney's advice and counsel for your questions responded to herein by "I AM ALWAYS LIABLE."

 
L

Lianne

Guest
I interpreted this differently than IAAL. I didn't think the insurance company actually paid the other guy anything; I thought he was just saying that they "settled the case" by deciding to repair the car (instead of calling it a total loss and replacing the car). In any case, I don't think the insured can stop them from repairing instead of replacing. I'm no lawyer, but arbitration looks like the only way out there. However, if you accept repair, you can file a Diminished Value (DV) claim for the inherent loss of value on the vehicle (just due to the fact that it's been in an accident and is worth less, even if it's been perfectly repaired). If your insurance company is paying for the repairs, they'll be the ones paying for the DV. If the other guy's insurance is paying for the repairs, then they'll be the ones paying for the DV. Good luck!
Lianne
 

Find the Right Lawyer for Your Legal Issue!

Fast, Free, and Confidential
data-ad-format="auto">
Top