• 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.

Other insurance trying to total my car when I want it repaired.

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

bat22

Junior Member
California

Scenario: Car stops perpendicular within my lane because they couldn't account for traffic on the adjacent lane. I come to a full stop but the car behind me doesn't. Damage to my rear and to my front. Still, while the guy who rear-ended me is waiting for a tow truck, my 2003 Volvo takes me over 11.5 miles back home. My own insurance deems that guy liable and leaves me to sort it out with the other insurance. Close to 50 days pass before the other insurance says they're putting partial accountability on their guy and the rest on the car that stopped in front of me.

Predicament: This insurance not only wants to declare my older car a total loss, they're offering a pittance for it. I'm checking with an independent garage for their estimate but it looks like they're also looking at an optional total loss when repair parts trump depreciated value.

Argument: In CA, the guy who rear-ends you is almost always the one at fault. I don't see how my car being older should mean a discount for the other insurance company for their own guy's blunder. Especially when I haven't inconvenienced them with car rentals or medical bills, and they want to total a car that's still operational. My uncle says to just sue the other driver in small claims court since that should cover most of the damages and give me a better discount than what they're offering.

Thoughts? :confused:
 


ecmst12

Senior Member
You are owed either the repair cost, or the fair market value of your car in the condition it was in right before the accident - whichever is LESS. If the repair cost exceeds the value, you're not getting the repair cost.
 

bat22

Junior Member
You are owed either the repair cost, or the fair market value of your car in the condition it was in right before the accident - whichever is LESS. If the repair cost exceeds the value, you're not getting the repair cost.
Do you know if it's possible to take that market value and put it into repairs, myself taking care of the difference? Without having my car declared a total loss?
 

ecmst12

Senior Member
The car will still be declared a total loss and issued a salvage title. You can buy the car back from the insurance company for the salvage value and repair it, but you'd have to get a reconstructed title in order to be able to legally register it again (requirements vary by state) and the value will be half or less of what it would be with a clean title. You will be better off taking the settlement and buying a similar old car with a clean title that runs, or putting it towards a newer car that will be more reliable.
 

latigo

Senior Member
California

Scenario: Car stops perpendicular within my lane because they couldn't account for traffic on the adjacent lane. I come to a full stop but the car behind me doesn't. Damage to my rear and to my front. Still, while the guy who rear-ended me is waiting for a tow truck, my 2003 Volvo takes me over 11.5 miles back home. My own insurance deems that guy liable and leaves me to sort it out with the other insurance. Close to 50 days pass before the other insurance says they're putting partial accountability on their guy and the rest on the car that stopped in front of me.

Predicament: This insurance not only wants to declare my older car a total loss, they're offering a pittance for it. I'm checking with an independent garage for their estimate but it looks like they're also looking at an optional total loss when repair parts trump depreciated value.

Argument: In CA, the guy who rear-ends you is almost always the one at fault. I don't see how my car being older should mean a discount for the other insurance company for their own guy's blunder. Especially when I haven't inconvenienced them with car rentals or medical bills, and they want to total a car that's still operational. My uncle says to just sue the other driver in small claims court since that should cover most of the damages and give me a better discount than what they're offering.

Thoughts? :confused:
And I suppose that if your car was rammed into a utility pole instead of another vehicle the chiseling insurance company would contend that the utility company was "partially accountable". A pox on these parsimonious sons of a what not!

Anyway, as Tonto might say: "Uncle is heap smart!". So just sue the other guy in small claims court.
 

bat22

Junior Member
Update

Update:

So I received the estimate of my car's worth and it seems an agreeable sum. Thing is the insurance of the fellow who rear-ended me feels it only needs to pay just short of 50% of the estimated value, placing shared fault with the driver who pulled in front of me. I don't know if the latter person accepted responsibility but the fact is it was the rear collision that got the figurative ball rolling. If not for the former fellow, I'd have remained at a complete stop without incident. I see no need to go barking up another insurance tree for the other half so...

Question: Is it acceptable to sue a driver for the remainder of my car's worth after their insurance has reached its 50% verdict?
 

Zigner

Senior Member, Non-Attorney
Update:

So I received the estimate of my car's worth and it seems an agreeable sum. Thing is the insurance of the fellow who rear-ended me feels it only needs to pay just short of 50% of the estimated value, placing shared fault with the driver who pulled in front of me. I don't know if the latter person accepted responsibility but the fact is it was the rear collision that got the figurative ball rolling. If not for the former fellow, I'd have remained at a complete stop without incident. I see no need to go barking up another insurance tree for the other half so...

Question: Is it acceptable to sue a driver for the remainder of my car's worth after their insurance has reached its 50% verdict?
If you take the 50%, then you're going to waive any right you have to sue the guy. This was NOT the fault of the car that pulled out in front of you. This is 100% the fault of the driver who was following you too closely.
 

LdiJ

Senior Member
His own insurance has no obligation to do any job for him unless his insurance pays his claim.

If he prefers to deal with the other insurance company, he's on his own.
However, in the first post it appears that his insurance company kind of washed their hands of the matter.
 

justalayman

Senior Member
Update:

So I received the estimate of my car's worth and it seems an agreeable sum. Thing is the insurance of the fellow who rear-ended me feels it only needs to pay just short of 50% of the estimated value, placing shared fault with the driver who pulled in front of me. I don't know if the latter person accepted responsibility but the fact is it was the rear collision that got the figurative ball rolling. If not for the former fellow, I'd have remained at a complete stop without incident. I see no need to go barking up another insurance tree for the other half so...

Question: Is it acceptable to sue a driver for the remainder of my car's worth after their insurance has reached its 50% verdict?
No. If you accept their offer you will be required to sign a release of any further property damage claims.

You can either accept their offer; attempt to negotiate a higher offer acceptable to you; just say the Hell with it and sue the driver of the car that hit you.
 

Zigner

Senior Member, Non-Attorney
California

Scenario: Car stops perpendicular within my lane because they couldn't account for traffic on the adjacent lane. I come to a full stop but the car behind me doesn't. Damage to my rear and to my front. Still, while the guy who rear-ended me is waiting for a tow truck, my 2003 Volvo takes me over 11.5 miles back home. My own insurance deems that guy liable and leaves me to sort it out with the other insurance. Close to 50 days pass before the other insurance says they're putting partial accountability on their guy and the rest on the car that stopped in front of me.

Predicament: This insurance not only wants to declare my older car a total loss, they're offering a pittance for it. I'm checking with an independent garage for their estimate but it looks like they're also looking at an optional total loss when repair parts trump depreciated value.

Argument: In CA, the guy who rear-ends you is almost always the one at fault. I don't see how my car being older should mean a discount for the other insurance company for their own guy's blunder. Especially when I haven't inconvenienced them with car rentals or medical bills, and they want to total a car that's still operational. My uncle says to just sue the other driver in small claims court since that should cover most of the damages and give me a better discount than what they're offering.

Thoughts? :confused:
To be clear (for everyone advising): Do you have collision insurance, or do you only have liability?
 

Zigner

Senior Member, Non-Attorney
If OP had collision coverage on a 2003 vehicle, I don't think there's any help for him...
This was more for Xylene's & LdiJ's benefit - I don't think the OP had collision either, but just wanted to be clear.
 

bat22

Junior Member
My coverage is uninsured motorist collision. As my insurance placed fault with the one who rear-ended me, who was insured, they put me in touch with their company and closed the book on my case.
 

Find the Right Lawyer for Your Legal Issue!

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