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?
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?