I was rear ended hard by another car. She was cited by police. I was not injured and $2000 worth of damage was done to my car. Her insurance company is taking car of my car and the rental but even though I am not injured, I am wondering about getting $1000-$2000 because of her negligence and the inconvienence it has caused me. Also even though my car will be repaired to original condition, when I sell it and someone hears it was in an accident, people just don't like that. I know trying to receive diminished value is not really a legit thing, but I am wondering if the insurance company would try and offer me a little to settle without anything else.
2006-06-23 11:09:33 · 8 answers · asked by tuckerdog 1 in Cars & Transportation ➔ Insurance & Registration
Its not about greed. Would you be as likely to buy a car if someone told you it had been in an accident? Its aboutsomething that never should have happened and the time I have wasted taking care of this and missing work to take care of things.
2006-06-23 11:22:48 · update #1
Diminished Value claims have been barred either by policy or statute in most states. Check the below link for a list of states and some additional info. Another great, free site to read for all things legal is www.nolo.com.
If you do not have a legal right to present a DV claim in your state, other than injury there's no legal basis to get "fuzzy" (vs hard) money from an accident. Auto policies, for both insureds and claimants, are written to handle hard, documentable losses, those you can provide receipts for: Rental car, medical bills/lost wages, auto repair. "Fuzzy" money, such as 'pain and suffering' settlements that are subjective, require an injury or a legal basis for payment.
While there's certainly no harm in asking (the worst they can say is no, right?) please be prepared that it might not go your way. You can always check anything the adverse insurance company tells you with your own company/agent so you know you're getting the straight story.
Good luck. Glad you weren't hurt.
2006-06-23 13:46:35 · answer #1 · answered by ohso_quiet 4 · 2⤊ 0⤋
I would wait at least until you are close to trial (within the last month or two, at least). Settlement offers usualy max out shortly before trial. When you say "it doesn't hurt but it feels sore and achy," you can leave out the first part. If it's sore, it hurts! Don't undercut your own case by saying it doesn't hurt when it is actually sore. If you've already stated in your deposition or in interrogatories that it doesn't hurt but now you are feeling sore and achy, ask your lawyer to serve updated answers on the other side so they are aware that you have continuing pain and suffering. They key here is proof of liability. If the evidence is good that you were not at fault (especially if there is a witness besides you or other evidence that backs up that you were not at fault), then the law says that you are supposed to be compensated for all your medical bills (past and likely future bills), lost income, other out-of-pocket expenses, pain and suffering. (but not your atty fees). You have a right to insist on a jury trial. Yes, you are taking a gamble, but if you really were not at fault and they have no evidence that you were, then the only real issue at trial will be how much you get. I doubt you'll get less than you've just said has been offered as settlement. (However, depending on how your atty client fee agreement works, the lawyer may get a higher % of the recovery if you go to trial). If this is the first offer or the trial is not tomorrow, I'd say push the lawyer to do better. It's true that you have to consider collectability. If the only source of recovery is the insurance policy, that may be the upper limit of what you can get. If the person who hit you has assets of their own, you possibly can go even higher but then you have to take into account the costs of enforcing the judgment against a reluctant individual.
2016-03-27 02:24:47 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
In a very similar situation, I asked for and got an extra $2500 for "reduction in value" of my nearly new car. The other party's insurance agent didn't even bat an eye, he immediately agreed that it was fair. There's nothing illegitimate or illegal about it. A severely damaged vehicle will never be quite the same again and you should be compensated for that reduction in value.
Further, if the repair shop doesn't do the job exactly right, you may see problems several years down the road. That's exactly what happened in my case; I was living several thousand miles away from the area where the repairs were done and there was no way to get the vehicle back to the shop to have the driver's door properly re-skinned.
Asking for deminished value compensation from the responsible party (or their insurance company) is entirely appropriate especially when you are entirely without fault in the accident.
2006-06-23 12:47:32 · answer #3 · answered by Bostonian In MO 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I think it is a good thing that the insurance company is paying for your rental car. They had to pay to have your car fixed since that is why she carries insurance. If they offer you some monetary settlement on top of that then you should consider that a bonus since you did not lose a limb , your life, or spend time in the hospital. If you do decide to press the issue, first think of how high YOUR medical insurance and car insurance are now and how much higher they will rise if everyone decides that they deserve more than what it takes to get their lives back in order.
2006-06-23 11:33:18 · answer #4 · answered by Rere 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
In this event you would have to sue the person that hit you car. The insurance company is only required to pay for bodily injury and property damage. Anything outside of that they are not responsible for. Now some companies well give you a little bit more over your damages to keep the claim from going to court. So you can call the company and see what they can do.
2006-06-24 06:04:38 · answer #5 · answered by ginasia05 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Claiming injury when you are not injured is insurance fraud. It doesn't matter what you intend to do with the money or if your vehicle has diminished value. Insurance is intended to put you back to your financial state prior to the accident, they will fix your car. They fix you if you are damaged. They do not give out money for inconvenience or because you may want to sell it later. I understand but what you are thinking of doing, but it is illegal and is the reason we all have high insurance rates. Take the moral ground, only accept what is legally owed to you.
2006-06-29 09:47:27 · answer #6 · answered by jodi M 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
You can tell the insurance company that you have been incovenienced and you feel you should be compensated for that inconvenience.
If you tell them you are going to consult a lawyer they may offer more. Or you can get a lawyer and they can make a case.
But just to let you know this kind of thing is what drives up insurance costs for everyone.
2006-06-23 11:29:53 · answer #7 · answered by Fullarmor 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
don't be greedy...
2006-06-23 11:14:03 · answer #8 · answered by silv2078 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋