English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

i was involed in a car accident the damage was driver side wing . the quote was expensive and insurance said car was a write-off and offered book price i do not agree with insurance .the car is repairable i have still got log book .who is responsible for car untill agreement is made

2007-08-21 15:03:36 · 4 answers · asked by monica a 1 in Business & Finance Insurance

4 answers

The laws of each state can vary but in general - a car is deemed a total loss when the cost to repair the car (including parts and labor) equals or exceeds 75% of the car's actual cash value (what you could have reasonably sold the car for 1 min before it's damage- given the cars options, mileage and condition).

If the estimate exceeds 75% of the cars value - then by law, the insurance company has to total loss it.

If the estimate is close to 75% and the insurance company expects that a supplement for additional damage will be likely during the cars repair that could put the car over the 75% mark, then they will usually go ahead and total loss the car.

If you want to repair the vehicle, you can elect to buy back the salvage. (ie buy back the wrecked car from the insurance company). Depending on the year/make of your car - salvage value can run anywhere from 20%-30%. Most sedans are in the 20-25 range and trucks 25-30. The insurance company would take the actual cash value of the vehicle and subtract the salvage value and that's how much they pay you + you get the car.

If you choose to buy back the car and repair it - then any costs to repair the vehicle that run higher than what you were paid by the ins co - you will have to pay out of pocket.

You will also have a salvage title - so the re-sell value of the repaired car would be less than a car that does not have a branded title.

If you car is a "rolling total" - ie - the estimate makes it a total loss but the car is save to drive - people will frequently choose to retain the salvage.

Until you sign the title to the car over to the insurance company you are legally responsible for the vehicle - that means you have to keep paying taxes on it and making your car payments.

2007-08-21 15:37:12 · answer #1 · answered by Boots 7 · 0 0

Technically, any car is repairable. It's a matter of economics. Most insurance companies follow a formula to determine if they are going to pay to repair a car or if it is a total loss. Your damaged car has what is called salvage value. To determine if it's worth repairing, the insurer usually determines what the fair market value is on your car--immediately prior to the accident. This takes into account its age, equipment, mileage, prior damage, condition (i.e. rust), etc. From the retail value, they subtract the salvage value and the difference is the most they would pay to repair the vehicle. If the estimated repair cost exceeds that figure, they figure it's a total loss. The hardest part for most people is accepting what fair market value is. Most people feel their cars are worth far more than what an insurer values it. However, insurers have to use objective means of valuation just like a car dealer or appraiser. If you disagree with the value, you could contact a car appraiser to look at the car and tell you what it is worth. Then ask your insurer to explain how they arrived--mathematically--at the decision that your car had to be totalled and not repaired.

2007-08-21 15:31:28 · answer #2 · answered by Yo' Mama 4 · 1 0

YOU are. It might be repairable, but the insurance company is only responsible for THE LESSER OF the cost of repairs or the acutal cash value (note, NOT book value) of the car. Once they've made an offer for the lesser of the two, they ALSO don't have to pay any more storage fees.

If you don't like it, you can take them to court over it. It's not necessarily going to get you any more money. It won't get storage fees paid. And it could take up to 18 months.

2007-08-21 15:31:34 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous 7 · 0 0

It does no longer sound as though the motorcyclist is dependable on your damages. The hit and run motorist was once the proximate motive of the coincidence. Just considering the motorcyclist struck your auto does no longer make him mechanically dependable on your damages. You must end up he was once negligent. Perhaps you'll recuperate a component to your damages. If you sue the motorcyclist, he's going to refer the problem over to his coverage organization. They will retain to shield him. Sorry, you're out of success considering that you would not have Collision Coverage

2016-09-05 09:17:58 · answer #4 · answered by ? 4 · 0 0

fedest.com, questions and answers