Not exactly. Insurance is supposed to “make you whole”. That could be by giving you the depreciated cash value of the vehicle. Since that value depends largely on their source of data, I have found it productive to say “OK, if you think that is enough money to make me whole, then find a vehicle the same year, color and trim level with the same mileage and provide that instead of the cash because I can’t find such a deal anywhere. If you can’t either, then perhaps it’s time to get my lawyer involved.” It’s amazing how quickly the offer is increased (or, once anyway, they replaced the car with one that was identical to the wrecked vehicle).
Without reservation, THIS. ^^^^ You have nothing to lose by telling them she is hurt and then never getting around to documenting that. You have everything to lose if you say, “Nah, she’s fine” but she ends up not being fine.
Also:
-
Your insurer referring you to the at-fault insurer is bad juju. Google up The Unfair Claims Practices Act for your state.
-
Most companies won’t surcharge your policy if they have to make a payment AS LONG AS you were not at fault. If yours does, dump them and be loud and public about why.
-
Your insurance company is NOT your attorney. They are NOT your advocate. They are NOT allowed to ‘go to bat’ for you–that’s the short path to unlicensed practice of law. Their job is ONLY to pay what they owe according to the insurance contract.
-
Attorneys generally don’t help with property damage. The money is in injury cases. They might give some assistance with the property damage IF you’ve signed them up to represent you for your injury case. But even then, they aren’t very knowledgeable.
-
State to state, but typically you are only owed the market value of your property at the time it is damaged. You are NOT owed what you paid for it, or for the cost of obtaining it/dealer fees. Insurance companies are not auto brokers–they skate very thin ice indeed if they point you in the direction of the replacement vehicle. They CAN use vehicles currently for sale/recently sold to develop the market value of your car, however, because that’s how you determine the market value of a car.
If you don’t think they are acting in good faith, and the amount at issue is large enough, get a laywyer. If you are considering waiving your ability to claim for medical expenses, even though you don’t foresee any, get a lawyer.
For a few hundred bucks you can at least get one to write a letter for you.
you are at a significant disadvantage here regarding your information, experience, and aggravation vs theirs. And from their point of view, there is zero downside to playing hardball with you. There is no incentive to settle this quickly. Their rush on trying to resolve the medical waiver is because deadlines get action: it is the same reasons sales are today only, and call in the next 20 minutes to get a free extra sham-wow. But other than that, you feel the delay more than they do. So you will give up, or give in, before they will. An attorney can help you find reasons to get them to want to settle.
Missed Inigo Montoya’s post. Go with that.
If you don’t think they are acting in good faith, and the amount at issue is large enough, get a laywyer. If you are considering waiving your ability to claim for medical expenses, even though you don’t foresee any, get a lawyer.
For a few hundred bucks you can at least get one to write a letter for you.
you are at a significant disadvantage here regarding your information, experience, and aggravation vs theirs. And from their point of view, there is zero downside to playing hardball with you. There is no incentive to settle this quickly. Their rush on trying to resolve the medical waiver is because deadlines get action: it is the same reasons sales are today only, and call in the next 20 minutes to get a free extra sham-wow. But other than that, you feel the delay more than they do. So you will give up, or give in, before they will. An attorney can help you find reasons to get them to want to settle.
In this specific case, yes. But if the situation were reversed, and he needed to use his liability coverage, then the insurance company very much is on the hook for your defense, as they have a duty to defend.
I don’t really understand this. If the other driver is at fault, is it normal that your own insurance company is completely out of the loop, assuming that the other driver is insured? Do you have no recourse but to hire an attorney if there’s a dispute, are there arbitration procedures?
ACTUALLY, they have to pay a lawyer to do that. Sometimes the lawyer is an employee of the insurance company, but frequently not. It’s a fine distinction and a situation not without it’s occasional conundrums. The relationship is very much attorney/client just as if the customer were paying out of his own pocket. However, the insurance company has to pay for it.
Ridiculously simplified summaries follow:
Some coverages like PIP/MedPay pay no matter who is at fault. Depending on what state you’re in that amount may or may not be recoverable from the other insurance company/at fault party personally.
Collision coverage (pays for your car) is something you as a policyholder have the right to invoke no matter who was at fault, and your insurer has NO right to send you away. They just don’t. Incentivizing/advising you to seek recovery somewhere else, when you have a policy contract that says they WILL perform, is tantamount to wrongfully denying an otherwise payable claim. It is a bad faith denial of a claim and that action has punitive value (in a lawsuit) all by itself, over and above the monetary damage to the property. I mean, if an adjuster really wants his hide torn from his shaking body and tanned in front of his own eyes, he need only say, “Yeah, we can cover it but [that’s all. Nothing else after that phrase matters]”. If there is a competent manager-type within earshot someone is going to have a very bad day. Trust me.
You’re still talking about dealing with your own company, right? The remedy is actually spelled out in the policy contract. Some companies don’t do arbitration, some do–but maybe not in all states.
So I’m still confused as to what should be happening in OP’s situation. OP’s car is destroyed, and the other driver is at fault. You said OP’s own insurance company should not be advising him in pursuing his own direct claim against the other driver’s insurance company, because they can’t act as his attorney. But should OP simply be claiming from his own insurance company, and leaving it to them to seek reimbursement from the other driver’s insurance company?
Insurers can chat with each other about facts, particularly when sorting out who was at fault. And they only are supposed to do that when they have skin in the game. “Hey, we made a collision coverage payment so the insured could get his car fixed, but your guy was at fault so pay us back…” But they can’t say, “Hey, your guy broke our guy’s arm, pay his bills + $5,000 for his pain.”
In the OP case he has every right to run the claim through his own insurance AND through the other guy’s, and he has the right to pick the better number (at fault company reimburses the deductible eventually, so that’s not really a consideration). But what CAN’T happen is his company can’t call the other company and tell them what to pay.
If Both insurers are being cheap, OP can sue the at fault guy directly. That’s always fun.
FWIW, a key concept that isn’t being mentioned here is the legal concept of “no-fault insurance”, which is a bit of a misnomer as it has nothing to do with establishing fault, but rather, it’s the legal principle that every insured deals with his own insurance company regardless of fault. To quote the cited article, “No fault simply means that, regardless of who is at fault for an auto accident, each driver’s insurance company will handle their claim” – i.e.- it was established precisely to prevent scumbag insurance companies like the OP’s example from refusing to do their job for their client. Unfortunately AFAICT the legislation only exists in this form in some Canadian provinces; the US version seems to apply only to personal injury claims, and then only in a few states and with significant limitations. Merely a side comment; I have no specific advice for the OP, particularly not being familiar with the laws in his state, other than to agree with most of what has been posted, but especially the part about not prematurely closing off the potential of future medical claims.
As for insurance companies not “going to bat for you”, well, it’s true that they’re not your attorneys, but if you’re liable for an accident and find yourself on the receiving end of a major lawsuit for Pain and Suffering™ which certain people seem to automatically acquire even in a minor fender-bender, your insurer has a whole army of lawyers who will defend the case because your case is their case, and this is in fact probably the most important reason to have insurance. Insurance companies have been known to go so far as to hire private detectives to covertly photograph claimants for alleged debilitating injuries performing physical tasks inconsistent with their claims, such as climbing ladders to do home repair or going out for a nice game of golf, while claiming to be immobilized by pain. My friend the former insurance adjuster always took special delight when this scum was charged with insurance fraud. A person of ordinary means fighting such a lawsuit on his own would be totally screwed.
Too bad insurance companies are never charged with fraud for schemes designed to lowball offers and pressure unfair settlements.
Insurance companies very often conduct surveillance of their customers. In my experience, they end up trying to hide that evidence, since it often supports the claim. Typically something like “she never left the house during the four days we watched, other than to limp to the mailbox, using a cane.”
That’s all good stuff, but I want to have another go at this dead horse: The expenses associated with legal defense and investigation all speak to the insurance company doing what it can to restrict any payments it makes to those which are reasonable, necessary, and collision-related. In other words, they have skin in the game. That’s different from them going on the offense and trying to get something for you. For instance, your company’s adjuster can’t assemble and present your injury/property damage case to the at-fault insurance (unless they’ve already made a payment to you and are recovering that payment from them–but again, they’re doing on their own behalf, not yours).
Inigo, I’m really appreciating your feedback in this thread. Are you an insurance agent?
Insurance sales 1996 - 2001
Total Loss adjuster 2001 - 2008
BI/UIM adjuster 2008 - 2018
And I’ve spent the last year working at a plaintiff firm [del]fighting[/del] working across from insurance companies
No kid will ever say that’s what he wants to be when he grows up. Don’t let this happen to you. Drop out and join a band. Really.
Thanks–that’s really helpful.
I don’t particularly want to go to court, and I’m not anywhere near that stage yet. But it’s good to know what approaches to negotiation make sense, and which ones don’t.
Heh. Here’s what I’m finding. It’s pretty dense reading for me, but I’m noticing that my insurance company–NC Farm Bureau–is the defendant :
From my reading, I don’t have much of an action against Farm Bureau, but it may be worth our filing a complaint with our insurance commission.
The bar for Bad Faith is reasonably high. Mistakes & disagreements aren’t enough. There has to be a wanton pattern of reckless neglect. On the other hand, commissioner complaints are [a major pain] [an intense learning experience] for the claims folks. Definitely an effective means of getting more eyes/experience on your claim.
^This, 1000 times this. My insurance company is agent driven, I have had no problem with the agent them upholding my interest. In those cases, however, where fault lies with the other driver and their insurance is on the hook for all damages there is an distinctly adversarial relationship. In those cases i have found it very advantageous to bring in the State Insurance Commissioners office if I receive any push-back on a fair settlement (OK, “fair” in my view). Once the regulators are involved the scales always seems to swing back my way.