Situation: 10 YO vehicle, 160k miles, excellent condition, inside and out.
Hood, windshield, fender, etc. is crushed by fallen tree during a storm.
Vehicle has comprehensive coverage. Ins Co has not seen the vehicle yet,
but based on the age and damage, the owner assumes his Ins Co will say the
vehicle is totaled.

Are there any special strategies for dealing with the Ins Co? Obviously the
settlement won't be enough for a new vehicle, but can a higher settlement
be negotiated based on the previous good condition of vehicle? Anything
specific to say (or not to say) to the adjuster?

"DerbyDad03" wrote in message
stuff snipped

Situation: 10 YO vehicle, 160k miles, excellent condition, inside and out.
Hood, windshield, fender, etc. is crushed by fallen tree during a storm.
Vehicle has comprehensive coverage. Ins Co has not seen the vehicle yet,
but based on the age and damage, the owner assumes his Ins Co will say the
vehicle is totaled.

Know the Bluebook (and other sites/pubs) value for said vehicle in excellent
condition - collect a few notices from the classifieds listing same
make/model and note their price. Look up prices on Ebay Motors. Unless you
had modifications to the van the your insurance company was aware of
(handicapped controls, etc) all you're ever likely to see is high Bluebook
value for a 10 year old car.

I would be unhappy with their first offer just as a matter of principle -
the principle being they'll lowball you every chance they get. (-:

Get estimates on the damage anyway - maybe you can find someone to do the
work for less than what they would offer you to total it.

I hope you at least got to make or sale firewood from the tree that attacked
your vehicle.

--
Bobby G.

On Wed, 18 Jun 2014 10:44:50 +0000 (UTC), DerbyDad03
wrote:

Situation: 10 YO vehicle, 160k miles, excellent condition, inside and out.
Hood, windshield, fender, etc. is crushed by fallen tree during a storm.
Vehicle has comprehensive coverage. Ins Co has not seen the vehicle yet,
but based on the age and damage, the owner assumes his Ins Co will say the
vehicle is totaled.

Are there any special strategies for dealing with the Ins Co? Obviously the
settlement won't be enough for a new vehicle, but can a higher settlement
be negotiated based on the previous good condition of vehicle? Anything
specific to say (or not to say) to the adjuster?

You get Blue Book value based on miles as far as I know. The price
range difference between "excellent condition" and "good condition"
is a couple hundred bucks for a 10 year old Chevy.
Look up the car on Kelley. I've had a couple cars totaled and never
talked to an adjuster, but the other driver's insurance paid.
The adjuster will see what condition the vehicle was in.
I bought back one of them from the insurance company for a hundred
bucks and fixed.
There is no "strategy" for an adjuster. They've seen them all.
Politeness is my strategy.

DerbyDad03 wrote:
Situation: 10 YO vehicle, 160k miles, excellent condition, inside and
out. Hood, windshield, fender, etc. is crushed by fallen tree during
a storm. Vehicle has comprehensive coverage. Ins Co has not seen the
vehicle yet, but based on the age and damage, the owner assumes his
Ins Co will say the vehicle is totaled.

Are there any special strategies for dealing with the Ins Co?
Obviously the settlement won't be enough for a new vehicle, but can a
higher settlement be negotiated based on the previous good condition
of vehicle? Anything specific to say (or not to say) to the adjuster?

I was successful in raising the payout a few hundred when my wife flipped
her car a few months ago - I was also successful in getting more when my
Sportster was totalled no question about totalling in either case by
showing the "improvements and modifications" warranted the extra money .
When the \76 FLH got hit , they wanted outside verification of value , but I
was also successful in getting close to what it was worth pre-crash .
The best strategy is to go prepared with documentation of your claims ,
like recent tire receipts , etc . Aftermarket additions too , if documented
..
--
Snag

On 6/18/2014 3:44 AM, DerbyDad03 wrote:
Situation: 10 YO vehicle, 160k miles, excellent condition, inside and out.
Hood, windshield, fender, etc. is crushed by fallen tree during a storm.
Vehicle has comprehensive coverage. Ins Co has not seen the vehicle yet,
but based on the age and damage, the owner assumes his Ins Co will say the
vehicle is totaled.

Are there any special strategies for dealing with the Ins Co? Obviously the
settlement won't be enough for a new vehicle, but can a higher settlement
be negotiated based on the previous good condition of vehicle? Anything
specific to say (or not to say) to the adjuster?

Bus ran over my motorcycle.
They tried to settle for blue book.
Showed them several local newspaper ads asking three times that.
They caved.

On Wed, 18 Jun 2014 10:44:50 +0000 (UTC), DerbyDad03
wrote:

Situation: 10 YO vehicle, 160k miles, excellent condition, inside and out.
Hood, windshield, fender, etc. is crushed by fallen tree during a storm.
Vehicle has comprehensive coverage. Ins Co has not seen the vehicle yet,
but based on the age and damage, the owner assumes his Ins Co will say the
vehicle is totaled.

Are there any special strategies for dealing with the Ins Co? Obviously the
settlement won't be enough for a new vehicle, but can a higher settlement
be negotiated based on the previous good condition of vehicle? Anything
specific to say (or not to say) to the adjuster?

If the car is totaled, owner would like to keep the car he can ask the
adjuster about buying it back. He would need to check state law and if
the ins. co. will give him a policy for a "salvage" vehicle.

_How is the buy back of your car, after it is totaled, determined?_

http://www.carinsurance.com/kb/content39152.aspx

just sayin'

DerbyDad03 wrote:
Situation: 10 YO vehicle, 160k miles, excellent condition, inside and
out. Hood, windshield, fender, etc. is crushed by fallen tree during
a storm. Vehicle has comprehensive coverage. Ins Co has not seen the
vehicle yet, but based on the age and damage, the owner assumes his
Ins Co will say the vehicle is totaled.

Are there any special strategies for dealing with the Ins Co?
Obviously the settlement won't be enough for a new vehicle, but can a
higher settlement be negotiated based on the previous good condition
of vehicle? Anything specific to say (or not to say) to the adjuster?

Add to what others said - if the insurance company refuses to budge, tell them
you will rent a car on their bill until you can come to an agreement.

On 6/18/2014 3:44 AM, DerbyDad03 wrote:
Situation: 10 YO vehicle, 160k miles, excellent condition, inside and out.
Hood, windshield, fender, etc. is crushed by fallen tree during a storm.
Vehicle has comprehensive coverage. Ins Co has not seen the vehicle yet,
but based on the age and damage, the owner assumes his Ins Co will say the
vehicle is totaled.

Are there any special strategies for dealing with the Ins Co? Obviously the
settlement won't be enough for a new vehicle, but can a higher settlement
be negotiated based on the previous good condition of vehicle? Anything
specific to say (or not to say) to the adjuster?

Buy back the vehicle for insurance salvage value, and part out.

Steve

On Wed, 18 Jun 2014 03:44:50 -0700, DerbyDad03
wrote:

Situation: 10 YO vehicle, 160k miles, excellent condition, inside and
out.
Hood, windshield, fender, etc. is crushed by fallen tree during a storm.
Vehicle has comprehensive coverage. Ins Co has not seen the vehicle yet,
but based on the age and damage, the owner assumes his Ins Co will say
the
vehicle is totaled.

Are there any special strategies for dealing with the Ins Co? Obviously
the
settlement won't be enough for a new vehicle, but can a higher settlement
be negotiated based on the previous good condition of vehicle? Anything
specific to say (or not to say) to the adjuster?

Somewhat similar. Tree was 'topped' and left. Trunk then rotted out, then
fell onto car flattening it! Trunk was 3 ft diameter or so. Very heavy.

Insurance company said here's your check. Awfully small. So went and did
some homework. I had a car, don't have a car, need a car. pay me more,
went back and forth, sat in their office for hours bothering them, until
received a better check,about twice what first check was.

Argument based upon 'replacement' value [must use words carefully] do NOT
use words 'loss', because loss value is NOTHING! Now, replacement value,
that costs some money. Keep repeating, I had a car, I don't have a car
now. Again, do not EVER say, loss, or I lost the car, because loss value
is based upon nothing.

"Not@home" wrote in news:L8idnUXhH7
:

If you are dealing with your own insurance company, you have a contract
and both you and the company must adhere to its terms. Usually that
means you get the current market value of the car.

Exactly so. And there is some room for negotiation. A few years ago, my son wrecked one of
our cars. Nobody hurt, thank goodness, but the car was totalled. Insurance company told us
how much they would pay. I looked up the Kelley Blue Book value, and saw that they were
somewhat under that. Called the adjuster, told him it appeared they hadn't accounted for the
value of the all-leather interior. Oops, we missed that, he says. I said it also had a full tank of
gas (true: my wife had just filled it up on her way home from work that afternoon.) Adjuster said
send us the receipt and we'll pay for that too. I did, they did -- final result was a check about
$500 more than they originally offered. Not bad for maybe half an hour of my time.

On 6/18/2014 1:50 PM, micky wrote:


3) Same car as above, but I wanted the trunk fixed. Badly bent,
woudln't come within 6" of shutting, much less latch. It would cost at
least 500 at at a body shop I'm sure. 27 years ago. I was using a
chain to keep it closed. Went to NYC for a visit, went to Brooklyn. A
couple guys stopped me and wanted to know if I wanted the car fixed.
Yes, I said, so they did it right then and there, as I expected, for 50
dollars maybe, in 15 minutes. Fit nice. They started to paint it,
as agreed, but it was stupid of me to want that, because they weren'
tgoing to run around to get exactly the right color and their color,
though close, looked worse than the scratched paint imo. So I told them
to forget that. Gypsy body men they're called. I don't think
Baltimore has them. But I'm sure Brooklyn still does. Prices have
gone up in 25 years of course. But I didnt' even dicker with these
guys and all they wanted was 50.

When I lived in Philly, there were some of those Gypsies around. It is
not where I've have my Lamborghini repaired, but for an older car that
has a couple of wrinkles, they do some decent work.

On Wed, 18 Jun 2014 08:21:09 -0700, "Bob F"
wrote:

DerbyDad03 wrote:
Situation: 10 YO vehicle, 160k miles, excellent condition, inside and
out. Hood, windshield, fender, etc. is crushed by fallen tree during
a storm. Vehicle has comprehensive coverage. Ins Co has not seen the
vehicle yet, but based on the age and damage, the owner assumes his
Ins Co will say the vehicle is totaled.

Are there any special strategies for dealing with the Ins Co?
Obviously the settlement won't be enough for a new vehicle, but can a
higher settlement be negotiated based on the previous good condition
of vehicle? Anything specific to say (or not to say) to the adjuster?

Add to what others said - if the insurance company refuses to budge, tell them
you will rent a car on their bill until you can come to an agreement.

Apparently your knowledge of "comprehensive coverage" is lacking.
Typically, comprehensive coverage does not include rental cars.
Therefore, your suggestion of renting a car wouldn't make even a
rookie adjuster flinch.

On 6/18/2014 6:44 AM, DerbyDad03 wrote:
Situation: 10 YO vehicle, 160k miles, excellent condition, inside and out.
Hood, windshield, fender, etc. is crushed by fallen tree during a storm.
Vehicle has comprehensive coverage. Ins Co has not seen the vehicle yet,
but based on the age and damage, the owner assumes his Ins Co will say the
vehicle is totaled.

Are there any special strategies for dealing with the Ins Co? Obviously the
settlement won't be enough for a new vehicle, but can a higher settlement
be negotiated based on the previous good condition of vehicle? Anything
specific to say (or not to say) to the adjuster?


I've gone through this a couple of times. It can be exasperating.
Squeezed a few extra bucks out of one as in the two weeks it too them to
evaluate it the book value had gone down.

Gordon Shumway wrote:
On Wed, 18 Jun 2014 08:21:09 -0700, "Bob F"
wrote:

DerbyDad03 wrote:
Situation: 10 YO vehicle, 160k miles, excellent condition, inside
and out. Hood, windshield, fender, etc. is crushed by fallen tree
during a storm. Vehicle has comprehensive coverage. Ins Co has not
seen the vehicle yet, but based on the age and damage, the owner
assumes his Ins Co will say the vehicle is totaled.

Are there any special strategies for dealing with the Ins Co?
Obviously the settlement won't be enough for a new vehicle, but can
a higher settlement be negotiated based on the previous good
condition of vehicle? Anything specific to say (or not to say) to
the adjuster?

Add to what others said - if the insurance company refuses to budge,
tell them you will rent a car on their bill until you can come to an
agreement.

Apparently your knowledge of "comprehensive coverage" is lacking.
Typically, comprehensive coverage does not include rental cars.
Therefore, your suggestion of renting a car wouldn't make even a
rookie adjuster flinch.

It was very effective when dealing with the insurance company of the guy that
hit my car. Sorry if I don't know the details of every kind of claim.

On Wed, 18 Jun 2014 15:34:20 -0400, Ed Pawlowski wrote:

On 6/18/2014 1:50 PM, micky wrote:


3) Same car as above, but I wanted the trunk fixed. Badly bent,
woudln't come within 6" of shutting, much less latch. It would cost at
least 500 at at a body shop I'm sure. 27 years ago. I was using a
chain to keep it closed. Went to NYC for a visit, went to Brooklyn. A
couple guys stopped me and wanted to know if I wanted the car fixed.
Yes, I said, so they did it right then and there, as I expected, for 50
dollars maybe, in 15 minutes. Fit nice. They started to paint it,
as agreed, but it was stupid of me to want that, because they weren'
tgoing to run around to get exactly the right color and their color,
though close, looked worse than the scratched paint imo. So I told them
to forget that. Gypsy body men they're called. I don't think
Baltimore has them. But I'm sure Brooklyn still does. Prices have
gone up in 25 years of course. But I didnt' even dicker with these
guys and all they wanted was 50.

When I lived in Philly, there were some of those Gypsies around. It is
not where I've have my Lamborghini repaired, but for an older car that
has a couple of wrinkles, they do some decent work.

Good to know. I had in mind finding these guys when I went to NY, but
some time I may have to go to Philly instead. Closer. (I"ll check if
they're still there first)

BTW, for others, they're not real Gypsies

BTW2. I hadn't put any extra holes in the car to use the chain, so they
didn't have to fix that.

On Wed, 18 Jun 2014 08:21:09 -0700, "Bob F"
wrote:

DerbyDad03 wrote:
Situation: 10 YO vehicle, 160k miles, excellent condition, inside and
out. Hood, windshield, fender, etc. is crushed by fallen tree during
a storm. Vehicle has comprehensive coverage. Ins Co has not seen the
vehicle yet, but based on the age and damage, the owner assumes his
Ins Co will say the vehicle is totaled.

Are there any special strategies for dealing with the Ins Co?
Obviously the settlement won't be enough for a new vehicle, but can a
higher settlement be negotiated based on the previous good condition
of vehicle? Anything specific to say (or not to say) to the adjuster?

Add to what others said - if the insurance company refuses to budge, tell them
you will rent a car on their bill until you can come to an agreement.

I have found providing price of 3 or more "local market" equivalent
vehicles for sale will cause an adjustment in price if warranted. If
there is no equivalent condition vehicle, show what is avaialable at
what price and demonstrate the difference in value (sometimes by
producing a newer vehicle , same condition but higher mileage, for
instance, ) Friend had his pristine 2004 Taurus written off and got
$1000 more than the first offer by producing a 2002 Taurus with the
same mileage for more than they were offering, for sale in the same
city. "out of market area" pricing (for instance E-Bay motors) doesn't
carry much weight

On Wed, 18 Jun 2014 13:50:31 -0400, micky
wrote:

On Wed, 18 Jun 2014 10:44:50 +0000 (UTC), DerbyDad03
wrote:

Situation: 10 YO vehicle, 160k miles, excellent condition, inside and out.
Hood, windshield, fender, etc. is crushed by fallen tree during a storm.
Vehicle has comprehensive coverage. Ins Co has not seen the vehicle yet,
but based on the age and damage, the owner assumes his Ins Co will say the
vehicle is totaled.

Are there any special strategies for dealing with the Ins Co? Obviously the
settlement won't be enough for a new vehicle, but can a higher settlement
be negotiated based on the previous good condition of vehicle? Anything
specific to say (or not to say) to the adjuster?

3 stories, each might be of some value.

40 years ago, guy borrows car, totals it. 1970. 1965 Pontiac Catalina
Convertible. State Farm insurance totals it, but I want to buy it back
and they tell me I have to pay them 25% of the amount they were going to
pay me, because they have a deal with a junk yard to pay 25% of the
retail price for any car they bring in. I don't believe that. Do you
guys? Plus all four fenders had dents. When I squawk he says
he'll have to tell the underwriter (another way of saying they'll cancel
me.) So we agree on 400 dollars (which iirc was 100 more than his
first offer) but he sends me a check for 300. (and the deductible was
50 dollars so it wasn't confusion about that.) I complain and he sends
the right amount, but now I have only one day before I'm supposed to
leave for Costa Rica and I need the money to travel with. (Bank made
an exception and cashed it for me immediately. I'd never wanted that
before and didn't know it was an exception.)


MOST insurance companies have a "salvage contract" where the insurance
company delivers ALL totalled vehicles to the wrecker in question for
either a fixed price or a percentage of payout - regardless of
condition. The salvage value may be straight scrap, as in a burnout,
or it may be 75% of market value, in the case of a car with all the
airbags blown and virtually no body or powertrain damage. The
insurance company cannot sell the vehicle back to you, but they CAN
settle for "cash in leiu of repairs" where you keep title to the car
and get slightly less than the "total" payout. The title gets branded
as "salvage"
In the case of both my mother-in-law's Mustang and my wife's Corolla
they were not branded because the total dabage was limitted to wiring
harness and minor interior items. After repairs and inspection by the
insurance company, both cars were returnrd to service, and were
insured by the same company.
In both cases we got the amount they offered to total the vehicle, and
retained ownership (after a bit of wrangling and arguement about the
value of the vehicle)
2) Next time hit-and-run while I'm parked. I no longer have
comprehensive but they pay when other driver can't be found. (Uninsured
motorist) Go into the GEICO estimating place, I guess they totalled me,
they notice that there is a power door lock switch on the drivers door,
and they pay me for it. Another 40 dollars I think. At least it
seemed like a lot of money for it then. . I had put it in myself from
two junkyard parts, and it only controlled the passenger door (Why do
you need power door lock for the door you're sitting right next to?)
It was a beautiful job, looked good as factory installed.

If they totalled me, how come there was no dickering about and no charge
for my keeping the car, which I did?. If they didn't total me, why did
they care about the power door lock when all the damage to the car was
at the trunk?

3) Same car as above, but I wanted the trunk fixed. Badly bent,
woudln't come within 6" of shutting, much less latch. It would cost at
least 500 at at a body shop I'm sure. 27 years ago. I was using a
chain to keep it closed. Went to NYC for a visit, went to Brooklyn. A
couple guys stopped me and wanted to know if I wanted the car fixed.
Yes, I said, so they did it right then and there, as I expected, for 50
dollars maybe, in 15 minutes. Fit nice. They started to paint it,
as agreed, but it was stupid of me to want that, because they weren'
tgoing to run around to get exactly the right color and their color,
though close, looked worse than the scratched paint imo. So I told them
to forget that. Gypsy body men they're called. I don't think
Baltimore has them. But I'm sure Brooklyn still does. Prices have
gone up in 25 years of course. But I didnt' even dicker with these
guys and all they wanted was 50. And that's 100 dollars an hour for
each of them. So it's a fair price. Believe you me, they had a lot of
experience of they couldn't have gotten it right at all.

On Wed, 18 Jun 2014 15:28:02 -0500, Gordon Shumway
wrote:

On Wed, 18 Jun 2014 08:21:09 -0700, "Bob F"
wrote:

DerbyDad03 wrote:
Situation: 10 YO vehicle, 160k miles, excellent condition, inside and
out. Hood, windshield, fender, etc. is crushed by fallen tree during
a storm. Vehicle has comprehensive coverage. Ins Co has not seen the
vehicle yet, but based on the age and damage, the owner assumes his
Ins Co will say the vehicle is totaled.

Are there any special strategies for dealing with the Ins Co?
Obviously the settlement won't be enough for a new vehicle, but can a
higher settlement be negotiated based on the previous good condition
of vehicle? Anything specific to say (or not to say) to the adjuster?

Add to what others said - if the insurance company refuses to budge, tell them
you will rent a car on their bill until you can come to an agreement.

Apparently your knowledge of "comprehensive coverage" is lacking.
Typically, comprehensive coverage does not include rental cars.
Therefore, your suggestion of renting a car wouldn't make even a
rookie adjuster flinch.
If you have "loss of use endorsement" they pay rental regardless of
cause of damge.

On Wed, 18 Jun 2014 14:57:05 -0700, "Bob F"
wrote:

Gordon Shumway wrote:
On Wed, 18 Jun 2014 08:21:09 -0700, "Bob F"
wrote:

DerbyDad03 wrote:
Situation: 10 YO vehicle, 160k miles, excellent condition, inside
and out. Hood, windshield, fender, etc. is crushed by fallen tree
during a storm. Vehicle has comprehensive coverage. Ins Co has not
seen the vehicle yet, but based on the age and damage, the owner
assumes his Ins Co will say the vehicle is totaled.

Are there any special strategies for dealing with the Ins Co?
Obviously the settlement won't be enough for a new vehicle, but can
a higher settlement be negotiated based on the previous good
condition of vehicle? Anything specific to say (or not to say) to
the adjuster?

Add to what others said - if the insurance company refuses to budge,
tell them you will rent a car on their bill until you can come to an
agreement.

Apparently your knowledge of "comprehensive coverage" is lacking.
Typically, comprehensive coverage does not include rental cars.
Therefore, your suggestion of renting a car wouldn't make even a
rookie adjuster flinch.

It was very effective when dealing with the insurance company of the guy that
hit my car. Sorry if I don't know the details of every kind of claim.


Someone hitting your car has NOTHING to do with "comprehensive"
insurance coverage.

On Wed, 18 Jun 2014 21:30:32 -0400, wrote:

On Wed, 18 Jun 2014 13:50:31 -0400, micky
wrote:

On Wed, 18 Jun 2014 10:44:50 +0000 (UTC), DerbyDad03
wrote:

Situation: 10 YO vehicle, 160k miles, excellent condition, inside and out.
Hood, windshield, fender, etc. is crushed by fallen tree during a storm.
Vehicle has comprehensive coverage. Ins Co has not seen the vehicle yet,
but based on the age and damage, the owner assumes his Ins Co will say the
vehicle is totaled.

Are there any special strategies for dealing with the Ins Co? Obviously the
settlement won't be enough for a new vehicle, but can a higher settlement
be negotiated based on the previous good condition of vehicle? Anything
specific to say (or not to say) to the adjuster?

3 stories, each might be of some value.

40 years ago, guy borrows car, totals it. 1970. 1965 Pontiac Catalina
Convertible. State Farm insurance totals it, but I want to buy it back
and they tell me I have to pay them 25% of the amount they were going to
pay me, because they have a deal with a junk yard to pay 25% of the
retail price for any car they bring in. I don't believe that. Do you
guys? Plus all four fenders had dents. When I squawk he says
he'll have to tell the underwriter (another way of saying they'll cancel
me.) So we agree on 400 dollars (which iirc was 100 more than his
first offer) but he sends me a check for 300. (and the deductible was
50 dollars so it wasn't confusion about that.) I complain and he sends
the right amount, but now I have only one day before I'm supposed to
leave for Costa Rica and I need the money to travel with. (Bank made
an exception and cashed it for me immediately. I'd never wanted that
before and didn't know it was an exception.)


MOST insurance companies have a "salvage contract" where the insurance
company delivers ALL totalled vehicles to the wrecker in question for
either a fixed price or a percentage of payout - regardless of
condition. The salvage value may be straight scrap, as in a burnout,
or it may be 75% of market value, in the case of a car with all the
airbags blown and virtually no body or powertrain damage.

Are you saying that a car like you just described can be worth to the
junk yard 75% of the maket value** BEFORE the accident? That's
amazing.

**(blue book price?)

The
insurance company cannot sell the vehicle back to you, but they CAN
settle for "cash in leiu of repairs" where you keep title to the car
and get slightly less than the "total" payout.

Yeah, slightly less. I thought that would be 10 or 15% less, not 25%
less, because they get 25% for any car they bring them. .

The title gets branded
as "salvage"

These days I'm sure. 40 years ago, I don't remember if I lived in a
title state (Indiana) but they didn't fiddle with my title or label
anything else "salvage". And that other car 20 years ago in Md. I
can't remember any details, not how much they paid me, or why the power
door lock mattered, unless they totalled it, but in that case I don't
remember asking for the car back, but if I did, they didn't deduct much
for my keeping the car. I remember where the GEICO office was -- I
always remember geographiic things, but it's amazing how I can't
remember anything else.


In the case of both my mother-in-law's Mustang and my wife's Corolla
they were not branded because the total dabage was limitted to wiring
harness and minor interior items. After repairs and inspection by the
insurance company, both cars were returnrd to service, and were
insured by the same company.
In both cases we got the amount they offered to total the vehicle, and
retained ownership (after a bit of wrangling and arguement about the
value of the vehicle)

So you're saying clearly that they didn't deduct anything when you kept
the car. I wish state farm had done that for me. Instead he
threatened me with the underwriter. Then I let the insurance lapse when
my car was stored and I was in Central America. When I got back I
called my mother, who called her agent (I was 23 when I left and we used
the same agent (in fact she handled everything) and 24 when I returned,
and he told her that he couldn't reinstate my insurance without my
signature.

So I was stuck in San Antonio with no insurance. I guess since GEICO
was a national company, I could have bought insurance from them but I'd
never heard of them and also, until recently it had only been for
Government Employees. And every agent I called told me Texas required
one to live in Texas. Out of the deep corners of my
mind, I remembered that my brother went to medical school, in Indiana, 7
years earlier, with a boy from San Antonio, and I remembered his name.
It must have been an unusal name. I looked him up in the phone book
and somehow called his parents on the first try. And I told them the
truth and asked if I could use their address to buy insurance, and the
man said fine. So I did, and 6 months later in NYC, I bought
insurance from GEICO when my brother suggested it.

I dont' know what I would have done if the father of his friend, who he
hadn't seeen or talked to since they graduated 7 years earlier, hadn't
said Okay.

And a couple years after that, the State Farm agent admitted to my
mother than he lied about needing my signature.

On Wed, 18 Jun 2014 10:44:50 +0000 (UTC), DerbyDad03
wrote:

Situation: 10 YO vehicle, 160k miles, excellent condition, inside and out.
Hood, windshield, fender, etc. is crushed by fallen tree during a storm.
Vehicle has comprehensive coverage. Ins Co has not seen the vehicle yet,
but based on the age and damage, the owner assumes his Ins Co will say the
vehicle is totaled.

Are there any special strategies for dealing with the Ins Co? Obviously the
settlement won't be enough for a new vehicle, but can a higher settlement
be negotiated based on the previous good condition of vehicle? Anything
specific to say (or not to say) to the adjuster?

I did not read all the other replies yet so some may have covered
this. This past April I was sitting at a traffic light and a lady
texting on her phone rear ended my 14yo PT Cruiser w/102K miles, never
in an accident and meticulously maintained. Her insurance company
would only total it because CT has a law that states the insurance
company only has to pay 75% of average fair market value. Although I
obtained several estimates for repair (all over $5K) the insurance
only offered me approx $3.6K. I was very unhappy. I contacted my own
insurance co for advice (useless) and our states insurance department
(also useless) so based on information I found searching the net I
made pdfs of all my maintenance records and auto parts purchases over
the past year and send them off to the ins adjuster. I also wanted to
purchase the car back as salvage.

After weeks of back and forth negotiation I settled on a total of
$4.9K and received their check shortly thereafter. This amount
already included my buy back of $250.

Next I found an independent repair shop that had good reviews from
friends and online and visited them for help. I told them my dilemma
and they agreed to incorporate used parts where they could to keep the
costs down. They repaired by back end and replaced the rear
suspension with one obtained from a junk yard where the donor car had
damaged its front. Bottom line, I've just had the car back a week
today and I couldn't be happier. My TOTAL cost was $3.4K so I had a
little funds left to purchase a Starbucks coffee.

Hope this helps. Good luck.

On Wednesday, June 18, 2014 9:05:42 PM UTC-4, wrote:
On Wed, 18 Jun 2014 08:21:09 -0700, "Bob F"

wrote:



DerbyDad03 wrote:

Situation: 10 YO vehicle, 160k miles, excellent condition, inside and

out. Hood, windshield, fender, etc. is crushed by fallen tree during

a storm. Vehicle has comprehensive coverage. Ins Co has not seen the

vehicle yet, but based on the age and damage, the owner assumes his

Ins Co will say the vehicle is totaled.



Are there any special strategies for dealing with the Ins Co?

Obviously the settlement won't be enough for a new vehicle, but can a

higher settlement be negotiated based on the previous good condition

of vehicle? Anything specific to say (or not to say) to the adjuster?



Add to what others said - if the insurance company refuses to budge, tell them

you will rent a car on their bill until you can come to an agreement.



I have found providing price of 3 or more "local market" equivalent

vehicles for sale will cause an adjustment in price if warranted. If

there is no equivalent condition vehicle, show what is avaialable at

what price and demonstrate the difference in value (sometimes by

producing a newer vehicle , same condition but higher mileage, for

instance, ) Friend had his pristine 2004 Taurus written off and got

$1000 more than the first offer by producing a 2002 Taurus with the

same mileage for more than they were offering, for sale in the same

city. "out of market area" pricing (for instance E-Bay motors) doesn't

carry much weight

To me, *completed transactions* on Ebay would carry
a lot more weight than ads that just show what buyers
are dreaming of getting. If you're using CL or newspaper
ads, they better be way above what the insurance company is
offering. If I was the adjuster and offered $5000 based
on Blue Book sources, ads showing people asking $6000 wouldn't
do much to impress me.

On Thursday, June 19, 2014 2:18:53 PM UTC-4, micky wrote:
MOST insurance companies have a "salvage contract" where the insurance

company delivers ALL totalled vehicles to the wrecker in question for

either a fixed price or a percentage of payout - regardless of

condition. The salvage value may be straight scrap, as in a burnout,

or it may be 75% of market value, in the case of a car with all the

airbags blown and virtually no body or powertrain damage.



Are you saying that a car like you just described can be worth to the

junk yard 75% of the maket value** BEFORE the accident? That's

amazing.



Never mind that. I want to know how cars wind up at the
junk yard with "all the air bags blown and virtually no body or
drivetrain damage". EMP from nuke sets off the airbags?

"mike" wrote in message
...
On 6/18/2014 3:44 AM, DerbyDad03 wrote:
Situation: 10 YO vehicle, 160k miles, excellent condition, inside and
out.
Hood, windshield, fender, etc. is crushed by fallen tree during a storm.
Vehicle has comprehensive coverage. Ins Co has not seen the vehicle yet,
but based on the age and damage, the owner assumes his Ins Co will say
the
vehicle is totaled.

Are there any special strategies for dealing with the Ins Co? Obviously
the
settlement won't be enough for a new vehicle, but can a higher settlement
be negotiated based on the previous good condition of vehicle? Anything
specific to say (or not to say) to the adjuster?

Bus ran over my motorcycle.
They tried to settle for blue book.
Showed them several local newspaper ads asking three times that.
They caved.

smart move, having your buddies place those ads!

On Thursday, June 19, 2014 10:07:16 PM UTC-4, BobMCT wrote:
On Wed, 18 Jun 2014 10:44:50 +0000 (UTC), DerbyDad03

wrote:



Situation: 10 YO vehicle, 160k miles, excellent condition, inside and out.

Hood, windshield, fender, etc. is crushed by fallen tree during a storm.

Vehicle has comprehensive coverage. Ins Co has not seen the vehicle yet,

but based on the age and damage, the owner assumes his Ins Co will say the

vehicle is totaled.



Are there any special strategies for dealing with the Ins Co? Obviously the

settlement won't be enough for a new vehicle, but can a higher settlement

be negotiated based on the previous good condition of vehicle? Anything

specific to say (or not to say) to the adjuster?



I did not read all the other replies yet so some may have covered

this. This past April I was sitting at a traffic light and a lady

texting on her phone rear ended my 14yo PT Cruiser w/102K miles, never

in an accident and meticulously maintained. Her insurance company

would only total it because CT has a law that states the insurance

company only has to pay 75% of average fair market value.

Must be great living in a state with laws like that.
Do they have one that says you only have to pay 75%
of the premium?

"trader_4" wrote in message news:7451a890-

This past April I was sitting at a traffic light and a lady
texting on her phone rear ended my 14yo PT Cruiser w/102K miles,
never in an accident and meticulously maintained. Her insurance
company would only total it because CT has a law that states the
insurance company only has to pay 75% of average fair market value.

Must be great living in a state with laws like that.
Do they have one that says you only have to pay 75%
of the premium?

People with "cherry" cars never get what they feel (and probably is) fair
market value and probably never will. As for the legal comment, it would be
useful to actually check the facts because what's stated is not really what
the law says about percentages, "totalling" a car and fair market value:

http://www.heltonlaw.com/Personal-In...amaged-1.shtml

WHEN IS A VEHICLE A TOTAL LOSS?
A motor vehicle is considered a total loss when the amount of repairs
(including supplemental claims such as projected rental during the period of
repair) equals or exceeds 75 percent of the pre-accident cash value which is
sometimes referred to as the vehicle's Fair Market Value (FMV). 11 NCAC §
4.0418 (5).

Generally speaking the liability insurance company is required to pay the
fair market value (F.M.V.) or pre-accident cash value of the vehicle right
before the collision occurred. In simple terms, the F.M.V. is the value a
seller, not forced to sell, and a buyer, would agree upon for the vehicle
immediately before the collision giving rise to the property damage claim.

Insurance adjusters generally have a book value they use to arrive at F.M.V.
They may have some "wiggle" room based on the condition of the vehicle, but
there is generally little room for negotiation. Book value is supposedly
F.M.V. and as such this gives both sides a little leeway to negotiate.

Many insurance companies use the National Automobile Dealers association
(NADA) publication entitled "Official Used Car Guide," which is published
monthly. Some liability insurance companies have their own methods to arrive
at valuations. Some insurance companies consider their system superior to
the NADA Book commonly used. Notwithstanding, no publication is completely
accurate and they should and are indeed only "guides." As such there is
usually some basis to negotiate in most cases.

Example: If the vehicle's pre-accident F.M.V. is $8,000 and the estimates
for the cost of repairs are less than $6,000 then the liability insurance
company is obligated to only pay for the cost of repairs. However, if the
estimated cost of repairs is $6,000 or more, then the liability insurance
company has to pay the pre-accident F.M.V. of $8,000 because the vehicle is
considered a Total Loss. Frequently, problems arise when claimants fail to
understand that the law does not require liability insurers to pay more than
the fair market value. If F.M.V. is $8,000 and the cost of repairs is $9,000
then you will only recover $8,000. In other words, you can't recover more
than the F.M.V. even when the cost of repairs exceeds the F.M.V.
Unfortunately, this is true even if the F.M.V. is less than what is still
owed on a vehicle.

You should always continue making car payments even if the car is totaled.
You are generally contractually obligated to continue making payments,
notwithstanding the condition of your vehicle. If you are behind on your
loan payments, this will only make the negotiation your total loss much more
difficult. In short, the bank or financing company will not care that your
car has been wrecked. They still insist on being paid.



--

Bobby G.

On Monday, June 23, 2014 6:29:37 AM UTC-4, Robert Green wrote:
"trader_4" wrote in message news:7451a890-



This past April I was sitting at a traffic light and a lady

texting on her phone rear ended my 14yo PT Cruiser w/102K miles,

never in an accident and meticulously maintained. Her insurance

company would only total it because CT has a law that states the

insurance company only has to pay 75% of average fair market value.



Must be great living in a state with laws like that.

Do they have one that says you only have to pay 75%

of the premium?



People with "cherry" cars never get what they feel (and probably is) fair

market value and probably never will. As for the legal comment, it would be

useful to actually check the facts because what's stated is not really what

the law says about percentages, "totalling" a car and fair market value:



http://www.heltonlaw.com/Personal-In...amaged-1.shtml




The poster is talking about a law in *CT*, where he lives and the law
you're citing is NC. But I think it maybe you figured out what he's
talking about. He said "The insurance company only has to pay 75% of
fair market value." Perhaps what he meant was the insurance company has
to total it if the cost of repairs are more than 75% of fair market value.
The latter is what you found for NC and it makes more sense. The way he
stated it, it looked to me like he was saying they totaled it because
they then only have to pay 75% of the value of the car.



WHEN IS A VEHICLE A TOTAL LOSS?

A motor vehicle is considered a total loss when the amount of repairs

(including supplemental claims such as projected rental during the period of

repair) equals or exceeds 75 percent of the pre-accident cash value which is

sometimes referred to as the vehicle's Fair Market Value (FMV). 11 NCAC �

4.0418 (5).



Generally speaking the liability insurance company is required to pay the

fair market value (F.M.V.) or pre-accident cash value of the vehicle right

before the collision occurred. In simple terms, the F.M.V. is the value a

seller, not forced to sell, and a buyer, would agree upon for the vehicle

immediately before the collision giving rise to the property damage claim..



Insurance adjusters generally have a book value they use to arrive at F.M..V.

They may have some "wiggle" room based on the condition of the vehicle, but

there is generally little room for negotiation. Book value is supposedly

F.M.V. and as such this gives both sides a little leeway to negotiate.



Many insurance companies use the National Automobile Dealers association

(NADA) publication entitled "Official Used Car Guide," which is published

monthly. Some liability insurance companies have their own methods to arrive

at valuations. Some insurance companies consider their system superior to

the NADA Book commonly used. Notwithstanding, no publication is completely

accurate and they should and are indeed only "guides." As such there is

usually some basis to negotiate in most cases.



Example: If the vehicle's pre-accident F.M.V. is $8,000 and the estimates

for the cost of repairs are less than $6,000 then the liability insurance

company is obligated to only pay for the cost of repairs. However, if the

estimated cost of repairs is $6,000 or more, then the liability insurance

company has to pay the pre-accident F.M.V. of $8,000 because the vehicle is

considered a Total Loss. Frequently, problems arise when claimants fail to

understand that the law does not require liability insurers to pay more than

the fair market value. If F.M.V. is $8,000 and the cost of repairs is $9,000

then you will only recover $8,000. In other words, you can't recover more

than the F.M.V. even when the cost of repairs exceeds the F.M.V.

Unfortunately, this is true even if the F.M.V. is less than what is still

owed on a vehicle.



You should always continue making car payments even if the car is totaled..

You are generally contractually obligated to continue making payments,

notwithstanding the condition of your vehicle. If you are behind on your

loan payments, this will only make the negotiation your total loss much more

difficult. In short, the bank or financing company will not care that your

car has been wrecked. They still insist on being paid.







--



Bobby G.

"trader_4" wrote in message
news:d32937b5-62e1-4a12-9ad3-

But I think it maybe you figured out what he's
talking about. He said "The insurance company only has to pay 75% of
fair market value." Perhaps what he meant was the insurance company has
to total it if the cost of repairs are more than 75% of fair market value.

Yep. He had the percentage right, but not how it's applied (pretty
uniformly across the US). I thought the explanation I posted was the most
informative even though it was not of the OP's state because I knew what the
general salvage principle was. I was surprised to see the Holton firm said
words to the effect, "we don't do auto accidents, but if we did, here's how
it would go." They seem to imply they'll do it for clients, and that's how
it works down here. I've gotten my lawyer to do things I know he would
rather not, but he does them because I pay him and often only need a letter
on a lawyer's letterhead to get something accomplished.

I've been bent over the salvage rules a few times because I run cars for a
long, long time and know the TRUE value of a primo well-cared for car you've
worked on all its life. It sure isn't what the Bluebook says. There really
needs to be a factor for "one owner" cars that can level out the sting of
being forced to total out and not repair such cars.

One thing I learned from the Holton site was that the 75% figure not only
includes repair but supplemental claims such as projected rental during the
period of repair. So on a $10K FMV car, you can get totaled even if repairs
are less than $7.5K. Good to know I guess. )-:

Sadly, there aren't many ways to come out ahead, if any. Many people
believe if the car is worth 10K then insurers should pay up to $10 to repair
or restore it. Not so. If repairs equal $7,500 then they can "total you"
and force you to take the $10K payout. Or nothing. It's in the 30 page
contract somewhere. I can see their business reasons for setting things up
that way. The likelihood of restoring a beloved one-owner, perfectly
maintained 10 year old vehicle to its pre-crash state is not very good and
they (smartly) like to cut their losses.

The ways out of the "I've been totaled but I still want my old car" dilemma
all come with associated costs and may not save any money in the long run.
You may be able to find an insurer that will cover the cost of repairs
should you insist on getting your old car back but I imagine the premiums
would be high enough to make it more sensible to self-insure. Sometimes you
can get "classic car" insurance if the vehicle is old enough and meets
certain other parameters, which often include limited mileage.

Some states regulate the auto insurance industry very tightly so I am not
sure how flexible insurers can be but I've found if you look around someone
will write a "rider" that covers you - usually for a respectable premium if
you're asking for something risky to be covered.

Ironically, I've just started to see ads where insurers are offering
"replace with new" coverage so I'd say the terms are flexible given enough
shopping and competition. This is one of those areas of the law where it's
not really a case of being "made whole" after an accident. In the OP's
case, if it was a drunk driver and not a tree that caused the damage, he
would be likely to have been "made wholer" by the other guy's insurance
because of the criminal liability.

The other ways have been discussed already, and buying the car back for
salvage is probably the best and most cost effective way of getting your car
back. In some states, retitling a salvaged car means paying some pretty
hefty fees and taxes if you're not a wholesaler.

I bought a car back for salvage once and discovered just how many things
break that you can't see in a 40mph front end to side of other car crash.
Nowadays I'd take the check and give a fallen soldier a hearty salute on the
way to the junkers. Or North Carolina, which has a remarkable cottage
industry of salvage recovery going on.

--
Bobby G.

On Tuesday, June 24, 2014 9:20:11 AM UTC-4, Robert Green wrote:
"trader_4" wrote in message

news:d32937b5-62e1-4a12-9ad3-



But I think it maybe you figured out what he's

talking about. He said "The insurance company only has to pay 75% of

fair market value." Perhaps what he meant was the insurance company has

to total it if the cost of repairs are more than 75% of fair market value.



Yep. He had the percentage right, but not how it's applied (pretty

uniformly across the US). I thought the explanation I posted was the most

informative even though it was not of the OP's state because I knew what the

general salvage principle was. I was surprised to see the Holton firm said

words to the effect, "we don't do auto accidents, but if we did, here's how

it would go." They seem to imply they'll do it for clients, and that's how

it works down here. I've gotten my lawyer to do things I know he would

rather not, but he does them because I pay him and often only need a letter

on a lawyer's letterhead to get something accomplished.



I've been bent over the salvage rules a few times because I run cars for a

long, long time and know the TRUE value of a primo well-cared for car you've

worked on all its life. It sure isn't what the Bluebook says. There really

needs to be a factor for "one owner" cars that can level out the sting of

being forced to total out and not repair such cars.



One thing I learned from the Holton site was that the 75% figure not only

includes repair but supplemental claims such as projected rental during the

period of repair. So on a $10K FMV car, you can get totaled even if repairs

are less than $7.5K. Good to know I guess. )-:



Sadly, there aren't many ways to come out ahead, if any. Many people

believe if the car is worth 10K then insurers should pay up to $10 to repair

or restore it. Not so. If repairs equal $7,500 then they can "total you"

and force you to take the $10K payout. Or nothing. It's in the 30 page

contract somewhere. I can see their business reasons for setting things up

that way. The likelihood of restoring a beloved one-owner, perfectly

maintained 10 year old vehicle to its pre-crash state is not very good and

they (smartly) like to cut their losses.



The ways out of the "I've been totaled but I still want my old car" dilemma

all come with associated costs and may not save any money in the long run.

You may be able to find an insurer that will cover the cost of repairs

should you insist on getting your old car back but I imagine the premiums

would be high enough to make it more sensible to self-insure. Sometimes you

can get "classic car" insurance if the vehicle is old enough and meets

certain other parameters, which often include limited mileage.



Some states regulate the auto insurance industry very tightly so I am not

sure how flexible insurers can be but I've found if you look around someone

will write a "rider" that covers you - usually for a respectable premium if

you're asking for something risky to be covered.



Ironically, I've just started to see ads where insurers are offering

"replace with new" coverage so I'd say the terms are flexible given enough

shopping and competition. This is one of those areas of the law where it's

not really a case of being "made whole" after an accident. In the OP's

case, if it was a drunk driver and not a tree that caused the damage, he

would be likely to have been "made wholer" by the other guy's insurance

because of the criminal liability.



The other ways have been discussed already, and buying the car back for

salvage is probably the best and most cost effective way of getting your car

back. In some states, retitling a salvaged car means paying some pretty

hefty fees and taxes if you're not a wholesaler.



I bought a car back for salvage once and discovered just how many things

break that you can't see in a 40mph front end to side of other car crash.

Nowadays I'd take the check and give a fallen soldier a hearty salute on the

way to the junkers. Or North Carolina, which has a remarkable cottage

industry of salvage recovery going on.



--

Bobby G.

One simple solution to that is to not insure a car for collision if
it's not worth it and you can absorb the loss. If the car already
has a blue book value less than 10K, is paid off, you're probably better off
saving a couple hundred bucks a year.

"Robert Green" wrote:
"trader_4" wrote in message
news:d32937b5-62e1-4a12-9ad3-

But I think it maybe you figured out what he's
talking about. He said "The insurance company only has to pay 75% of
fair market value." Perhaps what he meant was the insurance company has
to total it if the cost of repairs are more than 75% of fair market value.

Yep. He had the percentage right, but not how it's applied (pretty
uniformly across the US).

.... Snip ...

One thing I learned from the Holton site was that the 75% figure not only
includes repair but supplemental claims such as projected rental during the
period of repair. So on a $10K FMV car, you can get totaled even if repairs
are less than $7.5K. Good to know I guess. )-:

FWIW....That is my understanding of how it works in NYS.


Sadly, there aren't many ways to come out ahead, if any. Many people
believe if the car is worth 10K then insurers should pay up to $10 to repair
or restore it. Not so. If repairs equal $7,500 then they can "total you"
and force you to take the $10K payout. Or nothing.

As for the situation that started this thread, the update is this: Earlier
today the Ins Co deemed the car "salvage" and offered the owner $3300,
which is about $100 less than the owner estimated based on the research
he'd done. When he inquired about the value of aftermarket remote start
($250 installed) and the Class III hitch (also $250 installed) he was told
that they valued those items at $75 a piece. The owner gently pushed back
and asked if their was anything that could be done to increase the amount
that was offered. The adjuster told him that he (the adjuster), if asked by
the claimant, can escalate to matter to the "home office" where they have a
few more tools for determine the value. They can expand the search radius
for comparables, they can use something called a "split-book" valuation
method where they average values from sources like the KBB and NADA, etc.

My buddy asked the adjuster if the value could possibly go _down _ if they
applied these other tools and the adjuster said that he had never seen it
happen. He basically told my buddy that it can only help to escalate it, it
can't hurt. So, my buddy "officially" asked that the matter be escalated.
Within a few hours he got an email from someone at the Ins Co telling him
that the matter had been escalated to her desk for further investigation,
and that she should have an answer within 24 hours.

If nothing else, my buddy gets to keep the rental car for an extra day. :-)

The other ways have been discussed already, and buying the car back for
salvage is probably the best and most cost effective way of getting your car
back. In some states, retitling a salvaged car means paying some pretty
hefty fees and taxes if you're not a wholesaler.

In NYS, it is my understanding that if the vehicle is 8 years old or newer
it's a pretty arduous process to put it back on the road. It has to be
retitled as Salvage and it has to go through a rigorous inspection. The
goal is to ensure that anyone buying the car not only knows that the
vehicle has been wrecked, but also that it has been put back into somewhat
working order, e.g the frame isn't going to crack in half when you hit that
first pot hole.

For vehicles over 8 years old, it's apparently "buyer beware". No
retitling, no inspection other the standard NYS inspection.

I'll let you know the final number once my buddy hears back from the Ins
Co.

On Friday, June 20, 2014 8:50:27 AM UTC-5, trader_4 wrote:

I want to know how cars wind up at the

junk yard with "all the air bags blown and virtually no body or

drivetrain damage". EMP from nuke sets off the airbags?

HAH!

On Tue, 24 Jun 2014 16:12:16 -0700 (PDT), Nicholas Kriho
wrote:

On Friday, June 20, 2014 8:50:27 AM UTC-5, trader_4 wrote:

I want to know how cars wind up at the

junk yard with "all the air bags blown and virtually no body or

drivetrain damage". EMP from nuke sets off the airbags?

HAH!
Note - I said "virtually" no body damage. I've seen air bags deplyed
from hitting a parking curb - minor sub-frame damage. Replace the
sub-frame and all that's left is air bag damage. And the subframe
wasn't damaged enough to cause a safety issue or to affect setting
alignment. Also seen quite a few where only the bumper was damaged. No
sheet metal or structural damage, but blew out the windsheild,
destroyed the dash, damaged the headliner and other interior trim. Car
written off with less than 100,00km on the clock

"DerbyDad03" wrote in message "Robert Green"
wrote:
"trader_4" wrote in message

But I think it maybe you figured out what he's
talking about. He said "The insurance company only has to pay 75% of
fair market value." Perhaps what he meant was the insurance company
has
to total it if the cost of repairs are more than 75% of fair market
value.

Yep. He had the percentage right, but not how it's applied (pretty
uniformly across the US).

... Snip ...

One thing I learned from the Holton site was that the 75% figure not
only
includes repair but supplemental claims such as projected rental during
the
period of repair. So on a $10K FMV car, you can get totaled even if
repairs
are less than $7.5K. Good to know I guess. )-:

FWIW....That is my understanding of how it works in NYS.

I suspect it's that way in a lot of states. I've totaled cars in DC,
Virginia, Maryland AND NY and seem to recall that's how it went. The time I
ended up with the car for salvage was when I totaled a new Honda Prelude
with less than 17K miles on it, turning it into a Honda Accordian. The
insurer wanted to repair it, at first, but it suffered a 40mph impact into
the side of a car running a red light. The sunroof tracks were bent, the
rear fold down seat was creased in the middle, there was structural damage,
engine damage, the doors were no long square, etc. I had to get an
independent repair appraisal to FORCE them to total the car because I didn't
want to drive something that had to have so many repairs. Since the insurer
missed so many things it was a piece of cake to get a more realistic
estimate. They totaled the car and then immediately cancelled my policy.

Sadly, there aren't many ways to come out ahead, if any. Many people
believe if the car is worth 10K then insurers should pay up to $10 to
repair
or restore it. Not so. If repairs equal $7,500 then they can "total
you"
and force you to take the $10K payout. Or nothing.

As for the situation that started this thread, the update is this: Earlier
today the Ins Co deemed the car "salvage" and offered the owner $3300,
which is about $100 less than the owner estimated based on the research
he'd done. When he inquired about the value of aftermarket remote start
($250 installed) and the Class III hitch (also $250 installed) he was told
that they valued those items at $75 a piece. The owner gently pushed back
and asked if their was anything that could be done to increase the amount
that was offered. The adjuster told him that he (the adjuster), if asked
by
the claimant, can escalate to matter to the "home office" where they have
a
few more tools for determine the value. They can expand the search radius
for comparables, they can use something called a "split-book" valuation
method where they average values from sources like the KBB and NADA, etc.

My buddy asked the adjuster if the value could possibly go _down _ if they
applied these other tools and the adjuster said that he had never seen it
happen. He basically told my buddy that it can only help to escalate it,
it
can't hurt. So, my buddy "officially" asked that the matter be escalated.
Within a few hours he got an email from someone at the Ins Co telling him
that the matter had been escalated to her desk for further investigation,
and that she should have an answer within 24 hours.

If nothing else, my buddy gets to keep the rental car for an extra day.
:-)

I would put that under what I said earlier: "Never accept their first
offer." They'll always make at least *one* better one if you squawk. But
don't push them too hard because they can become intractable. I had to
threaten to take one insurer to court because they were taking so long to
make a final payment. They paid when they got the papers (to not do so
risked treble damages in that state) and then, you guessed it, they canceled
my policy.

The other ways have been discussed already, and buying the car back for
salvage is probably the best and most cost effective way of getting your
car
back. In some states, retitling a salvaged car means paying some pretty
hefty fees and taxes if you're not a wholesaler.

In NYS, it is my understanding that if the vehicle is 8 years old or newer
it's a pretty arduous process to put it back on the road. It has to be
retitled as Salvage and it has to go through a rigorous inspection. The
goal is to ensure that anyone buying the car not only knows that the
vehicle has been wrecked, but also that it has been put back into somewhat
working order, e.g the frame isn't going to crack in half when you hit
that
first pot hole.

That was my undestanding too, but I also believe it varies from state to
state. I would expect NYS to have fairly strong consumer protection laws in
place. There were a couple of incidents that I believe caused those laws to
come about, and I believe it was Hurricane Andrew where the retitling of
water-damaged cars reached epidemic proportions. I wonder how much of a
problem it is nowadays with services like CarFax?

For vehicles over 8 years old, it's apparently "buyer beware". No
retitling, no inspection other the standard NYS inspection.

The law is pretty unsympathetic in most/many cases with people who buy old
cars and expect perfection. Based on the number of such cases that find
their way to TV "judge" shows it seems to be a pretty common expectation
among buyers. "His ad says: '15 year old Ford, runs great' and after two
months and a trip to Mexico, the transmission died so I want all my money
back and reimbursment for the money I spent on another car to replace
it!!!!"

I'll let you know the final number once my buddy hears back from the Ins
Co.

Thanks. While not home repair per se, it's a subject people who maintain
their older car meticulously need to know about.

Another interesting question is how you force them to paint an entire door
after a small accident rather than "blending" which, on a clear coated car
like a Honda, never looks good, even right after being repaired and looks
terrible after weathering for a few months.

--
Bobby G.

"DerbyDad03" wrote...

.... Major Snippage Occurred ...


As for the situation that started this thread, the update is this: Earlier
today the Ins Co deemed the car "salvage" and offered the owner $3300,
which is about $100 less than the owner estimated based on the research
he'd done. When he inquired about the value of aftermarket remote start
($250 installed) and the Class III hitch (also $250 installed) he was told
that they valued those items at $75 a piece. The owner gently pushed back
and asked if their was anything that could be done to increase the amount
that was offered. The adjuster told him that he (the adjuster), if asked
by
the claimant, can escalate to matter to the "home office" where they have
a
few more tools for determine the value. They can expand the search radius
for comparables, they can use something called a "split-book" valuation
method where they average values from sources like the KBB and NADA, etc.

My buddy asked the adjuster if the value could possibly go _down _ if they
applied these other tools and the adjuster said that he had never seen it
happen. He basically told my buddy that it can only help to escalate it,
it
can't hurt. So, my buddy "officially" asked that the matter be escalated.
Within a few hours he got an email from someone at the Ins Co telling him
that the matter had been escalated to her desk for further investigation,
and that she should have an answer within 24 hours.

If nothing else, my buddy gets to keep the rental car for an extra day.
:-)

I'll let you know the final number once my buddy hears back from the Ins
Co.


My buddy settled with the Ins Co today. After he pushed back on the $3300
offer, they came back with $5200, which he accepted. He and I had both done
some book value searches on the web and $5200 is at the highest end of a
private party transaction if the vehicle was in excellent condition. It was
in great shape, but excellent would be a stretch.

Anyway, $1900 for maybe 15 minutes worth of phone conversations with the
Tier 2 adjuster is a pretty decent hourly rate. :-)

Oh, and they are letting him keep the rental until Monday so he can look
for a replacement vehicle this weekend.

"DerbyDad03" wrote in message

Anyway, $1900 for maybe 15 minutes worth of phone conversations with the
Tier 2 adjuster is a pretty decent hourly rate. :-)

Well done, sir. A definite reminder to never take the first offer.

--
Bobby G.

On Thu, 26 Jun 2014 16:08:26 -0700, DerbyDad03
wrote:

....snip....
My buddy settled with the Ins Co today. After he pushed back on the $3300
offer, they came back with $5200, which he accepted. He and I had both
done
some book value searches on the web and $5200 is at the highest end of a
private party transaction if the vehicle was in excellent condition. It
was
in great shape, but excellent would be a stretch.

Anyway, $1900 for maybe 15 minutes worth of phone conversations with the
Tier 2 adjuster is a pretty decent hourly rate. :-)

Oh, and they are letting him keep the rental until Monday so he can look
for a replacement vehicle this weekend.

THANKS for the update.

What company? sounds like they may have just purchased 'priceless'
good-will here.

RobertMacy wrote:
On Thu, 26 Jun 2014 16:08:26 -0700, DerbyDad03 wrote:

....snip....
My buddy settled with the Ins Co today. After he pushed back on the $3300
offer, they came back with $5200, which he accepted. He and I had both done
some book value searches on the web and $5200 is at the highest end of a
private party transaction if the vehicle was in excellent condition. It was
in great shape, but excellent would be a stretch.

Anyway, $1900 for maybe 15 minutes worth of phone conversations with the
Tier 2 adjuster is a pretty decent hourly rate. :-)

Oh, and they are letting him keep the rental until Monday so he can look
for a replacement vehicle this weekend.

THANKS for the update.

What company? sounds like they may have just purchased 'priceless' good-will here.

I believe it was Travelers.