fishbone Posted July 24, 2009 Share Posted July 24, 2009 My wife's car was hit and the other driver was at fault. I called my insurance company and told them I was having the car flat bedded to a shop I know and trust. For a Subie to have it flatbedded is perfectly reasonable and the ONLY way to do it. However, I'd get claims for Hyundais with a broken headlamp or cracked bumper flatbedded 80 miles out of the way 'cause that's where the owner chose to fix their precious Hyundai. Needless to say I'd only pay for what was reasonable, which was a regular tow to a good shop in the area. They'd have to foot the rest of the bill. Sorry, but I'm not going to pay lodging at the Ritz for you too so you can stay nearby the shop 5 days while it's being repaired. Some people can't wait for the opportunity to try and screw someone over but they only end up screwing themselves. I can understand the reasons why folks out there are disgruntled at insurance companies, heck, I have my reasons as well. But when you work on the other end, you get to see the other side of the coin as well. "How can I yield to somebody I didn't see" Or "He was speeding" Oh, so you pulled in front of a speeding vehicle. Makes perfect sense. "He was not supposed to be there. Why should I have to look" It could have been a kid, an emergency response vehicle, etc etc. The list of idiocy goes on Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DiscoPete Posted July 24, 2009 Share Posted July 24, 2009 ......., all the other guy's fault. Each time my insurance paid out, and subrogated the claim. I got my deductibles back and my rates have never gone up. That's how it worked for me when my Impreza got rear-ended. When the body shop discovered additional damage, they submited the additional expense to my insurance company. No hassles at all. My car was fixed with an OEM trunk lid and rear spoiler that were obtained from a wrecking yard. Used OEM body panels might be one way to get OEM if the insurance won't otherwise pay for it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fishbone Posted July 24, 2009 Share Posted July 24, 2009 Finding additional damage is a fairly common thing. When you write up the estimate, you do so for the obvious parts, but when you tear down the car you'll often run into additional, non-obvious damage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IanB Posted July 24, 2009 Share Posted July 24, 2009 Most insurance will only pay for OEM parts if the vehicle is 2 years old or newer, around here anyways (Canada). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cfaber Posted July 24, 2009 Author Share Posted July 24, 2009 Thanks for all the great information here. The responses thus far have been very helpful in dealing with this for me. I hope this thread helps others as well in navigating the tricky world of insurance adjusters and companies. As I stated before the best solution I've seen so far, which for me in Colorado has worked was to just use a body shop recommended by the at fault's insurance company, then work with the body shop to `fudge' the numbers toward the OEM parts price. Winning the internet Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IanB Posted July 24, 2009 Share Posted July 24, 2009 Thanks for all the great information here. The responses thus far have been very helpful in dealing with this for me. I hope this thread helps others as well in navigating the tricky world of insurance adjusters and companies. As I stated before the best solution I've seen so far, which for me in Colorado has worked was to just use a body shop recommended by the at fault's insurance company, then work with the body shop to `fudge' the numbers toward the OEM parts price. If you source used OEM you may be able to get it done under the price of new aftermarket, but it will involve some footwork on your part, and a bodyshop that is willing to work with you. Start calling wreckers! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bluesuby Posted July 24, 2009 Share Posted July 24, 2009 For a Subie to have it flatbedded is perfectly reasonable and the ONLY way to do it. However, I'd get claims for Hyundais with a broken headlamp or cracked bumper flatbedded 80 miles out of the way 'cause that's where the owner chose to fix their precious Hyundai. Needless to say I'd only pay for what was reasonable, which was a regular tow to a good shop in the area. They'd have to foot the rest of the bill. Sorry, but I'm not going to pay lodging at the Ritz for you too so you can stay nearby the shop 5 days while it's being repaired. Some people can't wait for the opportunity to try and screw someone over but they only end up screwing themselves. I can understand the reasons why folks out there are disgruntled at insurance companies, heck, I have my reasons as well. But when you work on the other end, you get to see the other side of the coin as well. "How can I yield to somebody I didn't see" Or "He was speeding" Oh, so you pulled in front of a speeding vehicle. Makes perfect sense. "He was not supposed to be there. Why should I have to look" It could have been a kid, an emergency response vehicle, etc etc. The list of idiocy goes on I can understand you not authorizing an 80 mile flatbed for a Hyundai or a car beat to hell, but if we are talking a car in great condition prior to being hit, I believe it's incumbent upon the guilty party to restore it to its prior condition. On the other hand, I could see if the damage were my fault there would be a disagreement. But then again, the insurance companies don't argue about collecting the premiums, do they? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DarkLegacy Posted July 24, 2009 Share Posted July 24, 2009 I am a claims adjuster in NY... I am also am a NYS auto damage appraiser... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DarkLegacy Posted July 24, 2009 Share Posted July 24, 2009 Ask me anything! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fishbone Posted July 24, 2009 Share Posted July 24, 2009 I can understand you not authorizing an 80 mile flatbed for a Hyundai or a car beat to hell, but if we are talking a car in great condition prior to being hit, I believe it's incumbent upon the guilty party to restore it to its prior condition. Right, however, what I was trying to say was that there are reasonable and unreasonable expenses. On the lines of haulin' the car 80 miles away, for no good reason, on a flatbed again for no good reason, said person could also demand rental fees for an Eskalaid ... Some people think they are entitled to above and beyond VIP treatment. I don't care you drive a Benz and think you're better than everybody else. Find a reputable tow company and tow it. Don't throw it on an enclosed flatbed with air conditioned and humidity controlled interior, God forbid your leather interior would dry up ... Obviously there is gray area in that regard, I hope you get the general idea though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DarkLegacy Posted July 24, 2009 Share Posted July 24, 2009 Fishbone is correct. I would pay for the 80 mile tow if it was reasonable... Such as the ins is on vacation, the accident occurred in NY and they live in Jersey... Work in Jersey ect. I would tow the car from NY to NJ.... I would not pay for the tow if they lived in NY, had the accident in NY, but their buddies body shop is in Jersey... That's not reasonable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nm Posted July 25, 2009 Share Posted July 25, 2009 "How can I yield to somebody I didn't see" Or "He was speeding" Oh, so you pulled in front of a speeding vehicle. Makes perfect sense. "He was not supposed to be there. Why should I have to look" It could have been a kid, an emergency response vehicle, etc etc. The list of idiocy goes on Whats fun is that in MN, a speeding car gives up the right of way, so there this would be a defense, FYI. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scruit Posted July 27, 2009 Share Posted July 27, 2009 Ask me anything! What are the most hotly contested types of accident? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scruit Posted July 27, 2009 Share Posted July 27, 2009 Ask me anything! Have you dealt with any accidents where one of the vehicles was equipped with a dashcam? How does that affect the process? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scruit Posted July 27, 2009 Share Posted July 27, 2009 Ask me anything! In a situation where most drivers on the road break a specific law (ie where the majority of cars coming through a given intersection line up on the right shoulder prior the beginning of a right-turn lane) how do you reconcile "common usage" versus driving laws? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scruit Posted July 27, 2009 Share Posted July 27, 2009 Ask me anything! Given your experience at resolving contested accidents... If you were to install a 4-camera dashcam in your car, where would you point the cameras? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Scruit Posted July 27, 2009 Share Posted July 27, 2009 Ask me anything! What are the most common misconceptions that common people have about "Deciding factors" in accidents? (Examples: I pulled out in front of him because he was signalling right - therefore it's his fault, right?? I turned left in front of him, but he was speeding so his automatically loses all ROW, right??) What factors DO matter? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cfaber Posted July 27, 2009 Author Share Posted July 27, 2009 I think these camera questions are rather interesting. Though I suspect most of these are questions which will be answered in court if the cops arrive Winning the internet Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nm Posted July 27, 2009 Share Posted July 27, 2009 What are the most common misconceptions that common people have about "Deciding factors" in accidents? (Examples: I pulled out in front of him because he was signalling right - therefore it's his fault, right?? I turned left in front of him, but he was speeding so his automatically loses all ROW, right??) What factors DO matter? I can answer this in criminal law. The common misconception is that the other guy is at fault. Actually, the most common misconception I've seen that because the other guy failed to provide a presumed right of way, they have not liability. You were still speeding bub, and we can get you for that (and as i discussed above, you may actually be at fault civily). People think that only one side can get a ticket. I'd note one thing, he said she said tickets (no witnesses) nearly always get caught. In Minneapolis/St. paul, we had intersection cameras that limited this. So yes, it would help you criminally. It will also help you in a tort action. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fishbone Posted July 27, 2009 Share Posted July 27, 2009 Have you dealt with any accidents where one of the vehicles was equipped with a dashcam? How does that affect the process? I can answer this as well. Any type of video helps a LOT. There have been claims where the liability decision (majority of fault) was completely reversed once we got our hands on video surveilance, be it from the security cameras in the parking lot, public bus, etc. ANY video helps strengthen your case and eliminates the word vs words situations where you have no witnesses. As to where to point those 4 cameras, I would say just try to cover as much ground as you can. Front, sides, rear. Some people may dismiss the rear camera saying "if you get rear-ended, the majority of the time is the guy's fault for not maintaining proper distance and failing to pay attention". But there may be a time for example in a parking lot where it becomes word vs word on who backed into who. You could be completely stationary and some guy could back into you but then go around and say YOU backed into HIM or at the least that you were both backing out, he saw you and honked but you didn't stop, etc. People are weasles. Unless the point of impact makes it obvious who did what, if it is word vs word there will be NOTHING to go by and it will end up with split liability. And that sucks. The reality is most parking lot accidents like this are a tough, tough call and they rarely end up in a way that either satisfies one or both parties or does justice to what actually happened. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fishbone Posted July 27, 2009 Share Posted July 27, 2009 What are the most hotly contested types of accident? I can't recall a certain type being most hotly contested, but I can tell you the ones that sucked the most and got people hot were parking lot accidents where we had no witnesses, no cameras to go by. Word vs word with no other evidence to go by absolutely sucks. Another were total loss settlements, although I didn't dabble in that a whole lot. Some people are absolutely unrealistic about what their car is truly worth. That, and we hated it as soon as somebody brought up KBB value. To give you a perfect example, my wife is selling her car. KBB rates it a full $1200 OVER the amount it actually sells for in our market area. For a car under 10 grand, that's quite a big margin. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fishbone Posted July 27, 2009 Share Posted July 27, 2009 In a situation where most drivers on the road break a specific law (ie where the majority of cars coming through a given intersection line up on the right shoulder prior the beginning of a right-turn lane) how do you reconcile "common usage" versus driving laws? There is no blanket answer to this. It all depends on the specific, one accident, what the guy did, how the accident happened, etc. You still have to obey the law and you still have a duty to avoid an accident. Even if you are driving perfectly legal, in your lane, and another guy does something he is not supposed to in front of you, if you saw him and took no evasive action, you get nailed for it. Driving legal doesn't give anyone and entitled right to plow into anybody else. I see a LOT of people on Nebraska roads that drive with a sense of entitlement; people turn in front of them and they come within feet of nailing each other but nobody takes evasive action. "Hey, if I hit him, it will be his fault, he turned in front of me" Think again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fishbone Posted July 27, 2009 Share Posted July 27, 2009 Whats fun is that in MN, a speeding car gives up the right of way, so there this would be a defense, FYI. Is that new? I was in MN while I was doing this and I never recall this argument working. If a guy had a stop sign and incoming traffic vehicle did not have a stop, if said guy did not stop and went and the other guy nailed him, even if the other guy was speeding, that doesn't mean you're off the hook from failure to stop and yield. You're the majority at fault. 'The other guy was speeding" Yes. And the cops will dutifully handle that ticket. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DarkLegacy Posted July 27, 2009 Share Posted July 27, 2009 Most contested would definitely be intersection accident and lane change accidents. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DarkLegacy Posted July 27, 2009 Share Posted July 27, 2009 Dash cam can help or hurt you... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.