Question about "dimunition of value"? - LONG!!

[DNBois]

I know if anyone can help with this dilemma it is the DISers. To try and make a long story short, on 11/12, an individual plowed into the back of my husband's car (which was parked in our driveway) which then in turn hit the rear of my car. To make matters worse the front end of the SUV somehow hooked onto the rear bumper of DH's car and dragged it down about two houses where it crashed into a fire hydrant. This is not to mention the fact that he also went through our yard and plowed over our mailbox as well as our next door neighbors mailbox in addition to going through a few neighbors yards.
Even the police were baffled when they showed up at a little past midnight to investigate the damage. They followed the tire tracks to the end of our street where there is a condo community and found the white Ford Explorer with some damage and our bank statement on the hood (lucky we didn't pick up the mail.) The driver was smart and didn't answer the door because even though the weather wasn't great that particular night, we all assumed that he was intoxicated to say the least.
My car didn't have much damage - I already had it fixed in about 8 days or so but DH still has the rental car and his vehicle (Honda Civic) had almost $6000 worth of damage. Ironically, DH has three more payments until car is paid off and the retail value on his vehicle is a little over $9,000.00. Once the car is paid of, we had decided to trade in for a new vehicle but we are certain since GEICO is having the body shop use recycled parts, we will most definitely be offered least $1000 - $1500 less because of this accident. We called GEICO who basically said that we were lucky our car was getting fixed and we did mention that we were speaking to an atty. (our brother-in-law) who stated that we were due this 'dimunition of value.' Without getting our in-law involved, is there anyway that we can sue GEICO for this loss of value to the car? Any advice is much appreciated!!!

 

[DNBois]

Does anyone have any advice or recommendations? Am I being too picky to want to get full value for our car? I just don't think that it is right for someone to destroy valuable property, have it repaired with recycled parts which in turns lower its resale value and then wash their hands clean of the whole problem? Anyone? Thanks.

 

[rubyslipperlover]

Go read your insurance policy with Geico. You need to know exactly what it says before you can complain about what they are/are not paying.

However, standard auto policies tend to be written in a way that compensates you for the damage to the auto only. The insuring agreement tends to promise the insured that the insurer will pay for property damage to the vehicle, not esoteric "diminution in value". In other words, the insurer's obligation is to pay for repairs to the vehicle, to restore it to the way it was prior to the accident. If the vehicle is so badly damages that it's "totalled" the insurer's obigation is to pay you the value fo the vehicle immediately prior tothe accident.

And when you settle with Gieco you will probably have to sign a release of some sort which indicates that the value of the damage to the vehicle is whatever they paid, and that you assign your rights against the other driver to Geico, so I don't think you have any recourse against the other driver.

 

[DNBois]

The insured driver who caused the damage has the GEICO insurance; we have not gone through our insurance since the driver admitted 100% fault. I know that they are only required to pay for the damages to the car but I just don't think that it is fair that we lose out on at least $1000 worth of value for an accident that wasn't our fault.
We have not signed anything but rather have decided that we would sign over the checks that we recieved from GEICO (check specifies this for damages) directly to the auto body shop. I did find out that we have 2 years from the date of the accident to sue for this "dimunition of value" and in that time I am determined to get proof that the recycled parts they used have caused the value of this vehicle to deteriorate. Can you tell I am stubborn? Thanks - any other advice?

 

[rubyslipperlover]

the other driver's coverage was with GEICO. If you take the money from GEICO you are almost definitely precluded from suing the driver because GEICO will undoubtedly insist you sign a release in favor of the driver.

if GEICO had not stepped up to the plate and made arrangements to fix your car, you would either have had to submit the claim to your own insurer (and would not have recovered diminution in value) or you would have had to sue the driver, and GEICO would have defended the lawsuit on behalf of its insured.

if you had sued the driver, you cold either establish damages by showing the cost to repair the vehicle and restore it to pre-accident condition, or you could show the diminution in value. the driver's attorney would argue very strongly that to award both the cost of repairs and the diminution in value is a "double recovery".

another question - how are you going to establish "diminution in value"? what evidence can you present? did you actually put the car on the market before the accident? did you get an offer? if not, you've got a very difficult case to prove. the court won't award damages on your say so.

 

[DMickey28]

What New England state are you in? What year is the Civic? I worked as an adjuster in RI.. In most states the law dictates what parts are needed and can be used to repair your vehicle. Is the shop you took the car to a Geico approved shop? Have you used the shop before? Do you know for a fact that you will be offered this $1k less for the car when you trade it in? Where is that number coming from?

The insurance companies job is to restore your car to the condition it was in before the accident, provided it's not totaled. Depending on the age of the vehilce, the parts that are most likey going to be used for repairs are parts from the same car that perhaps had front end damage. These parts are found in salvage yards by the shop or the claims adjuster who wrote the repair estimate. That results are that the replaced parts are identical to the orginal, just off a different car. In the rare cases those can not be found, the age and miles on the car decides if the parts are going to be new "generic" parts or Honda parts. Certain safety equipement must be new no matter the age of the vehicle.

Geico is a huge company. They do right by you, the state and their insured. More often then not it's the body shop you need to worry about in the repairs of the vehicle not restoring it to the condition before the accident, rather than Geico. I don't believe you will get anywhere with suing the insurance company because you car would be restored to the condition it was before the accident.

 

[rubyslipperlover]

in some states -- I think NY is one of them -- the insurer cannot force you to use a specific repair shop. however, if you use one on the insurer's approved list, you probably won't have any problem with the insurer paying the bill.

 

[phillybeth]

Once the car is paid of, we had decided to trade in for a new vehicle but we are certain since GEICO is having the body shop use recycled parts, we will most definitely be offered least $1000 - $1500 less because of this accident.

How do you know this? Why would you even tell when you go to trade in the car that it was in an accident and 'recycled' parts were used? If you don't tell, how will they know?
Just because the retail value is $9000 does not mean that is your trade-in value.

 

[ahutton]

I don't know what state you are in, but in most states I've handled claims for in order to recover for diminished value you must PROVE you sustained a loss. That means if you trade in the vehicle and they offer you less, saying it is because of the repaired collision damage, you need them to put that in writing. Then you can submit that, along with a letter making a settlement demand to GEICO. FYI - you don't often actually see a settlement release with a Property Damage claim, unless the vehicle is a total loss.

 

[Sleepy]

Geico is a huge company. They do right by you, the state and their insured. More often then not it's the body shop you need to worry about in the repairs of the vehicle not restoring it to the condition before the accident, rather than Geico. I don't believe you will get anywhere with suing the insurance company because you car would be restored to the condition it was before the accident.

Well, GEICO did not do right by me! One of their clients ran a stop sign (had come from a party) and hit my car. He did not want to call the police so I agreed that if we called GEICO and he admitted 100% at fault, I would let the police slide (stupid on my part...he was probably intoxicated, but was not obviously impaired.....many people ran this stop sign all the time). Anyway, GEICO told me right there, that they would fix the damages to my car and to take it to an adjuster....even gave me an appt. NO PROBLEM. The next day GEICO called me and said the guy changed his story and said the stop sign was not a legal stop sign and they would not be fixing my car. They put me off for almost 3 months with their *investigation* and in the process, I had my insurance company take them to court. Took 6 months, but I won. The repairs to my car was far greater than the $1,500 they said it would cost. More like $3,500. I might be a woman, but I do know a bit about cars and even questioned the GEICO adjuster. That's ok, Allstate took care of me and in return GEICO not only lost their case, but also lost the potential of ever getting me as a client in the future.

 

[phillybeth]

Well, GEICO did not do right by me! One of their clients ran a stop sign (had come from a party) and hit my car. He did not want to call the police so I agreed that if we called GEICO and he admitted 100% at fault, I would let the police slide (stupid on my part...he was probably intoxicated, but was not obviously impaired.....many people ran this stop sign all the time). Anyway, GEICO told me right there, that they would fix the damages to my car and to take it to an adjuster....even gave me an appt. NO PROBLEM. The next day GEICO called me and said the guy changed his story and said the stop sign was not a legal stop sign and they would not be fixing my car. They put me off for almost 3 months with their *investigation* and in the process, I had my insurance company take them to court. Took 6 months, but I won. The repairs to my car was far greater than the $1,500 they said it would cost. More like $3,500. I might be a woman, but I do know a bit about cars and even questioned the GEICO adjuster. That's ok, Allstate took care of me and in return GEICO not only lost their case, but also lost the potential of ever getting me as a client in the future.

From what I can see none of this was GEICO's fault. They were representing THEIR client, not you. Any time anything happens, first call is to the police, second call is to your insurance. Let the two insurance companies fight it out.

 

[Sleepy]

From what I can see none of this was GEICO's fault. They were representing THEIR client, not you. Any time anything happens, first call is to the police, second call is to your insurance. Let the two insurance companies fight it out.

I'm sorry, but I don't see how you can say none of what I went through was GEICOs fault. I have had an at fault accident in the past and my insurance company was very quick about fixing the other persons car (and yes, no police were called on that one either). My insurance company did not try to create some stupid excuse as to the reason I was not at fault.....as was the case with GEICO. They were only looking out for themselves....not their client. He already admitted fault and GEICO had already told me they would fix my car. GEICO should have done the right thing and fixed my car without having to embarrass themselves in court by saying not all stop signs are legal . That's really grasping.

 

[rubyslipperlover]

the problem I have with you assigning fault to GEICO for your problem -- GEICO's contract was with the other driver, they had to "back him up". if he recanted and said he was not at fault, they have to go with that.

 

[phillybeth]

the problem I have with you assigning fault to GEICO for your problem -- GEICO's contract was with the other driver, they had to "back him up". if he recanted and said he was not at fault, they have to go with that.

Exactly. You are not GEICO's client, the other driver is. If you had changed your story in your no-fault, your insurance company would not have paid the other driver.

 

[rubyslipperlover]

exactly.

unless there was a non party witness or other unbiased source of information, GEICO was "stuck" with its insured's version of events until you were able to prove otherwise.

incidentally, GEICO really does go to bat for its insureds. about a year ago my sister was in an accident, the other car crossed a double yellow line and almost hit her head-on. my sister submitted her claim to her own insurer, GEICO, and they pursued reimbursement from the insurer for the other car. the other insurance ocmpany wants to assign part of the blame for the accident to my sister, but my sister told GEICO why she felt that she had no fault whatsoever, and they won't settle their claim with the other insurer if the other company insists on apportioning fault to my sister.

 

[DNBois]

WOW! I haven't had a chance to check this thread for a while and glad I did. To answer some questions, by state law, DH is required to report any accident that results in more than $1,000.00 worth of damage; any violation of this law may result in criminal prosecution.
We were sent a check for both of our damages which will be signed over directly to the body shop and we have not been requested to sign off on any releases at all.
We were given the name of this body shop to go to and unfortunately, were not aware that we could have chosen our own. The adjuster gave us the number and said he would call Paul (whom he seemed to know pretty well) at the auto body shop. After further investigation, we found that there is a state law that could prosecute an adjuster (fined and/or license taken away within the state and in some cases, criminal neglect) for suggesting an auto body shop, let alone offering the name of the one we would be referred to.
To answer another question, we have not had an offer on the car but we planning on trading it in for a new vehicle in a few months. Just as GEICO cannot prove that there would be any dimunition of value, I cannot prove that there would be. But the fact that recycled parts are being used (which is another thing we are looking into) may show that the value of the vehicle was compromised due to this type of repair.
I am aware that in other states class action law suits have been settled and GEICO was one of the defendants and the courts sided with the consumers; I am also aware that there is a pending law suit in Rhode Island concerning the same type of complaint.
I also agree with SLEEPY - I think that GEICO is very, very shady to say the least and I have heard some horro stories about their ambiguous policies. I think that SLEEPY was probably believing that GEICO was being honest and sincere and didn't need to worry about it - to turn around and put any blame on the victim in this accident is just plain wrong.
Thanks for your advice but I am determined to do something about this.

 

[DMickey28]

I take it you are in Rhode Island?

A claims adjuster is allowed to recommened the program that there company has that includes a bunch of shops, however we can not recommended a shop specifically. Geico, as do other insurance companies, all have a list of shops they recommend. In my company it was because we would then stand behind their work and if anything was wrong in the lifetime that you owned that vehicle with the repairs, our company would step in and foot the bill to repair that again. I believe Geico and the other large companies have this policy as well. Usually I would "sell" the program and then send the car to the closest shop to the consumer that had the lowest number of jobs at that time... quick repair and turnover. You claims adjuster neglected to tell you that you could take the car to anyone you wanted, however didn't you have an accident in the past? You didn't realize that you could go to any shop you wanted, or question being told that you HAD to go here????

 

[rubyslipperlover]

good luck in your efforts. but I think it's going to be very difficult to "do something".

primarily because GEICO's contract is with the other dirver, not with you. in liability insurance, the insurer's obligation is to pay damages the insured is legally obligated to pay. that's the language of the contract. it doens't say "if you're in an accident, we'll fix the other driver's vehicle."


as I recall, the class action suits were all first party policies, where the insured sought to have their own company fix the vehicle. (someone please correct me if I'm wrong, I haven't done the research here.)

if you were not happy with what GEICO proposed, your options were to file an claim on your own policy and have your company pursue GEICO, or to sue the driver.

even if you haven't been asked to sign a release, GEICO's defense will be that it repaired your vehicle, end of story.

in court, GEICO doesn't have to disprove diminution in value, you have to affirmatively prove it. and I don't see how you would do that, given that your car isn't new and that it has been repaired. if there's no evidence on eithe rside of the issue, GEICO wins.