all you lawyer types please

[marine]

Anyone know any tips on dealing with insurance claims? if anyone does, and can help me out here i will buy you beer for a long time.

quick summary: i shipped a vehicle with a company from LA to HI and they pay for all damage they do to the vehicle. they inspect it THOROUGHLY before and write down every nick on the car. When i went to pick mine up there was a huge chip in the hood down to the bare metal. Well, at first they denied my claim and said they musta just overlooked it on the initial inspection... (its an orange hole the size of a quarter on a metallic green car... how the **** can you miss that?! and after firing away at them i have em up to 2/3 payback, but i wanna finish the job off at 100%. any suggestoins?

 

[buddy]

Marine, I aint no barrister, but my thinkin' is this...If the pre-delivery inspection report shows "no damage" and the post-delivery inspection shows "orange hole, size of a quarter damage", my simple mind would think that those two documents are proof positive that the shipping company is 100% responsible for the damage to your vehicle. How could the persons at fault be only 66 and two turds responsible?

 

[loophole]

hey mac, how's the tan coming out there in the islands, bro? are you dealing with the shipper or their insurance carrier? claim seems sraightforward enough. this ain't my field but seems like since you shipped from cal then cal law applies. should be some specific state law on the subject and i'm gonna guess it's probably a strict liability for the carrier in this situation. check on your copy of the shipping contract and see if there isn't some fine print on the subject of liability. if there's a statutory cite on there post it up here and i'll check it out. also, i bet there's some jag at pendleton or 29 palms that is familiar with these situations and can give you some assistance. you should get all your dough.

let me know if i can help. semper fi.

 

[marine]

thanks guys... mac, i am closer to K-bay than camp pendleton..

Got off the phone with the insurance adjuster for them yesterday.... here is their take on it. I got him to admit the damage was their fault. Like pulling teeth, but when i reminded him for the umpteenth time it was a legal binding document i had in my hands signed by them... he kinda changed his stance. Their logic behind only 2/3 payment? The car had "pre-existing damage on the hood" Which, yes it did i must admit. You see, when i washed the car before i dropped it off i wiped it off with a rag and their were minute, tiny hairline scratches on the paint if you looked at it in just the right angle. So their take on it is that i should help pay the repair since there was already damage on it. But the claim amount is only to fix the hole they put in it. And i HAD to have it fixed before rust set it any more. The pre existant scratches on the hood were painted over in the process of fixing the real damage, hence they assume i am responsible for paying it although it cost nothing extra to do.
The guy pretty much dared me to take him to court for the last bit of money. And well, legal counsel is free for military, and i could use a day off of work... and my best friend over here is lead counsel at the JAG office....
will keep ya posted.

 

[loophole]

obviously the pre-existing damage claim is bogus. hard to believe that wouldn't be reasonable wear and tear. and reasonable repair costs is not something that you depreciate. my thought on the cal jag was that maybe someone in one of those offices would be more familiar on california law on shipper's liability. but sounds like your in good hands.

 

[marine]

Originally posted by loophole:
obviously the pre-existing damage claim is bogus. hard to believe that wouldn't be reasonable wear and tear. and reasonable repair costs is not something that you depreciate.

THANK YOU LOOP!!!! That was the wording i was looking for!
gonna pin em against the wall tomoorrow and really drive that big green weenie into someone else for once!!!!

 

[EMJ32]

Marine, bottom line they owe you for the damage they caused. They will only owe to repair the damaged hood and repaint only the hood.

Before you litigate, contact the claims supervisor and go up the ladder from there. If the contract was signed here in Cali, then contact the California State Department of Insurance. Let the claims sup/manager know you intend to file the complaint.

Don't back down!

 

[BigSteve]

I am not up to speed on California law, but I am sure they have implemented some type of Deceptive Trade Practices Act (DTPA). I assume by adjuster, you are talking about the company that you hired's insurance adjuster. I would tell them you are going to sue them under the DTPA if they keep jacking you around. You may also want to find out if there is some type of unfair claims settlement practices remedy in the California Insurance code. Under such provisions, the potential is there to get double and some times triple your damages under certain circumstances (such damages are also available under most DTPA provisions). Most insurance companies are aware of this and won't want to take the chance of getting popped over such a minor issue.

Just something to think about. I hope this helps.

 

[EMJ32]

Steve, Calif does has the Fair Claims Settlement Practices. In the case described by Marine, the carrier is simply trying to negotiate the pd claim. The FCSP regs won't really help him here, but a threat to complain to the DOI might get them to think twice about their position.

If he was able to prove a violation a consumer won't collect extra damages.No third party bad faith here in Cali either. The carrier would be faced with a small fine.

 

[marine]

the latest update on the case of the bad con job.

The car transport company has yanked their offer of 200$ back, apparently with the idea that if i am gonna nail their asses like i am trying they want me to earn every penny of it. Of course, all this did was motivate me some more....
Thanks to steve and EM for the tips... I am gonna toss those acronyms around on monday and see what kinda reaction i can get from them.

 

[BigSteve]

Good luck marine, and thanks for the info EMJ.
I never would have guessed that Texas is more consumer-friendly than Cali on this issue.

 

[scrubbo]

Buddys right, if there is no prior list of the damage its they're responsibility. W hat they are trying to do is get you to agree to a lower claim figuring you would pay a lawyer 33% fee if you sued. Keep pushing them they'll break.

 

[MadJack]

just pay your $50 deductable and get the damn thing fixed already

 

[marine]

Jack-
whats the little smiley face guy symbol for "blow me" ?

Its the bmw they dinged up, not the old crusty dodge. and i have a 500 deductible on the beemer... after that straight flush loss i told ya about there is no way i can afford to sheelll that kinda dough out.. LOL*

[This message has been edited by marine (edited 05-22-2001).]

 

[MadJack]

whats the little smiley face guy symbol for "blow me"

did hawaii turn you into a smartass or something? LOL

i think that would fall under the comprehensive part of your insurance, no? like getting your windshield cracked with a rock? 50 bucks and you're good to go.

 

[marine]

yup.. it would fall under the comp insurance all right. but in order to keep my insurance rates somewhat reasonable i had to go with the 500 buck deductible. translation, i pay for the first 500 of any repairs like that.