TacoBellSauce

your car is most probably isnt totalled
bring it in to a real nice body shop and if you are not satisfied just trade it in and get a new one
sue for the depreciated value also
the RL is a lovely car
IMO, you might regret getting something else

AbovePrime.

lolz why?

VOdoc

What a horror show. I cringe every time some bonehead comes flying up toward my tailpipe. This time the bonehead really did a job. There is something fundamentally wrong with an insurance system that tries to substitute a partially restored car for a brand new one. There should definitely be additional compensation for diminished value. I agree with others, that beautiful RL is not totaled (unfortunately).

SpicyMikey

Reading some of these comments since yesterday, I'm actually shocked some of you guys really got compensated for deminished value on top of cost for repair. I would never have even considered trying to get something like that. I'm still unsure how you guys did it

I looked at my policy with Geico and it says nothing about such a thing. It's basically a policy to repair or replace car, property, and body after an accident. It makes no mention of "value". You can get insurance to cover pretty much anything, but, I'd think you'd need to get a separately written rider with clear wording for such a thing (and pay extra). Without it, how can you prove the Insurance company ever promised to cover you for such a thing.

I'll have to try that one if/when I'm ever in a significant accident again.

AbovePrime.

You must have the cheapest insurance available, progressive covers everything, including diminished value if your car is repaired.

Evader

I'm sorry to hear about this accident. You're ok and that's what matters first. I would go to this girls hearing as a witness and hopefully you can be one of the reasons she gets her license suspended for a very long time. Do a search on this forum for diminished value or diminished claim, I was involved in something very similar and there was a few people on the TL board that was most helpful in settling my claim. I don't have the time right now but I'll try to find the link for it later if you don't run accross it

SpicyMikey

That's interesting stuff. See, I learned something today. I think I'll take the rest of the day off

I have to read my plan more carefully and talk to Geico to find out if it covers reduced trade in value. I've never seriously wrecked my cars, so I never really thought about it.

fkinder

There are two components to auto insurance, property damage and liability. Property damage is intended to restore the vehicle to the pre-accident condition. Liability is intended to cover any other damages for which you may be liable for causing the accident. You cannot claim liability damages for yourself on your own policy.

Damages for diminished value fall under Liability coverage. If the other driver is 100% responsible for causing the accident, then the other driver is responsible for 100% of all damages arising from the accident. All states require some minimum level of Liability coverage, usually $15-25,000. If your damages exceed the other driver's insurance coverage, your alternatives are 1) sue the other driver for the excess damage and hope to collect, or 2) file a claim for the excess damages under the Uninsured/Underinsured coverage of your own policy. UI coverage for diminished value varies from state to state and company to company.

Based on this thread, I reviewed my policy yesterday, and realized my UI coverage was grossly inadquate to cover my '04 MDX, let alone the '08 RL. Called my agent and increased UI to $50K/$100K/$300K - total cost of the new UI for the RL is less than $100 per year with total cost of the RL policy just under $900 per year. Cheap peace of mind in Texas, where it is estimated that 30% to 40% of the drivers on the road have no insurance coverage.

SpicyMikey

Thanks for your thoughts on that buddy. Makes sense. I'm definitely going to look into it also. Man, I can still learn something at 46. I feel young today

TacoBellSauce

The RL is the best car in its price range

my uncle got a E550 after his RL got stolen
traded it in the same month for another RL

Mike_TX

Well, the situation where I got the DV from State Farm was a one-car accident ... I spun out on a rainy road while on a trip in Colorado, and trashed a 2000 BMW 540i with less than 10,000 miles on it. There was no other party - and no Liability insurance coverage - involved.

And this will amaze and astound you, but State Farm actually came up with this all on their own. I was expecting nothing, but they called me and told me they were sending me a check.

NOW ... at the time, there had been a big legal flap over this very issue in the Texas courts, and I think S F figured they'd better play the game. Since then, they have pulled back some, but DV can still be had in TX if you pursue it. As I told the original poster, you might have to wait until trade time, then have dealers actually sign statements attesting that the car is worth "X" amount less because of the damages. Then, the insurer would supposedly reopen your claim and that would be part of the damages they owe you.

I have no idea how CT handles DV, but it's worth looking into. A guy here in TX has a webiste that addresses how best to do that, and I'll try to find it and post a link.

.
.

2007AcuraRL

Thanks Mike. I was reading quite a bit about dimunition in value today and the legal concept matches precisely my initial thinking. for the benefit of the rest of the great people on this thread, the notion is fairly simple to illustrate:

Assume there are two 2007 Acura RL's for sale. Assume also they are both in similar condition and have roughly the same mileage. Now assume that one of the cars, although it appears pristine, was actually rear-ended and later repaired. Lastly assume the repair was done 'correctly'. The car that was repaired will still have less marketable value because (a) even the best body shop cannot restore a car to the condition it was when it left the factory; (b) the Acura outerbody rust through warranty is void; and (c) there is an inherent loss of value for a car that has been repaired. A purchaser who knows one car has been in an accident and repaired (and consider this is precisely why a company like Carfax exists to provide this info) will either not purchase the repaired car altogether and choose instead the other RL that was never in an accident, or will only consider the repaired RL if he can get it at a substantial discount in price. This loss of value is in addition to the cost to repair the damaged vehicle.

I've heard from the body shop today and they have indicated the repairs would be $16,500. Now I have to consult with experts to determine the diminished value of the RL after the repair would be made. The total loss to me for the negligent or reckless actions of the driver who 100% caused the accident and resulting damage to my car would be the sum of these two figures.

fkinder

From the Texas Department of Insurance:

http://www.tdi.state.tx.us/bulletins/2000/b-0027-0.html

In Texas, to recover Diminished Value under Third Party Liability or Uninsured/Underinsured coverage, you must be able to quantify the amount of diminished value, usually through the use of an expert appraisal.

Anoher link:

http://www.diminishedvalueoftexas.com/

larrynimmo

I am really shocked that it is that much...I don't imagine that there is more than $3000 in parts & paint & supplies involved. That leaves 13,500...@80 an hour, that allows for almost 170 hours. (one mechanic working for a whole month) I guess I picked the wrong career.


it looks like you might have a case for diminished value...you know there is a lot more written on this than I thought. From what Mike came out with from Texas has really opened my eyes. Being that the car is almost brand new and being a premium car, its short and long term value will be significantly less and may be harder to sell even at a reduced price.

CL6

One question is due to the high use of aluminum, which is tough to repair, are insurance rates higher than for a mostly steel car?

GoHawks

Unless there was damage to the suspension, the only aluminum component that was damaged (based on what you can see from the picture) is the trunk.

On the RL, aluminum is only used on the front fenders, hood and trunklid.

larrynimmo

Of the body in the back, only the trunk lid is aluminum, and that should be changed in one piece. I think that the bumper frame is aluminum, but once the steel frame supports are bent back in place the aluminum parts should bolt right into place. There should be no aluminum body work performed (like you would do in an all aluminum body vehicle)

2007AcuraRL

Well here's some discussion of diminished value in CT: http://www.cga.ct.gov/2007/rpt/2007-R-0011.htm

No doubt that its applicable in my home state and is surely the correct result.

This particular reference regarding insurance companies is especially laughable:

Opponents (e. g. , insurers) of this theory [diminished value] believe that repairs to an accident-damaged vehicle can restore the vehicle to a condition that meets or exceeds its condition before the accident in terms of appearance, durability, functionality, and safety. Thus, they believe proper restoration of a vehicle does not result in diminished value.

Mike_TX

Good find. The TDI bulletin is merely to clarify the Department's official position, though, and as it states, it doesn't preclude the payment of DV by agreement between the insuror and the policyholder.

I recently had my RL repaired under my SF collision coverage because the guy that hit me had a chickencrap substandard insurance company that jacked me around. Since State Farm had paid me DV a few years ago on the other accident, I asked the adjustor about it this time.

He said it has gotten harder to get insurors to voluntarily pay it unless the policyholder can demonstrate an actual dollar loss. That's where the idea of a statement from a dealer came into play. My RL is leased, and I told him that if they try to charge me penalty dollars at time of lease return because the car was wrecked, I'd be giving them a call. He said they'd reopen the claim if that is the case and any additional costs would become part of the claim payable to me.

FWIW, I also had my car repaired at an Acura dealer, so I'd have a better case if Honda Financial squawked about the fact it had been hit.

Last comment - Do a Google search on Diminished Value and you'll turn up tons of info and lots of services that work with you to collect it.

.
.

synth19

That really sux man, I'm glad you are okay. This is why everyone loses in accidents! Not just the person at fault.

2007AcuraRL

Here is even more interesting reading as it pertains to DV claims in CT against Progressive Insurance which is the insurance company of the defendant in my case (and note how recent the date is):

Taken from Automuse website http://www.vehicleinfo.com/AutoMuse/?cat=6


Progressive Admits Claims “Specialist’s” Representation of CT Law is Wrong
Monday, October 8th, 2007

If you are or have been a party claiming diminished value against a Progressive insured in Connecticut, you might have been put off by a misleading statement by a Progressive claims representative. One such claimant’s attorney was told blatantly that the Connecticut Insurance Department refuses to allow insurers to offer diminished value coverage, and, therefore, no diminished value claims can be paid. CT Diminished Value Correspondence

Say, what?

Here is “Claims Specialist” Heather Hinckley’s July 9, 2007 response to a third party claimant’s demand for the inherent diminished value suffered as a result of a Progressive insured’s negligence:

At this time, the State of Connecticut, Department of Insurance does not allow Progressive Insurance of any other company to sell Diminished Value coverage for a vehicle. As the State doesn’t allow sales of the Diminished Value coverage, we are not able to afford Diminished value coverage. For these reasons, but not limited thereto, Progressive Insurance must respectfully deny your claim for damages. I am sorry that I could not advise you more favorably regarding this matter, but trust that you will understand our position.

Counsel for the claimant took the issue up with the Connecticut Insurance Department, which responded on September 26, 2007 stating that:

Heather Hinckley of Progressive Insurance has responded that the Connecticut Insurance Department does not allow diminished value coverage to be sold and therefore claims for diminished value cannot be made in Connecticut. In response to Ms. Hinckley’s assertion this is not correct. The Connecticut Insurance Department does not prevent claims made for diminished value and an insurer can request to include provisions of diminished value in their policy.

The CID also included a letter from a Progressive Claims Manager responding to the complaint that said:

I am writing in reply to your inquiry dated Aug. 21, 2007. I reviewed the complaint as well as the claim file and am able to provide you with the following information.

The letter sent by Heather Hinckley dated July 9, 2007, is incorrect.

Well that’s nice. Glad we got that all cleared up.

Of course, several questions remain. Has the Connecticut Insurance Department taken any action to ensure this misstatement of Connecticut law/regulation does not occur again? Has Progressive taken any action to make certain that its employees do not make this misstatement of Connecticut law/regulation again? But the one that has me really wondering is whether Heather Hinckley is still a “claims specialist” or whether she’s been knocked down to “claims representative”, “file clerk”, or “doughnut person”? After all, inquiring minds want to know.

It also bothers me that someone labeled a “claims specialist” by an insurance company can’t tell the difference between what is owed to an insured (first party) and what is owed to someone making a claim against an insured (third party). Ms. Hinckley’s comment about Progressive not offering “diminished value coverage” has nothing to do with a third party claim. The only portion of the policy any third party cares about is the section that tells the insured, “We’ll pay for anything for which you become liable up to the policy limits” (excepting, of course, intentional torts). How much of a specialist is a claims specialist who can’t tell the difference between a first party and third party claim? That’s covered in Insurance 101.

Probably, the most pertinent question is how many other people accepted the Hinckley line about diminished value not being permitted to be paid and simply went away? Well, Connecticut, your Insurance Department has spoken. Demand your diminished value. It’s really not illegal after all.

PortlandRL

They should take the license away from that stupid . At least she got busted with the booze. Probably give her a slap on the wrist and daddy will come bail her out and buy a new car so she can do it again next month.

VQPower37

why do u think the car is totalled??? it duznt look that bad, it could still be fixed, right?

Mike_TX

IMO, the answer is for states to pass laws either accepting or denying DV payments by insurance companies and stop dodging the issue.

Insurance companies have a point when rates (regulated by state agencies) don't include DV, because they can't recover losses they pay through the premiums they charge. So they just try real hard NOT to pay DV claims. But the public is becoming very aware that DV is part of their actual, tangible, dollar loss.

I say let insurance companies either cover it or exclude it. Be ready to pay extra premium for it, though, because insurance companies don't manufacture money - they're just "banks" where premiums are collected and then paid out to people who have accidents. When they pay out claims dollars, the bank has to be refilled with more premiums.

.
.

SpicyMikey

I agree Mike. 20 years ago it was not as much a problem. Now with everything being online, even getting your car stolen causes serious depreciation (even if it had no damage!!). CarFAX has changed everything.

DV protection should just be another option when configuring your policy. If you have a new expensive car, it probably pays to select that option and pay the related extra premium. In fact, they probably should just bundle gap insurance and DV into one optional choice

gavine

Isn't it the responsibility of the person at fault to pay the DV premium? She's the one that crashed into you. Why should you pay a premium for DV on your policy when it's someone else's fault. If I wreck my car on my own accord and I don't have DV on my policy, I'll live with it but the other person's insurance should pay for it if it's their policy-holder's fault and they should raise her premium to cover it moving forward.

SpicyMikey

Sure, in this case since she got cited for a violation it's clearly her fault. But what about most of the other accidents that are "no fault" and/or the faulty party cannot easily be determined without witnesses. Actually, Florida is a "no fault" state so every accident is your fault initially. Everyone's insurance company takes care of their own customer and then the insurance companies settle things later (if they can)

dwboston

MA is a "no fault" state. I got hit by a drunk driver 12 years ago in my brand new, 5-day old VW Golf Sport. She was arrested at the scene and cited for the accident, and her insurance company still tried to claim that I was 5% at fault. That car was never the same after that.

geronimomoe

NJ is a "no fault" state too. It's ludicrous. IMHO "no fault" is designed to minimize the time insurance companies spend fighting each other and they get to automatically increase our rates.

For your accident 12 years ago, it was your fault for being there. A friend of mine was rear ended and basically his agent told him that because he was there, he's automatically given 5% fault. My response was, "Excuse us for living!"...

2007AcuraRL

My car is being repaired. Body shop told me it will be a month before I get it back. I guess delays ordering parts and they don't work on it straight through is the reason it will be so long. I'm not even having a rear spoiler put back on since I don't think I'll keep the car when I get it back so there is no point adding stuff that I wont get my money back for on a trade in.
The body shop claims it will be as good as new and realizes I am a picky customer. Still, I'd give it less than a 5% chance that the paint finish will ever be good enough for me. There's always overspray some place, and fine sandpaper lines that you can see when the sunlight hits at just the right angle. I offered to pay them extra over and above the insurance money, if they can do a flawless job but they said they don't recommend a 'custom' paint finish because then it wont match the rest of the car finish. They do work for the Ferrari dealer up the street so I know they are capable of doing some convincing work. I'll have to go in and talk to them in person before they get around to the paint.
I havent priced out an '08 yet and I doubt it will be economically feasible for me to trade mine and get one. If I sell the RL, I'll end up in some other lesser car, but at least whatever I get will be factory fresh, and looking at it won't irk me every time I get in or out of it.
As for diminished value, the insurance company indemnifying the gal that caused the accident has denied my claim so I'll be suing her directly. I'll wait to get my car back first.

underst8

Wow, glad your OK. Sorry for the loss.

INDEMNIFYING THE GAL??? What the fuck does that mean? she rear ended someone hard enough to make him slide into you at a force enough to cause 14 grand damage to your car and they aren't paying up? Wow im blown away. Stupid bitch better pay up, hopefully the court system works in your favor.

My dad's black (hard-ass color to match) BMW 740i was sideswiped real bad a couple years ago. Sad day, loved that car, but the point is once the dealer repaired it (new front fender, door panels, rear fender, front bumper (about 20 grand total)) and paint spray (not whole-car), you couldn't tell it was ever in an accident unless you opened the hood and saw the seam weld on the fender/wheel well meeting point.

Like others have said, miracles can be worked and the car drove like it was new, no rattles, shimmys or any other sign it was in an accident. Sounds like that body shop is a good shot. Sue that girl for all it's worth to get your car looking and driving like brand new again, she owes it for sure. Best of luck.

synth19

Not to be a party pooper, but make sure you pick up your car in daylight and THOROUGHLY inspect the paint. I don't care if your shop works on Ferrari's. White is the HARDEST color to match. Worse case, they will have to blend. Just wanted to give you the heads up.

larrynimmo

I am hoping that you are happy with the paint work and I am interested in hearing your analysis.

As for the lawsuit, assuming you will and get a judgement, then it is upon you to collect. The girls father is not likely lible at all (assuming she is 18). Unless this girl is rich, or has some sort of trust fund. She can file a claim against here insurance to pony up...other than that you have to go after her assets...cars, savings accounts, land, payroll checks above amounts exempted by law. You have a number of years to collect from her. I am sorry, but I've decided when i am a victim of an accident I am taking the trip to the hospital. Not to gain any false medical reimburstment, but to ensure that my property claim is taken seriously. Insurance companies shift gears when this happens.

SpicyMikey

Larry's right my friend. You should consider the challenges ahead of you. Depending on the laws in your state, it may not be easy to prove your case. Even if you win, collecting in a civil suit is your responsibility. The courts don't help you in that regard. Look at OJ Simpson and the Goldman's. They won that multimillion dollar lawsuit against him for their daughters murder. They still haven't seen much if anything. I'm sure they spent more money then they collected. Of course, in their case it was a very emotional thing and they were trying to right a wrong. I understand their passion. In you case you need to evaluate the return on your investment of time and money.

Mike_TX

Well, first, you wouldn't just sue the girl - you'd sue her AND her insurance company. The fact they denied your claim means absolutely nothing at all. It's a shell game for them. The court can order them to pay if your claim is deemed to be valid and lawful, and I'm certain your attorney would include them in the suit, as well as possibly including the parents (there is a legal concept known as "negligent entrustment", under which the parents might be held liable for entrusting a car to a girl who has a known record of accidents and drinking. She may be 18, but if the car was provided to her by the parents, and/or she is still living at home, they could bear some responsibility.)

Secondly, I would hope you could get an attorney to handle your suit on a contingency fee basis - meaning if you lose, you pay him nothing and if you win, he gets a percentage of the award. In addition to saving you from possible attorney fees if you lose, it gives the attorney more incentive to work it aggressively.

But ... I still hope you give your car a chance. You're needlessly negative about it IMO, and you need to wait and see how it turns out. Just my 2 cents.

.
.

SpicyMikey

2007AcuraRL, I agree with Mike_TX, you have a right to be anal if you want, it's your life and car. But you have to look at the reality. It's just a car. So it won't be perfect. It probably wasn't perfect to begin with. If you chuck it now you'll loose signficant dollars. May not be worth it just because you can see a texture problem in th paint when staring at it from a certain angle in just the right lighting.

Regarding the contingency idea Mike; Do you think a lawyer is going to take a piddly case like this on contingency (with a max award of maybe $10k)? You could be right, maybe they would do it if it's a slam dunk case and 2007AcuraRL agreed to give them 50%+. The lawyer may gamble and decide it will only take a few letters to the insurance company to have them settle out of court for $7k. He'd get a quick $3500 for a few letters. But, my gut feeling; No, he'd have to pay a lawyer to take this case.

GoHawks

I got into an accident a couple years ago (my fault) with my White Diamond Pearl TL. > $5K in damage.

Talk about a hard color to match.

The dealer I bought my car from in suburban Chicago has the only factory authorized body shop in the region.

They replaced the right front fender and bumper cover. Repaired the hood, and blended the paint into the surrounding panels.

They did a phenomenal job. There was no way you could tell the car was ever in an accident.

Give it a chance.

2007AcuraRL

I'm taking down the photo for now....tired of looking at. Thanks for everyone's input.