Help! Insurance wants to total my 87 Westy

[funagon]

So far all of Migtyart's advice is right on the money. The insurance companies do not want to help you. They make money by paying out less than they should and leaving you at a loss. In this case you are at no fault at all. You should have no fear of demanding what you want. Don't sign anything, accept any checks, or agree to their offers until you get a fair deal.

They will try to pressure you or tell you that you have to decide right away. You don't. The only pressure on you might be an accumulating storage fee for letting your van sit at the mechanic's. But since they are at fault for taking your van out and wrecking it you shouldn't listen to such BS. It's time to stop being too nice and to make some demands.

Yes you do need to be made whole. That means they need to pay you whatever it costs you to fix your van, or to get another just like it. The "law" here is common law. I don't know Texas law but it may or may not be written in a Texas statute. It doesn't matter either way. The insurance company knows the law and know that you have to be compensated fairly, but they're betting that someone like you will give up and take a low offer. You don't have to quote the law like a lawyer, you just have to refuse their offer and tell them that you won't settle until you get enough for another nice van, just like yours, or to have it fixed, just like it was before.

If you want to keep your van and fix it you can get a high estimate from a pro body shop to show the insurance company. This is to ensure that you get enough money to do a good repair.

If it's totaled then you need to show the insurance company the SALE prices on the Gowesty.com website, and maybe ads here on the Samba too. You could also get an appraiser to evaluate the condition of your van too.

If lawyers don't want your case (because they can't make much money off of it) then you may be able to pay an attorney for specific tasks such as writing a letter or simply for giving you advice.

You can negotiate without an attorney, however. You just need to be tough and rational. I would suggest stopping by the library or bookstore and looking at books in the legal section about how to represent yourself, or how to negotiate with insurance companies.

Good luck and let us know how it's going.
_________________
1990 GL 7-passenger
2.2 liter WBX

[Margalo13]

I really appreciate all the support and suggestions--enormously! While I definitely fall into the "nice" category, I'm also clear headed and firm. I have told them (nicely) that all I want is my van back or a comparable one--that's it. Given the nature of the vehicle, a comparable is hard to find. Fixing mine for 10K (I do have a good shop and they're waiving storage fees to help) makes sense. I think they'll do a good job.

Keep those ideas coming. I'm checking all the links that have been forwarded.

As for the auction place--it's a pretty rigged system. Progressive has "an arrangement" with IAA. All their totaled cars go to them and since I'm not a dealer I can't bid. I pressed him about alternatives and he says there aren't any. The garage in question says he'll get one of his auto friends to bid on my behalf if necessary, but I worry about handing the title over--not something I'm inclined to do at this point.

Kathy

[PDXWesty]

Again, you're asking the wrong person. Progressive will tell you what works best for them and is the least amount of work for their agents. Just because Progressive has that agreement doesn't mean it's the law. You probably do have the right to buy the vehicle back for salvage value. You should ask all these questions to your own insurance agent too, not just the Progressive representative. Again, if Progressive doesn't make you happy, try the shops insurance then go to your own insurance.

In my accident, I ended up getting paid by my own insurance even though I had 0% fault. My insurance then recovered money on they're own from others. I didn't have to do a thing.

You shouldn't have to make this work. Your own agent should. Call them.

[xlr8r]

This is actually a very simple case being made more complicated by some of the "experts" here.

The insurance company owes for the cost of the repair but only up to the vehicle's ACV (actual cash value).

The problem is the repair estimate is coming in at an amount that is more than the vehicle ACV, therefore the vehicle is totalled.

What needs to happen is that a higher value for the vehicle must be documented. Remember, the fact you are fond of your vehicle does not mean it is worth any more money. However, if you can find examples of other vehicles that substantiate your claim of higher value, show them to Progressive. It will likely cause them to conclude that they should pay out more money.

A call to your Insurance commissioner might be helpful however you do not need an attorney!
_________________
1991- Seven passenger with 3.3 SVX ; 1987 - Seven Passenger with 2.5 Subaru

[mightyart]

[xlr8r]

I'm an insurance agent for 26 years.

Some of the advice given here HAS been bad.

Sorry.
_________________
1991- Seven passenger with 3.3 SVX ; 1987 - Seven Passenger with 2.5 Subaru

[mightyart]

Well, then who is at fault and why should she call her insurance commissioner?

[PDXWesty]

The value of a well maintained Westy is easily documented at over $10,000. They're trying to screw her.

[Pascaa]

I deal with insurance co every week.

Easiest way for you not to worry too much because you want to keep the van.

Get the van to a bodyshop you thrust. Tell the insurance co, where it is and that you want it fixed. Leave the ins co and the bodyshop to worry about the details. End of story. If you are allowed a rental go get one but check with your ins co for the maximum they will pay.

If they decide to total it. Decline. end of story.
If they try to bully you. Send 10 of the most expensive similar van you can find and tell them. The should not total your van unless it is over 70% (+ or -) of the market value. Get my drift, find expensive vans.

Do NOT talk about buying the van back from them. It is a signal to them to negociate you. Wait until you agreed to a price (hopefully real high) then ask candidly if you can buy it back.

Remember that they are trained professional that make money by paying less than what is fair. It is their job, that you are nice or not it doesnt matter. Their job is to save their employer money. no one in insurance gets promoted/bonuses for being too nice with customer. Time and money is all they care about. You like your van, get it fixed.
_________________
Pascal
1982 1.9 TD Westy Bertha
1985 Westy Oscar - would trade for syncro Vanagon
2000 Fork pick up (work truck)
2004 Mazda 6 wagon (her car)

[mightyart]

One thing I will tell you about the van.
I'm getting that you already have it at a body shop and they want 10 grand to fix it.
You just want van back, like it was before, we all understand that quite well.
Here's the hard part, if the unibody or frame was damaged you don't want it back it's better to have it totaled.
Talk to the guys at the shop and ask what has to be done, if they say it has to go on the frame machine or something to that effect that's not good.
I'm not saying it can't be fixed, but the odds are against it being right, If you seen the geometry that they use on the body it would make your head spin, since it is old they aren't used to working on them.
that was the main reason I let them total my Honda, I have seen a few repaired vehicals that had strange problems that couldn't be fixed.
here's a few links on the subject:
http://www.autopi.com/frame.htm
http://en.allexperts.com/q/Auto-body-repair-2036/2008/2/Unibody-Damage-3.htm

[funagon]

xlr8r wrote:

[Splash]

Kathy,

Two yeras ago I was hit and totaled my 78 Westy. Progressive sent me a check for $3,500 with out even asking . I told them no way.. I e-mailed them ad's from Samba showing Westy's worth $5,500 to $6,000 in my area. They cut me another check for $5,600. And then I bought it back from them for $125.00 . It worked well for me considering I only paid $2,500 for it. They don't want wrecked cars. I then bought an 87 Westy....Good luck and make them pay you what it's worth and then buy it back.

Splash...

[xlr8r]

[Margalo13]

All of the advice is good--the different perspectives help. I don't get the impression the insurance company is trying to screw me. They are just very good at doing their job which they do every day. Consumers are at a disadvantage. My strategy is to move slowly and carefully--it's not a daily driver, so that helps. They are asking me to document the value, they've given their estimate which I think is low (though close). They have agreed to go for "average market value" which is good.

As for the frame damage--I don't know. The front was hurt, the rest is not. I'm willing to take the risk and get it fixed.

As for "making things right," I told my daughter this falls into the category of life isn't fair. I'm going to play the game all the way, but I don't think litigation or involving attorneys is much to my advantage in this situation. I will go through the three possible companies--guy who hit it, garage who was working on it and my own. Once I do the work of documenting the value as best I can, I'll just give them all the same stuff.

It's a very arguable position. In cases such as these a mantra helps: these are COLLECTIBLE vehicles. They are increasing in value. They are bought and restored and sold for enormous prices.

Kathy

[Margalo13]

[Mightyart's Wife]

It’s always great to see the “Vanagon Community” banding together to help a fellow owner out when they are down. It’s a true testament to just how much these vans really mean to us.

I’ve seen some interesting points, and would like to offer a few of my own, with, of course, the usual caveat that I work on commercial insurance policies, and actually don’t even do much business auto these days. Coverage interpretations from insurance professionals like myself are pretty much worth the paper they’re written on. Adjusters have the best handle on how a policy will respond in a claims situation, and in this case, I would only trust the opinion of an adjuster that was completely independent of this situation, as funagon was right, the Progressive adjuster’s job here is to get out of the claim having paid as little as possible while still satisfying their legal obligations. I worked for an insurance carrier, and wouldn’t necessarily say that the carrier/adjuster is “out to screw the public”, but I will say that the carrier/adjuster’s job #1 is to make a profit, not to make you a fair settlement on a claim. This seems to be supported by the fact that most of the stories related here indicate that folks have to fight a bit to get what they feel is fair, at best.

Here are a few observations, in no particular order:

1) I absolutely think you should consult an attorney. You need to determine exactly what you are legally entitled to recover as a result of the damages. This is not set forth in Texas Insurance Code, which regulates how insurance carriers and agents have to behave; rather it is addressed, I would think, somewhere within the statutes that pertain to legal liability with regard to property damage. I don’t feel the insurance commissioner would be the person to contact, as he is charged with regulation of the insurance industry, not with interpreting the law as respects legal liability.

2) The garage had this vehicle in their “Care, Custody and Control” (CCC), and as such, they are responsible for the damages resulting from their actions. There is specific coverage that garages can purchase, called Garagekeeper’s Legal Liability Coverage (GKLL), and this applies to their liability to you for damages to your vehicle while in their CCC. There is no other insurance mechanism that would protect them from financial loss resulting from damage to your vehicle arising out of their use of your vehicle. They can choose not to purchase this GKLL coverage, but then they are essentially self-insuring the exposure, as liability is dictated by the law, not their insurance coverage, or lack thereof. They are praying that you go with the old man’s insurance, either because they don’t want to claim this on their insurance, causing their rates to increase, or because they have no such coverage, and they don’t want to pay you out of their pocket. (Similarly, you COULD file under the Physical Damage Collision coverage provided by your policy and let them subrogate against the legally liable party, but you are the only innocent person here, so why the heck should you have a claim show up on your loss report? It’s not supposed to negatively impact you, but can you really be sure it wouldn’t?) You are being extremely generous, because you are right, the old gentleman is legally liable, in that he caused the accident, but the way I see it, the garage is liable to you. They would be the ones to collect from the old man, as they would have suffered the financial loss as a result of his actions. There would have been no accident with the old man had they not test driven your van. Insurance companies don’t want to cover this “Garagekeeper’s Exposure”, and the cost of the coverage can be quite high – it is purchased by smart business persons that realize that repeat business results from inevitable problems such as this being handled professionally and expeditiously. Oh, and by the way, the cost of the GKLL coverage is driven, in part, by whether or not the business test drives vehicles. GKLL applications question business owners very heavily on the test driving aspect of the business, and the coverage is much cheaper if you do not test drive at all.

3) xlr8r is correct that policy language is quite clear on valuation, i.e. cost to repair or replace up to ACV, but that language is actually contained within the “Physical Damage” (PD) portion of the policy, which is first party coverage, meaning they pay you, the first party. The coverage under which you would collect would be third party liability coverage, meaning the insurance carrier pays you, the third party, on behalf of the insured person/entity that is legally liable, the first party. The verbiage for liability coverage would be pretty similar, whether you were looking at the garage’s liability coverage or the old man’s Personal Auto Policy (PAP). It would probably say something akin to: “We will pay those sums for which you become legally obligated as a result of bodily injury or property damage”. This is why I feel you need an attorney. I would not rely on the insurance carrier to tell you what they are legally obligated to pay as a result of the damages. It may be ACV, but I would think that this is where the principle of “making you whole” comes in, and ACV may not wholly encompass that principle. The insurance policy is not the law, and only lawyers can interpret the law. That is insurance “CYA” rule #1.

4) I would not even bother fighting with the carrier on valuation, you shouldn’t have to, you did nothing wrong. If you feel that this is necessary, then by all means, use every resource available to bolster your assertion that your van is worth well over $10K. How much would your van have cost you if you wanted to buy it before it got wrecked? Also, not sure you would want to keep it if it is damaged to the extent that you can’t ever make it right again. I am also accused of being too nice, but even I would demand that the only acceptable outcome is one in which I end up with my vehicle exactly as it was, or with enough money to purchase one of like kind and quality with minimal hassle. If you still choose to go this route and feel you must negotiate with the old man’s carrier, demand that they give you documentation of their basis of the valuation of your claim.

5) Remember, this is still your van. Your name is on the title, and you can take your broken van home and sue the pants off of the garage and the old man if you feel you are not going to end up in exactly the same place you were before the accident occurred. You can sue anybody you want…doesn’t mean your gonna win, but that, again, speaks to the necessity of retaining legal counsel.

6) Just an observation – it sounds like the carrier REALLY wants to auction your van. Hmmm…wonder why? Could it be because they know they will recover a ton of money at auction on a Vanagon, even in a state of disrepair?

7) It also doesn’t sound right that you have to collect from one or the other. The garage is liable, and I’d think you could sue the garage for the balance, if what you collected from the old man’s progressive policy did not restore you fully. Doesn’t sound right, but again, this is a legal issue, not an insurance issue.


I think the garage is liable, I think the garage is liable, I think the garage is liable, I think the garage is liable, etc., etc. You shouldn’t have to do all this work.

I’m not a lawyer, nor am I a coverage expert by any means. I am just an employee of the insurance industry that is fascinated by the details and minutiae therein. I love insurance, I love learning about insurance, I love fairness, I love people, and I love Vanagons.

Sorry this is so long. I am saving the most important statement for last, and hope that some (especially the Original Poster) have had the patience to stick with me. I REALLY hope that this works out in the best way possible for you and I hope you are back on the road in a nice vanagon soon. I hope my comments will help in some way, even if it’s just to precipitate some one who really know something to correct me if I’m wrong.
_________________
They that will not be counseled, cannot be helped.
-Ben Franklin

[xlr8r]

That was well said and I respect your opinion . However, I disagree with part of what you said.

The garage is not liable. We are now getting into the legality of the particular claim, and remember I said an attorney was not necessary. I still go by that statement. The reason the garage is not liable is because the claim as it was stated indicates the old man is at fault. If that is the case, the court would find against the old man and in favor of the garage. You would be back to step one having wasted your time. A case would still have to be brought against the old man and his insurance comapny.

As for the owner of our van, it is still a simple case. She must document that her van is worth more than the cost to repair. If it is, the carrier will pay the repair. If this fact is established and they refuse to pay, do not call a lawyer and add to your cost. Contact the Insurance Commissioner in the state of Texas and that office will make an OIC inquiry to Progressive. The inquiry will IMMEDIATELY get the attention of the company at the highest local level and your claim will be settled.
Companies don't often mess around with OIC inquiries.
If the van is not worth more than the cost to repair, then the insurance company will pay what has been established as the ACV and that is that. The point to remember is if this happens the claimant HAS been made whole. She has been paid the ACV of the van and that is what was owed to start with.
_________________
1991- Seven passenger with 3.3 SVX ; 1987 - Seven Passenger with 2.5 Subaru

[Mightyart's Wife]

[xlr8r]

Let me say that it will be interesting to see how this turns out.

I hope we will get to see the end result and how it was handled.

Good luck!
_________________
1991- Seven passenger with 3.3 SVX ; 1987 - Seven Passenger with 2.5 Subaru

[Margalo13]