Help! Insurance wants to total my 87 Westy

[PDXWesty]

Remember, if you can't get the insurance adjuster to agree on the value, ask for an independant appraisal. There ARE people who can do that and give a fair value.

[xlr8r]

[wareiter]

This is not legal advice and I do not represent anyone here.
Where is the legal rescue squad?
All the advice I have seen is correct and the experiences are common. Insurance adjusters, agents with 26 years experience, MightyArt. These are good sources.
The van has been appraised by an "independent" service and there is a report with pictures and evidence of comparable sales. The at fault's insurance company should have offered enough money for you to be able to drive off a lot with the same make, model and condition vehicle with taxes, tags and registration paid. If they say they are offering you ACV, they should have about 3 examples of comparable vans offered for that price within about 100 miles.
You can always just sue the at-fault and present evidence of damages, cost of repair or fair market value. As the owner, you are competent (legally) to give an opinion of value. It is an easy and relatively cheap case to put on (no expert witness fees). The problem is that since you were not in the van (which is good) you were not hurt (which is good) so there is no gravy and you cannot generally get a lawyer without the gravy. If you were in Maryland, I would help you out for the karma.

[Margalo13]

[Margalo13]

[Margalo13]

[mightyart]

You may want to keep hush about the attorney, no reason to make the adjuster your advisary.
Be as nice and polite as you can, tell him your plight, how much you love your van, how long you had it ect.
Insurance companies are not your friends, but adjusters are people.
He may feel sorry for you and want to help you out.
Knowing your rights is the best thing you can do, that way you can ask him knowledgable questions if you think he's low-balling you.
When our Honda was wrecked we had progressive insurance, but the one who hit my wife also had progressive and that's who the claim was filed under.
We were quite happy with our outcome, but one of the big reasons ours was favorable was because Nina knew the right questions to ask, and she always talked to them nicely and as fellow insurance people.

[Margalo13]

[funagon]

To Margalo13:

I am not a lawyer and I am not offering legal advice. I am offering my opinion, just like everyone else on this board.

It sounds like you are doing a good job and you may not need an attorney. When I first posted here I was not suggesting that you should sue as a first course of action. Reasonable people routinely negotiate settlements with insurance companies, and you are wise to first attempt this on your own without the added expense of legal representation. Lawsuits are a "last resort" type of thing, best reserved for matters involving a lot of money, or life and liberty. So keep going with what you're doing and if you can get a good repair, or enough money for another van like yours, then bravo, you're done.

Yet there are times when it helps a lot to have an advocate looking out for you. If you should find it necessary to seek legal advice and representation then shop around for an attorney. You and your attorney would need to agree on how the attorney is to be paid (Hourly? Flat fee? Per task?), and how much money, and what the attorney will do for you. Then you can make an informed decision as to whether it makes monetary sense to hire legal counsel. I would also suggest that the attorney explain to you a clear course of action with a timeline for completion. Again, it may be possible to pay for advice without full representation, but I don't know how they do it in Texas.

But I hope you won’t need an attorney because it sounds like you’re on your way to working something out. An attorney would likely cost more than the $2,000 difference you’re negotiating right now.

The rest of this isn’t necessarily written to help the original poster. I’m just going to make some comments on what I’ve read here.

To Everyone Else:

All who have posted to this thread seem genuinely concerned that Margalo13 should find a fair and speedy resolution to this predicament. I also think that you're all giving pretty good advice based on your personal knowledge and experience. But not everyone has the same knowledge or experience.

I have to take issue with the following paragraph from xlr8r. I have valued the opportunity to read this person’s point of view. However, because I feel this view is so biased by association with the insurance industry, I am compelled to respond. Xlr8r wrote:

[Mightyart's Wife]

I believe that the advice offered by funagon is quite valuable. Further, it demonstrates exactly why folks in insurance (especially myself) have no business talking about legal issues, as I was indeed 100% wrong about breach of contract being a tort. "A tort is wrongful conduct by one individual that results in injury to another. All civil wrongs that are not based on contracts are torts."

I've had varied experience in the insurance industry. I've worked in a Risk Management department, for an insurance carrier, for a retail insurance agency that sells policies to businesses, and for a wholesale insurance agency that sells policies to retail agents. In all instances, the companies for which I work have been very clear on the necessity of legal counsel in determining coverage issues.

In fact, I currently work for the wholesaler, and we are specifically prohibited from assisting agents with interpretation of coverage scenarios. These situations usually play out as follows:
Retail agent receives an inquiry from the insured, such as: "How will my policy respond if I am sued by XYZ General Contracting Company, who is an additional insured on the policy?" The retailer comes to us, the wholesaler, and says: "How will Joe Schmoe Subcontractor's GL policy with Big Guys Insurance Company respond if they are sued by their additional insured, XYZ General Contracting Company?" To which we respond: "We cannot comment on coverage scenarios. We will ask Big Guys Insurance Company for their comments." We then forward this inquiry to Big Guys, who invariably respond: "We cannot comment on coverage scenarios. We suggest that Joe Schmoe Subcontractor consult their attorney on this issue." We then forward this response to the retailer, and as such, have covered our rear ends from being sued for interpreting the policy incorrectly.

As an aside, all of us in the office usually have an opinion on how the coverage scenario would play out. We don't dare express this opinion, and I've heard seasoned professionals in my office advise the retailer that they would be wise to avoid sharing these opinions as well, lest they get hit with an "Errors and Omissions" claim in the future.

All this is neither here nor there with respect to the original poster's issue. It just underscores the dependence of the insurance industry on the advice and counsel of attorneys.

The Progressive adjuster probably has the luxury of consulting with counsel that is on retainer for their company. You are not on a level playing field if you don't afford yourself the same luxury.

Also, don't feel bad about holding the garage accountable if necessary - remember, it was just an accident, everyone understands that they didn't mean to wreck your van, and that's why they buy insurance.

Everyone is likely offering their best two cents in this instance, in hopes that you (the original poster) end up with the most fair and reasonable settlement. Don't sell yourself short here - a little money spent on legal advice may go a long way. Again, you don’t necessarily have to sue anyone, but an attorney can do a much better job of telling you what you are entitled to. Anything offered up from an insurance person is just an opinion. It would be a real shame to accept a settlement and then be out your own money sometime down the road because you were not fully restored to the position you were in before the accident occurred. If your van gets fixed, and problems arise later that end up being a result of the accident, I think it will be pretty hard to get the insurance company to give you more money. We’ve known people personally that have had repairs made after a “not at fault” accident, and they later had to shell out their own money, because problems kept cropping up down the road. I also hope that you won’t have to go to the hassle of getting an attorney – it would be great if you were able to get a fair settlement and walk away happy and right back where you were.

You are very wise to remain calm and explore all of your options, as you’ve been doing thus far, so you’ve got half the battle won right there. Best of luck, and do keep us posted.
_________________
They that will not be counseled, cannot be helped.
-Ben Franklin

[mightyart]

I was going to quit commenting but Funagon has brought up some intresting points that have gotten me thinking so here goes.
Have you actually seen the accident report or are you going by what the garage is telling you?
And the same with how well they are covered by insurance have you seen proof or again are you just going by what they are telling you?
Also you seen to want to settle for $10,000 to get your Westy fixed.
Is that the estimate number they gave you?
Remember it's called and estimate not a firm, if you settle and they start working and find more damage you are the one who's going to have to pay the differance.
It seems very easy to blame a 90 year old man, but he wasn't sited, it doesn't matter why, the accident report is what the court will go by.
He might be getting hosed to, have you talked to or seen him?
His car is wrecked to, the only person who is getting away scott free is the garage, who seems be the one at fault.
I will reiterate I am just offering suggestions as I see them, I like most who have posted don't want to see anybody get ripped off, But the advise on the forums from all of us is as good as what you've paid for it.

[Margalo13]

Many word read, cause many more words to flow from me!

Funagon: I appreciate your clear and organized thinking and especially your ability to put those into words. This forum has been of great value to me for a variety of reasons. I especially appreciate differing points of views and even contradictory ones. They inform me. It is up to me to sift through everything and take what sounds right, reject what doesn’t and pursue questions that seem most relevant. Most of all, I have benefited from the support in what otherwise felt like a very isolated and lonely situation.

The very special thing about a forum is that the potential is there for a true dialogue in which people respectively consider and respond to one another’s viewpoints. From here we can become bigger than we each would be without the others. Not all forums are created equal (can’t say I have a lot of experience, but am pretty sure that’s true), but I’ve found this one to be firmly in the space of inspired dialogue.

For example, I’m pretty sure the garage IS liable, even though it was a very unfortunate sequence of events (you don’t even want to know the details!). I went to the old man’s insurance first because it seemed fair; he made the mistake. The garage had the unfortunate fact of being in possession of my vehicle—they had responsibility for it. Not fair, but a fact.

To clarify—the old man pulled out in front of the van that was being test driven. However, the sheriff did not assign fault in his accident report (likely due to small town politics). The old man’s insurance has accepted my claim, though. I have not seen the accident report, but been told the bottom line. Think I’ll ask for a copy.

My real concern is that this is a border-line case financially. My poor 1987 Westfalia has an estimated 10K in damages to the front end. What is it’s actual cash value? ACV? It’s very close to 10K. Does it matter that I’d have to go to some trouble and expense to find a comparable vehicle if I agreed to total it? I am not inclined to total it, because it is repairable (based on the advice I have and choose to trust) and it is a collectible vehicle—they aren’t making them anymore. Also I have 15 years worth of maintenance and improvements that I can take to the bank—at least in terms of confidence. I don’t know if any of this matters. This is where legal counsel would be helpful.

My goal is very simple (as stated my MightyArtsWife). I want to be fully restored to the position I was in before the accident--nothing more and nothing less. This feels like moral high ground and that’s where I’m coming from with the adjustor. What I don’t know is if the law supports me.

Be assured that I do not intend to accept less and will consult with an attorney before making a settlement that accepts less than that. Cross your fingers. Tomorrow morning I expect a call from Progressive.

Regarding some of MightyArt’s follow-up comments. Yes, the 10K is an estimate and I’m consciously taking a risk for the following reasons. The garage and the body shop are practically across the street from each other. The body shop has squeezed his estimate as far as they can (I believe it to be a quality shop, one worthy of my Westy). A suspicious person might be worried about their collaboration, but I see it more as teamwork. We’re all trying to get this thing fixed and get it on the road again with the least hassle and expense possible. I trust both the garage and the body shop. I also have my eyes open and will make a claim on the garage policy if the old man’s falls short—we’ll find out tomorrow and I’ll let y’all know!

[PDXWesty]

I think your batttle is in getting a fair estimate for the value of the van. If you look across the country, the value of your van may be in the $12-$15 k range. That's where an appraisal would benefit you. I have not seen pictures of your van, but it sounds like you took care of it and it was in good shape. I don't think you should focus on how much it is to fix it, but how much it costs to replace it. To find a van with a long documanted history and only a few owners is rare. That makes yours even more valuable. An appraiser would consider this where an insurance company would not. Ask for an appraisal.

[carterzest]

Wow what a great wealth of information. In 1997, my 1991 Westfalia with 56K original miles (my dream vehicle), had a blowout on the freeway at 78 mph. The tire was a Michelin exact tire specified in the owners manual. After 18 separate visits to repair and body shops to repair the fender well, their was still an inadvertent knocking that occurred that noone could figure out. As it was my daily driver and I was a shipping agent using my car to drive over 30K per year, after 3 1/2 months of grief and being unable to spend anymore time on the battle, I surrendered and traded my beloved Westy in for a 1998 VW GTI VR6.......It took me until 2005 to get back into another Westy, which brings me to my point.
I purchased a 1980 Westy(actually advertised on The Samba for sale today because I just bought another 1974 Thing) from the 2nd owner and it had been in a low mph accident on ice up on the mountain during a snowstorm...
"During a snowstorm at Mt Hood @ 1999, the van slid at 20 mph into a snow bank and tipped into the bank, causing the top to tweak....Their insurance Co. would not back them up on purchasing a replacement top (because they did not exist) so it now has a "Reconstructed Title". He purchased it back from them, had the hardtop seamlessly repaired and re-Gelcoated by a marine painting specialist (looks brand new!),then had exterior professionally repainted(also looks brand new!)....Call for entire story,this is not BS, it was nowhere near totalled, just BER(beyond economical repair) according to Ins co....and just one look and drive you will love it just as much as I. When I bought this van my 3rd 1980 Westy, It took the owner two days to find the title before the transaction went through, then, when he found it it said "reconstructed title" which is not as bad as one may think. "Salvage title" cars were a total loss and I would never touch-frame damage, fire damage etc..., reconstructed title cars had an issue where they were "BER-Beyond Economical Repair" ".......

I did not have an issue with it as I was provided with all of the receipts and I could tell that someone really loved and cherished the van to a fault......and that due to my previous battles with my "dream van", this would be Karma's way of rewarding me for my previous struggles. I have had 0 issues with this van and as with any of my 34 VW's I have owned over the years, I do all the routine maintenance to keep up with my vehicle and keep it running and driving like it should. The one bad thing about a reconstructed title vehicle is that people confuse it with a salvage title and it can really hit you on resale, if you ever resell it? Personally, to me it was a godshot as I still have not seen a 1980 Westy in as good Physical and mechanical shape as my "reconstructed Title" van.

May peace and serenity be with you and if you decide to keep it, which it seems you are leaning towards, just remember that you do have 15 years of Maintenance and repair history and 15 years of memories and stories and no one can take that away from you. If you did ever have to sell it, just like when I bought mine, you will find a true enthusiast who loves and cares for it as much as you do so do not worry....it will all work out! I just wish I would have been on The Samba during my ordeal from 2-2007 until 3-2008 when I finally gave up and traded my 1991 Westy in for a GTI. These are incredible vehicles and some people get it and some people do not! I adopted a saying from a previous employer while selling cars for 1 1/2 years in college that has stuck with me all these years...." there is an ass for every seat!" Mine prefers the luxury of a home on wheels.....

Good luck and keep us all updated!
carterzest
_________________
Happiness=Portland, Oregon in the rearview mirror!

[funagon]

Margalo13 wrote:

[xlr8r]

To Margalo 13:

I wish you good luck with your settlement. You seem to be a very reasonable lady and if I were the adjuster I would be very inclined to want to help you with a fair settlement.

To Funagon:

It was your comment at the top of page 2, that got me started. I was not going to comment at all because Margola 13 seemed to be on the right track.

Spare me the legal lecture and take your disgust for the insurance industry to another discussion.
_________________
1991- Seven passenger with 3.3 SVX ; 1987 - Seven Passenger with 2.5 Subaru

[Margalo13]

[PDXWesty]

I still think you're selling yourself short. He's already agreed your van is worth $11k. $8500 means you're buying it back for $2500 which is WAY too high for a salvaged van. it's worth no more than $1000 on a buy-back which means they should be paying you $10,000 if you keep it. There are industry standards for this. He's still trying to make money because you want to keep it. My 89 van was valued at $16,500 and my buyback was $900. I still think you should reject their offer at $8500 and ask if they will have an appraisal done.

[Lanval]

I think you should ask for more. I had 2 cars totaled by others in the 90's up in Portland (VW Fox, Jeep Wrangler). If they're willing to give you 11K to salvage, then they should give you almost that to keep it. Here's how it works:
$11,000 and they take it; they then sell it to a junkyard/salvage operation ~ maybe $500-1000 depending on what totaled means (the junkyard will likely pay more for a car with more/desirable parts to sell).

So if they are willing to pay $11K less the return on the salvage sale, then if you keep the van you should be getting $11K less the salvage value.

Call a junkyard and ask them what they'd pay for it. That amount is the amount of money less than $11K you should reasonably accept, within a few hundred dollars.

Logic drives this conclusion ~ the value of the van can't change depending upon who holds the title. I would want to know where they came up with a $2500 value for a salvage title vehicle .

Bottom line ~ insurance is a business; they aren't evil per se (well some of them are) but they are paid according to how much they save the company. So you should insist that what's good enough for them is good enough for you. It's tiring, I know, but I'll add my own experience.

89 yr old lady ran a red light and totaled my VW. Back pain, etc. for weeks ~ my neck has never been the same, range of motion on one side has been limited ever after.

The insurance co. offered to settle for medical only, plus total out my car (the car ran fine ~ it was so cheap that bumper/panel damage totaled it). I got a lawyer involved ~ this cost me 25% of the value of the settlement. The settlement went from $2800 ($2000 for auto, $800 for medical) to $5800 (latter number was net to me). It was worth it to pay to have a sharpshooter on my side who knew the rules of engagement.

You can call your local BAR association and get a referral ~ they only charge $35-50 for a 1 hour or so meeting with a lawyer who can give you the lowdown on the situation.

Best of luck,

Lanval

[Pascaa]

I seem to remember suggesting to not tell them you want your van back... he is doing exactly what i predicted: saving money because you are attached to the van.

I'd take the 11000$ and move on because now you run into the fun of dealing with bodyshops. Chances are that they will find something else that needs to be fixed and you will be spending more money than you though. Even a written estimate has a clause that says something along those line : subjet to dissambly. Or subject to hidden damage. There are often hidden damages.

I am sure the insurance co will have you sign a contract price that sheilds them from spending any more money that you agreed to by keeping your van. You gave them the big end of the stick, dont expect them not to use it.

You seems like a nice person that is swimming in a pool of sharks, insurance co, garages, bodyshops are all professionnals that earn their (not yours) living by their trade. If something goes wrong and it is not their obvious wrongdoing, the customer always pays, Always. Unless you can fix your van yourself, go adopt the nicest van you can find.

I know it is the wrong forum for my last comment but here goes anyways: it is only a piece of metal, dont get emotionnally attached to it, emotion will make you take the wrong decisions.
_________________
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)