I know that was a corny joke that may overstate the frequency of the problem to some degree. But, this fact can't be disputed or denied: Insurance adjusters often lie to consumers, hoping their antics will cause them to become discouraged and accept a smaller settlement than they are rightfully owed.If you choose not to repair damage that is covered by insurance, as a general rule, the insurer still owes you for the full value of necessary repairs that would be required to put your vehicle into its preloss condition. But, be forewarned. If you choose not to repair accident damage on your car, your insurance company would not be required to continue insuring the car for its full retail value.While it is true, mistakes occasionally happen and some adjusters pass untruths out of ignorance, many others are handsomely rewarded for routinely telling blatant and deliberate lies to claimants.
if you encounter problems with a shop you selected, the insurance company will be quoting the old lyric, "I told you so," and will be little help in procuring your satisfaction.The fact that the negligent party bought lousy insurance coverage does not relieve them of the responsibility and obligation they have to indemnify you of damage they caused. Therefore, if the third-party insurance company doesn't want to make full restitution to you on their policyholders' behalf, you are under no obligation to deal with them. The same would be true for anything that is damaged and reconstructed. Think for a moment about a valuable vase that gets broken. Although the vase could be glued back together, even to the point that the damage is unrecognizable, it could never be as sound or as valuable as it previously was because there is a potential for failure after the accident and repair that didn't previously exist. Likewise, during auto repairs it is economically impractical to test every component and part on a car to guarantee that it's performance and durability are unaltered. In addition, many of the tests that would be required in making this determination are destructive by nature making them unfeasible to perform.If, on the other hand, you go to a shop selected by an insurer and get deceived, or don't receive the level of repair you are entitled to, you will be in a much better position to negotiate with the insurer, especially if there is threat of a bad faith lawsuit against them.
I might not run even then if you have a terrier or a poodle. If however, you are saying "sic-um" to a ferocious pit bull, I'll have a much different attitude. Insurers are no different. They pick and choose their fights. If they think you can mount a good defense against them, they will usually pay you everything you are owed. If they think you can't afford a lawyer or a proper defense, they will most often bully you and stall your claim, sometimes forever. As in the analogy of the dog, when you unleash a lawyer that commands insurer's respect, you will get action. But even then, don't expect results quickly.In effect, DRP shops see insurers as their customers instead of vehicle owners. Given the choice, most will favor an insurer to keep work coming in the door, even if it means lying and cheating long-time customers. There are many ways DRP shops favor insurers. As an example, many DRP agreements and contacts mandate that repair shop estimators overlook certain damages that would not be blatantly obvious to a consumer's untrained eye. In addition, it would not be uncommon for them to try to talk you into accepting an appearance allowance that represents an amount less than the actual cost of repairs to forgo repair of some damaged panels or parts. This would often be presented to you in such a way as to convince you they are doing you a favor.
Sunday, January 18, 2009
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment