by Guest » Fri Jul 10, 2009 03:54 pm
We received a major hail storm yesterday, and my vehicle is in bad shape. I have dents the size of grape fruits and softballs in the windshield and all the way from the hood to the back of the van and some on the sides. My question is, I lease this vehicle and dont want to pay to drive a refurbished vehicle, can the lease company take it back early?
Posted: Fri Jul 10, 2009 04:30 pm Post Subject:
"Refurbished vehicle"? You mean a vehicle that has been repaired? If so, I fail to see the problem. It will look _exactly_ the what it did prior to the damage. You don't own it so you won't need to worry about selling it with damage.
You have a contract with the leasing company. I'm sure there is a (huge) penalty if it's turned in early... if that is possible at all. You would need to speak to the leasing company about this as it all depends on your contract.
Posted: Fri Jul 10, 2009 05:46 pm Post Subject:
You may want to send a copy of the insurance estimate and pictures to your lease holder and have them put in writing that they will accept the repairs and methodology that the insurer is basing a settlement on. They may wish to inspect the repaired damage as well.
They may also accept the insurer payment and your deductible and sell the vehicle now as salvage and put you in another. It wouldn't hurt to ask them. You should, at least, involve the lease holder in the quality and type of repair the insurer is specifying. Some insurers never saw a hail dent that they did not believe was repairable using a paintless repair method when in fact, the panel should have been replaced. If the repairs are made using a pdr method, be sure to have the vehicle inspected for noticeable repairs under flourescent lighting which illuminates distortions and poor quality repairs. This pdr method generally only works on undamaged and nonrepainted surfaces and was only recommended for hail damage golf ball size and smaller.
Hail damage takes many shapes and sizes. Some hail is formed of clusters of ice and leave a jagged dent rather than a smooth round dent. Many dents wind up on edges next to braces that crack the paint. Other dents are made in areas that are not accessible by pdr massaging and may require a glue pull method which does not always remove 100% of the dent. They peck around a dent to give it the appearance of a gradual low spot to fool the human vision as it cannot detect dents on a curved or concave surface.
If repaired also determine who will bear the liability for dents that later reveal cracked paint because of the stress of pushing the dent out with a rod by massaging it. By all means, get a warranty from the shop that repaired it. They will be liable for the quality of repairs even if they sublet the repairs to a specialist that travels in from out of state that follow these storms. They may not later use the excuse that they cannot guaranty the repairs as the insurer specified them and it is all they would pay for. Repairers are supposedly the experts while it is insurers that pay for repairs, they do not repair cars themselves.
Many storm claims teams come into write hail damage estimates under a blinding sun with out aid of flourescent lighting. Placing cars under tents do not always reveal very small dents which can be plentiful as well. They are eager to get a check in the hand of the insured and tell you shops that will honor their guestimates which have agreements with the insurer looking out for their bottom line. It is the local adjusters that have to clean up behind some storm team appraisers that are under tremendous pressure and little time to accurately assess the damage properly in this repairer's opinionated opinion.
I have been told by many an appraiser that they are instructed to write for all pdr repairs when they know that the shop will be calling back for a supplement to replace parts that are not repairable. One can only speculate that some insurers with this knowledge understand that many policy holders pocket the money to which they are entitled and are basically and knowingly underpaid on a claim, again in my opinion and quite a few others. Seems that could be construed as insurance fraud but the statutes only seem to protect the policy holders against fraudulent repairers and since insurers only pay for repairs,,,,,oh well.
Add your comment