by mikomiko951 » Thu Feb 04, 2010 08:03 pm
Hi, When I woke up in morning I saw my car has a dmage (hit-and-run) so I called police and they said they do not have enough force to send it over as there is no injury and they said I can take my car to CHP to get report, but the damage was to the rear wheel and I did not want to risk to drive in freeway to get into CHP office. Then I called insurance and the lady told me I can take my car to body shop. Even I told her that I did call police and she said I can take the car to body shop or storage. So, I did. now they are saying the damage did not caused by accident and the car hit the wall (they said that their specialist is saying that). I have my neighbor who heard the sound of crash, but insurance say they heard crash but did not see anything, so it is not acceptable. So, they do not want to pay me. I do not know what to do. Please help me.
Posted: Thu Feb 04, 2010 08:57 pm Post Subject:
First, do you not have collision coverage but you do have uninsured motorist property damage? This is the only way your scenario would be correct.
I don't think you need to take your car in to obtain a police report... you can simply go to their office and fill out a report. What happens if you do this now? It should not make a difference to the insurance company when it was filed, only that it was. If your neighbor heard the crash did they then go out to see what it was? Why can't they confirm that they hear a crash when you say the accident happen and perhaps they can confirm that your vehicle was parked their at the time and then it would not make sense to say you hit a wall. What information does your carrier have to say you hit a wall? It seems like you have more information to confirm your version is correct (a police report, even filed now would really help you) and that they really don't have anything to confirm you hit a wall. Again, assuming that they _don't_ have any confirmation to what they claim.
Posted: Thu Feb 04, 2010 09:00 pm Post Subject:
How the vehicle was damaged isn't the concern, however it would appear that the "investigator" has the opinion that the vehicle struck an object rather than an object struck the vehicle. Have you asked the insurance company how their investigator arrived at that conclusion? Do you not have collision coverage on your policy which maybe the reason for non-payment?
Posted: Thu Feb 04, 2010 09:24 pm Post Subject:
How it was damaged could change what coverage is available. That is, from UMPD to collision. But you are correct, getting hit by another vehicle and hitting a wall could both be considered under collision, if it's on the policy.
Posted: Thu Feb 04, 2010 09:32 pm Post Subject:
I have full coverage. and the neighbor looked out from window after he heard the crash sound, but car looked ok, because her window is to the right side of the vehicle. And damage is on the rear left side. Insuranse said that the investigator beleives your car was moving when acccident happened and you hit the wall. they said this damage is not caused by accident.
Posted: Thu Feb 04, 2010 09:38 pm Post Subject:
I have full coverage
No such thing.... I've never seen "full coverage" listed as a coverage on an auto policy. Do you have _collision_ coverage?If your neighbor heard a crash and saw that your vehicle was parked in the street at the time it seems like you have _way_ more support for your claim then someone who thinks they can determine that your vehicle was moving at the time of an impact.
I'm wondering if the location and/or extent of the damage does not match up with a vehicle hitting yours when it was parked. I'm betting it's something more like this.
Also, if you've not filed a police report one has to wonder why. It can't hurt you to do so at this time.
Posted: Thu Feb 04, 2010 09:42 pm Post Subject:
yes, I have collision-coverage. It happened in December 20th , 2009, so can I still report it ? . By the way, Insurance denied yesterday.
Posted: Thu Feb 04, 2010 10:09 pm Post Subject:
If you have collision, as Trench stated, I fail to see how they can deny that coverage. You state that they felt you struck a wall. Well, that is covered under collision. So why are they denying collision coverage for the vehicle hitting a wall?
You need to contact the local PD to see if they will take a report at this time. I'm betting they will.
Posted: Fri Feb 05, 2010 06:37 am Post Subject: Collision coverage
Collision coverage provides protection to your car against damages caused by another car or any other object. So if you have this coverage, your insurance company should pay you even if they believe that your car had hit a wall.
Posted: Fri Feb 05, 2010 02:39 pm Post Subject:
Is there, was there evidence (debris) from this "phantom" vehicle left on the street where the collision occured?
Insuranse said that the investigator beleives your car was moving when acccident happened and you hit the wall. they said this damage is not caused by accident.
Suspect. Again, if this what they told you-I would ask what evidence supports this finding. Although difficult at times, there are several tell tale signs that would reveal if in fact a vehicle was in motion at the time of the occurance. Any paint transfer from another vehicle, debris that doesn't belong to your vehicle either on the street as I mentioned or in/on your vehicle, skid marks leading to/away, fluids in areas where your vehicle was not etc. If these are not present or evidence does not point in that direction maybe the reason for their decision. However, if you infact have collision coverage, there is no reason why you should not be paid in either case.
Posted: Fri Feb 05, 2010 04:59 pm Post Subject:
I filed a Law Suit in small claim court. Thank you all for answering my question.
Add your comment