by Guest » Sat Aug 13, 2011 04:22 am
TL;DR version:
State Farm took 41 days to come up with a settlement (which was also their first communication with me), and now won't cover the storage fees (their client ran a red light and plowed into me). They've also included Retained Salvage Value of $1600 for the completely destroyed vehicle (that they never appraised). I went to retrieve it, and tow yard has already sold it (yesterday) for $600. In other words, I'm out $1000 (1600 - 600) from their overestimation and large portion of storage fees they refuse to cover.
On July 1st, My wife and I got plowed into by somebody who ran a red light. The case was as clear as day and night: we have a witness following us who confirmed we went on green; we have a witness following the other guy who confirmed he ran a red light; police report concluded that the other party was at fault because of overwhelming evidence (that, and the guy himself actually admitted it on the scene). Police called the tow truck form the scene and towed the car.
We only had liability coverage with GEICO on that vehicle, so as soon as they saw the police report, they found the other party to be liable, wished me luck in pursuing them and basically didn't want anything to do with me from that point.
I contacted State Farm (the insurance agency of the other guy) and of course they haven't done anything with my claim. I had to supply the police report, and they took two weeks to conduct an "investigation" because their client has changed his mind and claimed it was me who ran a red!!!
During all of this I receive a letter from the tow yard that they are charging $60/day for storage; now we live in an apartment building with strictly enforced CC&Rs, so I have no means of retrieving the vehicle. During my very first conversation with State Farm I describe the situation with towing/storage and their first reaction is "we're not going to pay for this". After a long discussion we get it to "you won' be responsible" for the charges (I don't have a recording of this conversation, unfortunately). Two more weeks pass and the day my salvaged car is supposed to be auctioned off is rapidly approaching. On the 41st day I receive a settlement letter which does not mention anything about towing/storage. It also contains "Retained Salvaged Value" of $1600, for a car I don't want to retain. The same day I went to talk to the tow yard, and it turns out the car has just been sold for $600.
After (a literally) 2 hour conversation (with breaks for when their Claim Representative hung up on me) State Farm agreed to pay for towing and first 15 days of storage. I'm looking to get all of storage fees covered and also lowering the RSV to what the market has determined to be $600.
P.S. - just submitted a complaint to CA Dept of Insurance
State Farm took 41 days to come up with a settlement (which was also their first communication with me), and now won't cover the storage fees (their client ran a red light and plowed into me). They've also included Retained Salvage Value of $1600 for the completely destroyed vehicle (that they never appraised). I went to retrieve it, and tow yard has already sold it (yesterday) for $600. In other words, I'm out $1000 (1600 - 600) from their overestimation and large portion of storage fees they refuse to cover.
On July 1st, My wife and I got plowed into by somebody who ran a red light. The case was as clear as day and night: we have a witness following us who confirmed we went on green; we have a witness following the other guy who confirmed he ran a red light; police report concluded that the other party was at fault because of overwhelming evidence (that, and the guy himself actually admitted it on the scene). Police called the tow truck form the scene and towed the car.
We only had liability coverage with GEICO on that vehicle, so as soon as they saw the police report, they found the other party to be liable, wished me luck in pursuing them and basically didn't want anything to do with me from that point.
I contacted State Farm (the insurance agency of the other guy) and of course they haven't done anything with my claim. I had to supply the police report, and they took two weeks to conduct an "investigation" because their client has changed his mind and claimed it was me who ran a red!!!
During all of this I receive a letter from the tow yard that they are charging $60/day for storage; now we live in an apartment building with strictly enforced CC&Rs, so I have no means of retrieving the vehicle. During my very first conversation with State Farm I describe the situation with towing/storage and their first reaction is "we're not going to pay for this". After a long discussion we get it to "you won' be responsible" for the charges (I don't have a recording of this conversation, unfortunately). Two more weeks pass and the day my salvaged car is supposed to be auctioned off is rapidly approaching. On the 41st day I receive a settlement letter which does not mention anything about towing/storage. It also contains "Retained Salvaged Value" of $1600, for a car I don't want to retain. The same day I went to talk to the tow yard, and it turns out the car has just been sold for $600.
After (a literally) 2 hour conversation (with breaks for when their Claim Representative hung up on me) State Farm agreed to pay for towing and first 15 days of storage. I'm looking to get all of storage fees covered and also lowering the RSV to what the market has determined to be $600.
P.S. - just submitted a complaint to CA Dept of Insurance
Posted: Sat Aug 13, 2011 02:56 pm Post Subject:
You would have a duty to mitigate your loss. If you thought it was a total loss then the towing/storage should have been paid and it should have been moved to a salvage yard. The salvage yard would have paid you some money (probably enough to cover the towing/storage).
That is what SF is looking at.
SF does have the responsibility to investigate the loss. It's fortunant that their insured wanted to lie about the situation. But SF does need to consider this. My guess is that they wanted to follow up personally with the witnesses to confirm their statements. This can take awhile, depending on how fast they can be reached.
SF is going to take the position that they are not responsible for excessive storage on the vehicle due to the time it took to determine liability.
That is SF's position.
You have many arguments in your favor as well. You spoon fed SF enough to show their insured was liable. Did SF really aggressively investigate this loss or did they make a call and then sit on the file (I think you will find they sat on it). Did they tell you that they would not address the storage while they investigating the loss (this should have been done in writing... otherwise it was not done). If it was not put in writing then they gave you the "impression" that they would be addressing that excessive storage while they investigated the claim.
Your arguments that they actually told you they would pay for the storage and that they never gave you anything in writing as well as that they created the delays in their slow investigation are strong points and you probably want to focus on these. They were in control of this entire situation and this is what they do. So they should be held to a higher standard of how to avoid this conflict.
In that this happened in CA is _certainly_ in your favor! The CA DOI sets a high bar for insurance companies.
Do I think SF will pay 41 days of storage? They may... they may not. If you were to file suit against their insured for this amount do I think you'd win? I'd say you'd have a 75% chance. That is just a guess though. I'm pointing out that it's not a slam dunk.
As for the $1600 vs $600.... what the storage company sold the vehicle for is not a good measure of it's value. The storage company is _only_ trying to get paid for their expenses. I'm betting they would need to pay you anything over that amount so why would they work hard to make more money. They don't get anything out of it. They would rather just get paid what they owe and move on. Is the $1600 value correct? I can't know. How did SF arrive at this amount? Salvage bids? If so, have you called those places to confirm that they _will_ buy the vehicle for that amount? If SF thinks they have enough info to show that it could have been sold for $1600 then they may stick to their guns. However, if nothing else they might be willing to decrease this amount in order to get the claim settled. You may want to negotiate with them on this matter. What you need to keep in mind is that you could have done things a little better as well. When the towing company told you your vehicle was going to be sold you could have taken actions to prevent that. You could have put in writing to SF that they needed to address the storage, etc. Instead you just allowed your vehicle to be sold for whatever price. I'm not trying to throw anything in your face. I'm just trying to point out that there are two sides to this situation.
Posted: Sat Aug 13, 2011 10:45 pm Post Subject:
You could have put in writing to SF that they needed to address the storage, etc. Instead you just allowed your vehicle to be sold for whatever price. I'm not trying to throw anything in your face. I'm just trying to point out that there are two sides to this situation.
This is why I recommend all my collision customers communicate with both their insurer and the at fault party in writing. All a person has to say is that I choose to communicate in writing only so that there be no misunderstanding with either party as to the intent or content of any conversation. I have also found that some insurers will not put into writing many things they will freely say over the phone.Then again, some will be bold enough to make unfounded claims in writing that bites them in the keyster later. And those phone conversations intended for quality purposes only are never available when a consumer requests them. If an adjuster made it through four years of college and obtained a bachelors degree, they certainly should have learned how to type and email as fast and efficient as they talk. Some insurance personel even have enough time to disperse invaluable information on insurance forums as well as do their day jobs!
Posted: Sat Aug 13, 2011 11:13 pm Post Subject:
This is why I recommend all my collision customers communicate with both their insurer and the at fault party in writing.
. It's almost impossible to do everything in writing, it would drag out lot of claims. If there is something you are relying on, discuss it over the phone and then send a letter as follow up ("as we discussed... if this is incorrect, please let me know as soon as possible").I have also found that some insurers will not put into writing many things they will freely say over the phone.
Things in writing can also be taken out of context. In order to get an entire conversation in writing it would need to contain information from both sides of the conversation. You'd end up with a 20 page letter.
Then again, some will be bold enough to make unfounded claims in writing that bites them in the keyster later
I'm sure incorrect information is given out all of the time. But where is the Fair Claims Practice Act for non-insureds? The can pretty much flat out lie, admit to it later on and nothing happens.Some insurance personel even have enough time to disperse invaluable information on insurance forums as well as do their day jobs!
That really did not even make sense. I'd expect a little more.Posted: Sun Aug 14, 2011 01:35 am Post Subject:
Quote:
Some insurance personel even have enough time to disperse invaluable information on insurance forums as well as do their day jobs!
That really did not even make sense. I'd expect a little more.
tcope
I was trying to pay you a compliment but maybe it came out wrong. I was making the point that one should be able to communicate in writing as well as follow up via phone tag. I have read the notes adjusters have to make into their files by reading those that were made available in the Progressive vs Coccarro trial. Those same subpoened notes shed a lot of light on the amount of notes that accompany any claim file whether it be communication from supervisors and adjusters or notes refered to phone conversations with shops and vehicle owners. It would seem to be just as easy to share the same communication in writing with policyholders and claimants to me. People not in the collision industry or the insurance industry listen to our coversations and it sounds like we are speaking from Mars or another planet. People have a better understanding when they read and re-read text than when they listen to legal, technical, and jargon to which they are not accustomed. They are better served when they have the opportunity to make decison based on what they read and comprehend.
Posted: Sun Aug 14, 2011 04:46 am Post Subject:
I appreciate the time everybody has taken to respond. Regarding putting things in writing - they are horrifically slow as is, I imagine things would slow down by orders of magnitude if it had to be done over mail (btw, they take just as long to process emails). I was trying to resolve the situation before the car was to be sold.
State Farm has arrived at $1600 without ever sending an adjuster; they haven't even looked at the pictures I've provided, because it takes them OVER A WEEK to process an email - and that's how I sent them. Failure to carry out proper investigation is my angle. I owe the tow yard over $3100 and the car was sold at a large auction - pretty close to open market conditions and they have no incentive to let it go for less. I didn't want to sell the car to the tow yard earlier, because I didn't want to be in a situation where State Farm couldn't assess the damages. What if they said - the car was actually all right, we can't take a look at it, so you're on your own? Or they'd estimate it at a much higher price than what i'd have to sell it for - precisely the case it ended up being.
I didn't quite just allow the vehicle to be sold - I called State Farm every working day for 3 days straight leading up to the date of sale to get them to do something. The day it was supposed to be sold, when I came home from work, there was a fedex with a settlement letter which:
a) didn't offer to cover any of the towing/storage.
b) was sticking me with retained salvage (which I didn't want, but turns out in 3rd party cases they are not required to take it over according to CA DOI)
After reading the letter I called the tow yard (with sadistic twist of irony, it's named "Auto Return" in San Francisco) and they still had the car. The following day I spent several hours trying to negotiate with State Farm, because I was still naively under impression that they will cover costs I incurred as a direct result of their client's actions. That's when I learned about the gray area in law that they choose to twist to their advantage and realized that I'm going to have to take it to court. That same night I went by the tow yard, but the car was already sold for $600.
Posted: Sun Aug 14, 2011 07:45 pm Post Subject:
State Farm it seems will not come into the modern era of technology with regard to email conferencing and contact. It would be much easier for shops, policyholders, and claimants to email pictures and documents to state farm, but they prefer boots on the ground and control by claiming they have the right to inspect property and premises that they do not own. They are cost control to the point of being anal. It could be simply because their entire house of cards almost came down in a billion dollar court case where the evidence against them was as a result of internal emails that they had to supply. Had it not been for a supreme court judge's decision in Illinois who State Farm funded the campaign for him to get elected and subsequently found in favor of State Farm, things may have been different in the field of insurance today. They rely on faxing of documents, denying and delaying claims that they so choose.
Insurers simply have deeper pockets when it comes to litigation and they will outspend you if necessary. This can be seen in a recent court case where Progressive paid their expert witness more than 30,000 dollars which was the amount they were suing to collect for supposed fraud against a shop. Wise jurors saw the folly of their plan and found in favor of the business owner, but not before he spent several hundred thousand dollars for his defense. Insurers have time and money on their side and they win with power and might and not necessarily right much of the time. That being said, I would still much rather work for vehicle owners that have state farm than most any other company out there. I don't always find them fair, but when challenged with facts that are undeniable, they step up to the plate much of the time and pay sooner than most at least in my region of the country.
In addition, I have collected thousands of dollars over the years from state farm in storage and administrative fees for which they claim they do not owe. I am not in the business of babysitting their policy holder cars taking up valuable working space while they play games with claimants and policyholders. They can not abandon a vehicle in Missouri, maybe this helps.
Posted: Mon Aug 15, 2011 02:31 am Post Subject:
I went through this same thing with Allstate.The adjuster said things to me on the phone like "when you go to get your belongings out if they dont want to let you in have them call me".She made me feel like my car did not belong to me anymore and like I had no choice but to leave it at the tow yard until they decided what they wanted to do.This was before they had even sent a field rep to decide if my car could be fixed.Not to mention how heartless they seemed about the whole situation.
Add your comment