Does anyone believe this is a fair settlement?

My daughter was rear ended by a driver with the same insurance company as we have (dual insured claim) and our 2004 Honda Civic EX was totaled. It had 143,000 miles on it.Last July this car received hail damage. The insurance adjuster gave us an on-the-spot estimate and we received a settlement of $3180.53. Our deductible of $250 was subtracted from this amount and we received a check for $2930.53. We did not have the hail damage repaired. This claim was filed under our policy and there were no liens on the vehicle.Now, in February, our daughter was rear ended by another person who has the same car insurance carrier as us. Her car is considered a total loss. The other driver has been deemed at fault. It is my understanding that any loss would be covered by the other driver's policy. The insurance adjuster called me before making an offer and asked me if we had the hail damage repaired for the prior claim. I told him we did not. His offer was then based on NADA Clean Retail Value of $8250, minus $575 for high mileage, minus $3180 for prior hail damage claim (under our policy), plus $173.84 for tag, title, tax refund bringing the final amount to $4,668.84.Here is my main question. Is it acting in good faith for the insurance company to subtract a former exact dollar amount from a claim that was filed under our policy? The current accident was the other driver's fault and they have the same insurance carrier. The current accident is being filed under their policy but they are subtracting a claim from my policy that was previously filed. I am not in any way trying to deny the hail damage. However, if we had not had the same insurance carrier, I don't believe a previous claim on our policy would have even been part of the equation. It is my understanding that they always use Clean Retail Value for the base of calculation regardless of prior claims or any other factors. I can understand a deduction for the hail damage but is it a fair and equitable thing to subtract dollar for dollar of a claim that was filed under another policy. They are using information that they have because it is a dual insured collision and using against me who is also their customer. I have been with the same agent for 30+ years. I don't see how my previous claim should be completely subtracted from the current situation. I paid premiums and carried full coverage on my car. The other driver carried full coverage on their car. They were at fault. This just doesn't seem right. How do we know what the acceptable amount to subtract for hail damage? Should it be based dollar for dollar on a claim that was filed under my policy. If both drivers weren't covered by the same company would this be exactly how it would be handled? Would they have privy to that information and would they have even asked for it? Why would they care what another company would have paid on my previous policy? I believe it's because it is all coming out of the same bank account, so short change the faithful 30 year customer so they can sqeeze more out of the claim. Does anyone believe this is a fair settlement?