Edmunds.com | Inside Line | Auto Observer Your Account | Help | Directory
You are here:
![[F]](http://a332.g.akamai.net/f/332/936/12h/www.edmunds.com/media/townhall/webxicons/site.gif){kind=small}
Forums
Smart Shopper Questions About Auto Insurance & Accidents
4410 messages, Last post on Nov 29, 2009 at 5:58 AM
You are in the Smart Shopper Forum. Your Hosts are kirstie_h & tidester
|
DV now means that the insurance can close the file on the claim...insurances hate nothing more than keeping a file open indefinitely for something as simple as DV...what if you do not sell the vehicle for 7 years, that is a long time to keep a file open, now multiple that by 1000s of vehicles, and the recordkeeping would be a nightmare... Also, the DV 10 years down the road may not matter, but it would when the car is newer...if you bought a ten year old vehicle, even knowing it was wrecked 9 years ago, would hardly change the vaue of the car at year 10, as it has already lost much of its value...so recovering DV at year 10 might just be silly... Did I miss the point???
|
|
|
Replying to: marsha7 (Aug 27, 2007 5:34 pm) One does not have to sell their vehicle to collect diminished value. It is an element of loss just like damage to a bent fender and other property damage. If an insurance company accept liability for damage, diminished value should be included. Is there Good Hope for Fair Auto Insurance Settlements? David Williams |
|
|
the point I may have missed...of course DV should be included, my point was that it should be paid at the same time the repairs are concluded, as DV will have the greatest effect the newer (younger) the car is... I meant that for a company to pay DV 5 years later would be silly, as the greatest DV takes place when the car is newer, or, put another way, paying $2500 in DV when the car at 10 years old is only worth $3000 from a wreck 5 years ago makes no sense... We incur the loss now, so DV should be paid now, as tho it would compensate us for the loss of value as tho we traded the car in today, not some time in the future... |
|
|
Replying to: marsha7 (Aug 28, 2007 6:13 pm) I am curious though, why an advocate for the collision repair industry would be pushing dv so hard? It will only really detrimentally effect the industry (except for PRI's) More vehicles will total, earlier and more often. In addition, it likely will work out to be a wash for the carriers as they will now -- and with impunity -- be able to reduce total-loss ACV settlements for DV. If carriers start giving DV, you can rest assured they will start taking DV.
|
|
|
Replying to: marsha7 (Aug 28, 2007 6:13 pm) |
|
|
Replying to: lilyowen (Aug 29, 2007 5:35 am) Diminished value is the tool that levels the field for consumers. If its use means more cars total. so be it. If insurers take as well as give DV, that's fair too.
|
|
|
Please bare with me I'm new to this whole forum thing. Saturday I purchased a new car (it only had 21 miles when I drove it off of the lot). Monday evening I had to go back to the dealership to finalize a few things. When I drove out of the parking lot I got into an accident. There were 74 miles on the car. It's pretty bad and I don't know if it's totalled or not.  Fortunately, I had just signed papers adding GAP insurance to my loan. However, I was told by the guy that towed my car that if it is totalled I may be entitled to another car since it is under a certain mileage. This sounds completely ridiculous... but I wanted to know if anyone had heard of this? I live in Pennsylvania, in case it matters.
|
|
|
Replying to: manda613 (Aug 29, 2007 8:28 am)
|
|
|
Replying to: qbrozen (Aug 29, 2007 9:50 am)
|
|
|
Replying to: manda613 (Aug 29, 2007 10:44 am)
|
|
You are here:
Forums
Smart Shopper Questions About Auto Insurance & Accidents
New? Join Now!
Forum Tools
Search Forums
Browse by Vehicle
Browse by Board
Browse by Topic
Today's Chats
