Insurance Question - Inconvenience 'n Stuff
 

Wife taking a left with green arrow, first car in line. 75+ year old lady takes a free right and T-bones wife's car in right side. Wife travelling 15mph, old lady going 5 mph or so.

Mushed in the passenger side doors, bent the pillar a bit. Doors won't open.

Along with wife and son, a separate witness also stopped and explained the above facts to police. Policeman issued a citation to the lady for failure to yield. Seems pretty clear cut.

But old lady tells her insurance that no citation was issued, that she wasn't at fault, etc.

So now our insurance considers the event 'their fault', but their insurance says event is 'in dispute'. They say they will reconsider once they receive the police report, but that is supposed to take 10-15 days. So right now I'm going through our own insurance, but with intent that lady's insurance will eventually pay for everything.

Now for the problem:

Car that was hit is a Prius V with a custom 2" receiver for a multi-bike rack. Our insurance says that such a car warrants a rental of up to $30/day. The problem is that I have an endurance mtb event this coming weekend and need to be able to safely transport 3 expensive mtb bikes and 4 people 6 hours each way. The prius v would have been fine. There are no vehicles in the $30 range that can do this. Other than a pickup I can't even find rental vehicles that have 2" receivers.

I would prefer to make my case to their insurance, I don't think I have an option with this short notice but to rent a Tahoe or something big. The cheapest I can get a bigger suv for is $78/day. That's with 2 hours of hunting. Ideally their insurance would find a reasonable replacement for me. I'm just renting it for the days I need it.

I realize it might be normal but I'm not used to getting crap from an insurance company. All cases in the past the other driver has accepted full responsibility and I received what I consider pool side concierge service. Once they tried to give my wife a tiny car, we complained and got something larger, but in that case we didn't need to contend with safely transporting 3 bikes.

I'm sort of pissed about the lack of clarity. I have a group legal plan and wondering if I should activate it. I don't want to hear about 'subrogation' and negotiation about fault since this was so clear cut. Probably I shouldn't take it personally but I am.

Lots of wise minds on here. Advice, etc, appreciated.

No such thing as "inconvenience" coverage. You have coverage for $30.00 that covers a vehicle of like kind. It may be clear cut to you but it's apparent the old lady disputes that. You filled a claim with your carrier so you have relinquished your rights to the insurance company. So you can't make your case to the other insurance company. In fact your doing so may jeopardize your carriers position and put them at risk. They could then deny your claim or hold you responsible for interference. Your company may or may not subrogate. It's their choice and they will make the decision based on whether or not it is financially acceptable to do so and their possibility of recovery.

You get $30.00 per day if you wish to pay $78.00 the difference is on you. The other company is not going to find you anything. The insurance carriers responsibility (both sides) is financial only.

That's the way it works.

Dr. C, I'm not sure I fully agree with your analysis. Why can't he call the other company's adjuster and ask if they'll cover the rental car? I've never heard of an insurer denying a claim or holding the insured responsible for "interference". His insurer will certainly subrogate for whatever they pay out to him, plus his deductible, but there isn't any reason I can think of that would prevent him from seeking an advance payment from the third-party carrier when his own insurer isn't willing to make the payment based on his first party coverage, as long as he doesn't sign a full and final release of all claims in exchange for the advance payment. IS there something I'm missing?

Zak, the least you can do is rent the vehicle that's the best deal, save your receipts, and make that part of your third-party claim against the other driver. I don't know what kind of a prepaid legal program you have, but it might not be a bad idea to activate it and have a lawyer hassle with the two insurers' adjusters. It's hard to negotiate on your own behalf.

I am in the insurance business. Commercial as opposed to standard auto. When you purchase insurance you assign your rights and a power of attorney to the carrier in exchange for them pay for your damage and or liability. Your carrier will hire adjusters and or attorneys as needed. zakthor or his wife could unknowingly make a statement that could jeopardize his carriers position against the other insured. Read your policy.

Correct "arguably at fault". The fact the old lady received a violation doesn't mean she is at fault until she pays the ticket (admission) or is found guilty in court. The accident report will help but is still disputable. The officer didn't witness the accident and made his report based on statements of those involved and witnesses. That doesn't mean the report will be correct and could be disputed by the opposing carrier to assign blame to zakthor reducing their financial obligation. Speaking to the opposing carrier could assist them.

Now the difference between the $30.00 and the $78.00 could be liability on the part of the old lady (payable by her policy). But that is where subrogation comes in. His policy authorizes $30.00 payable by his policy even if subrogation doesn't occur.

I think you're mixing up first party and third party coverage. His first party coverage will pay for the property damage to his vehicle under his comprehensive policy and will subrogate back against the at-fault driver's policy. But that doesn't affect the at-fault driver's liability to Zach's wife. He can still make a claim against the at-fault party for anything over and above what his insurer pays for on a first party basis. His insurer is obligated only to pay for the property damage that is covered by his comprehensive policy, which is why they want to pay only $30 a day, but that doesn't limit the other driver's liability. Zak's insurer might be willing to advance the full cost of a replacement rental vehicle, but they aren't obligated and would be taking the risk that they wouldn't get it back from the other driver's insurer when they settle the property damage claim. The other insurer is likely to consider the additional rental car expense as a potential element of damage when they settle the liability portion of the claim with Zach's wife. That's why I don't see any harm to contacting both adjusters and asking if either of them would advance the rental car expense pending final resolution of the claim. They'll probably say no, which gets us back to the save your receipts and make a claim for it later approach comes in.

Come to think of it, Zak should call his adjuster and ask him to call the other adjuster and see if they can negotiate an advance fr the rental car costs.

MRM, with all due respect I am not confusing anything. You can advise him you don't see any harm. I would advise I see a possibility of harm. But your closing statement is how you go about it. You go through your insurer and let them deal with it. If he choose to pay for the additional rental cost. Provide the receipts to his adjuster as part of subrogation.

Thanks MRM, that's what I was thinking.

Mostly I guess I'm frustrated that this is even being contested. It helps me to realize that. Probably my anger should be directed at the other driver who lied and is scared to lose her insurance.

I guess I consider the fault decided, but reasonable conservative corporation should get the facts straight. I could totally be a scam artist and I'm not their customer.

I think for now I should get in touch with my insurance, make sure they understand why I'm renting a $78 vehicle so they can defend that decision with the other insurance company.

And thank you too Sir!

For clarity: I don't have rental coverage, the $30 was the hypothetical amount our own insurance said they would expect to pay for an equivalent vehicle. It is a min and doesn't account for needing a 2" receiver (or a ton more space inside.)

You're welcome.

Do you have collision coverage?

He must have comp and collision or his company wouldn't be working with him to coordinate the property damage claim with the other party's insurer. If he had just liability they would have given him the other adjuster's contact information and wished him well. Rental coverage is a separate rider and costs a few bucks a month, so it makes sense Zak would have his own property damage covered but would not have his own rental car coverage. His insurer is calculating that they will eventually be able to get the other side to reimburse him for the replacement cost of a similar rental. This is actually quite nice of his insurer and is going a bit above and beyond for him, since the other side is denying liability and there's no guarantee that they'll get their money back. They can always go to intercompany arbitration if they don't get a decent settlement with the other insurer, but no one wants to file an intercompany arb for a couple hundred bucks.

Agreed MRM, but is his company working to coordinate the property claim? He states his carrier "considers the event "their fault"". So at this point they are preparing to pay the other party (liability). He further states the other carrier sees the event as "in dispute", so they aren't assuming their insured is at fault with an eye toward assigning at least a portion of the accident to Zakthors wife.

He hasn't said anything about his company repairing his vehicle under collision.

The rental rider would only be available if he had collision coverage. No rental leads me to believe their may not be collision. That's why I asked. If no collision that changes the whole scenario. The company rep may be just providing so free advice.

Yes, have collision coverage.

There were two witnesses that collaborated what happened. One of the witnesses knew the lady, small world. There may be video too. Technically though the lady hasn't admitted fault, is disputing events. My wife said she seemed sort of dingy.

I spoke with an attorney who said it was probably reasonable to rent the bigger vehicle for the time I needed it, just keep receipts, prepare to explain it, etc.

Worst case we pay our deductible and for the rental.

Hopefully the lady gets taken off the road. Would have been different if she had tboned a cyclist.

Edit: sorry my verbiage was ambiguous. To clarify:

My company believes us, that the lady is at fault. My company waived my deductible and is covering my repair.
The other company is saying the event is in dispute so wouldn't deal with us, which is different from the other accidents we ever had where the other party admitted fault.

Thanks again guys.

Resolution: Police report finally arrived at lady's insurance, from that they realized that their insured was just lying about everything and was causing trouble for everyone.

They have reversed liability and will cover the Tahoe I rented last weekend to transport bikes to race. They will be paying for a rental until our vehicle is repaired.

Not sure what the learning is from this. Maybe... if you screw up, own up to it, don't be a lying jerk.