I’ll bet that no one has explained to you what I am about to explain . . .
First of all, the terms Actual Cash Value (ACV) and/or Fair Market Value (FMV) are sorely lacking and ambiguous when it comes to actually helping to define the value of a private passenger automobile.
In fact, the formal definition in almost every source one can find leaves out the MAINASPECT that would make the definition useful.
The terms ACV and FMV are so ambiguous that they are totally meaningless when it comes to figuring out the value of your vehicle.
Don’t believe me, let’s break it down.
Start with familiarizing yourself with the “formal” definitions.
What do you think? Do you have to sell your car in order to prove that it has lost value?
To the surprise of me and my client’s attorney, we recently had a Judge that said YES. Insurance adjusters are trained to say YES to the title question, too. But what do you think?
The graphic with this article sorta sums up why the law does not agree with the Judge or the insurance adjusters, but I’ll go a little further to drive the point home.
No, Really…Do You Have To Sell Your Car To Prove Diminished Value?
Am I richer when the prices of my stocks go up?
Am I poorer when my stock values are down?
If average home prices around the home I own rise, am I richer?
If I trade my Lamborghini even for a Toyota Corolla, am I richer, or poorer?
If the doctor says I need a $10000.00 surgery to save my foot, am I richer if I don’t get the surgery?
If I lose my foot, and then use a prosthetic, is the cost of maintaining and replacing the prosthetic, along with the future medical costs I will incur part of the value of my claim, or does it only count when I actually go and pay for the care?
If everybody in your neighborhood paid $500 for a grill from the hardware store, and you found an identical one on Craigslist for $325.00 and still in the box, what is the market value of the grill?
If I have a Rolex valued at $22,000.00 by a well known Rolex appraiser, and I sell it for $18000.00, did I change the value of the Rolex?
If a sell price dictates market value, then there is no such thing as a “good deal”.
Let me start by saying that some people never need an attorney, and others will always need an attorney.
Additionally, this article is based on my 15 years of claims adjusting experience. I have developed a simple little formula that will help you decide if you need an attorney or not. Keep in mind, this quiz is tailored for auto accidents only, and I make no warranties or guarantees that your result is a foolproof answer.
Ultimately, the only person that can decide if you need an attorney is you.
With that being said, simply answer the following 15 questions and then add up your answers. All of these questions are yes or no questions. Whatever answer you have the most of is your answer to the title of this article.
If you are doing research on how to get paid for your vehicle’s diminished value, then you know that the advice on the street is to get a diminished value appraisal from a qualified expert. Are you feeling lost or overwhelmed in the process? You aren’t alone!
Insurance companies count on vehicle owners not knowing about the law, specifically the made whole doctrine. They use the lack of knowledge by the layman to prey on accident victims for profit. Right now, many of the accident victims that are reading this article are being further victimized by their own insurance company, and many times the adjusters that are doing the victimizing have been indoctrinated to believe they are doing the right thing and that they are within the law.
Let me be very clear here:
Insurance companies routinely steal money from their own customers through improper and illegal subrogation activities.
If you’ve had the displeasure of being in an accident where your vehicle was repairable, you’ve probably experienced a loss in the resale value of your vehicle, no matter how well it was repaired.
Additionally, in the vast majority of cases the insurance company that is responsible for settling the claim with you gives you an unfair and invalid diminished value claim denial. In my view, the denial of these valid claims is an act of fraud.
If it is fraud, then why doesn’t the insurance company get in trouble for it?
The primary reason is that there are very few attorneys and even fewer accident victims that really understand the denials. Because of that, it is difficult for the accident victim to defeat the illogical and unlawful reasons that insurance companies use to deny diminished value claims.
I thought long and hard about what I could do to help accident victims get fair compensation for lost value, and outside of preparing an appraisal for them and directing them to an attorney that will take their case, the best I can do is to educate. So that is exactly what I will do right now!
I’ve already published one article that gives some responses to common denials, but in this post, I am going to pull out the stops and address every denial reason I can find, and provide all the proper reasons why the denials are invalid, improper, and in most cases, fraudulent.
In the small world of automobile claims, there’s new buzz surrounding California Diminished Value law and the recent changes in California Jury Instructions regarding property damage to automobiles.
The changes came in response to one attorney’s relentless pursuit of justice. Attorney Montie S. Day refused to sit idly by when he realized California insurance carriers and their adjusters were using language in official jury instructions to try and make accident victims believe they could not legally recover lost value damages. Specifically, we’re talking about inherent lost market value to automobiles, or as it is more commonly known, diminished value or simply DV. Market surveys and sales prove that damaged and repaired vehicles are generally less desirable (thus, less valuable) on the resale market than identical vehicles that have never been damaged and repaired.
What’s interesting here is that big changes are expected, yet there is no new California Diminished Value law. What the insightful Mr. Day attacked was not improper law (jury instructions are not law, and the law in California already recognized the right of a victim to recover inherent lost value aka diminished value). Instead he realized insurance carriers were using language in the jury instructions to mislead accident victims and imply that the law in California would not allow recovery of inherent diminished value, so he attacked and exposed that unfair and misleading tactic.
In a professional forum for diminished value providers, we had a member inquire about how the amount of the repair bill affects the diminished value (inherent) of a vehicle.
It is my experience that the amount of damages is an imperative factor to have in order to accurately assess diminished value.
Worried about your collision repair after an auto accident?
You ought to be.
In nearly 15 years as an adjuster, I have seen some doozies when it comes to collision repair.
Not all shops are crooks, but body shops, like any other business, are in business to make money.
Most people are not experts on collision repair, and body shops know this.
Taking your car to a body shop is sort of like going to the doctor or hiring an attorney. You kind of have to trust what the doctor or lawyer says because they are specially trained.
It is the same for a body shop, you kind of have to trust what they tell you because they are specially trained.
What is a third party claim and what do you need to know?
Anytime you’re involved in an auto accident and it was not your fault, you potentially have a third party claim.
If the at fault party has liability insurance, then when you file a claim with their insurance company and you have a third party claim.
I have read quite a few articles that give a lot of bad information about adjusters. The thing I have noticed about those articles is that none of them were written by an insurance adjuster!
I’d be willing to bet that if you have not been an insurance adjuster, then you believe insurance adjusters are almost as bad as used car salesmen or attorneys, hehehe. It is a common view. I can’t speak for every single insurance claims office out there, but I can say that I have worked for 5 different non-standard companies as an adjuster, and I have worked on contract for many standard companies as a recovery specialist with a firm.
I have never been instructed to deny any valid claim, nor have I been advised to “low-ball” claimants.
This might happen at some companies, but it is definitely not the norm. Insurance adjusters (if they care about their license) will usually try very hard to fairly resolve claims.
I will say that I have definitely dealt with some companies that have some “questionable” practices.
I won’t name names, but some of these companies simply attempt to cut costs by hiring inexperienced adjusters and giving them a “rule-book”.
It is the inexperience of the adjuster in interpreting the “rules” that causes the majority of the issues.
