Loss of Use Insurance Question

The situation varies depending on various jurisdiction; for example, loss-of-use on a pleasure vehicle in Colorado is not something the law recognises as a damage... IE, you're out of luck. Other states have different laws, etc etc.

Beyond that, you must prove a your actual loss in a lawsuit. Courts will not simply accept an argument of "I was without my Ferrari for 46 days. It would have cost $1K/day to rent one, therefore I suffered a $46k loss."

In any case, you're facing filing a lawsuit and arguing it in court.

 

Not with an F-car, but with a collision claim in itself. The insurance co. is, by design, going to deny as much as they can. I'm involved right now with a claim where the defendant T-boned me, yet they say it's "not their fault". It's just what they do (so I'm told) and this has been going on for 2 years. I think we're playing a game of Chicken to see who flinches first. It's a staring contest.....and I'm blowing in their faces.

Not sure, but I doubt YOUR insurance co. can lean on them to help, since they aren't covering the repairs (or are they and then forwarding the repair bill?). I don't think there's any motivation for them to get involved. That sounds like a job for an outside attorney....which will probably cost the same as a "loss of use" payout.

 

you need to speak with someone who knows insurance in your state. is texas no fault - for example.

of course they are going to try to stiff arm you.... that is why you need to speak to someone...

interestingly, do you have insurance that only covers weekend use ?

 

If it were me I'd be dealing with the tow company directly. Tell them what you want and have them deal with their own insurance. If that doesn't work I'd talk to my own insurance or a lawyer. Just me though.

 

Is this not something that your insurance company should be sorting out on your behalf?

 

My experience when I had someone hit one of my cars and total it was that my insurance company took the lead and paid my claim under the com/collision part of the police, less the deductible. The then subrogated the claim against the part at fault's insurance to recover my deductible and the close of a rental car. It didn't matter that I had other cars to drive. The fact that I could not use the wrecked car entitled me to have a replacement at my disposal until the claim was fully settled and I signed off. I never dealt directly with the other persons insurance co. My insurance co did all the leg work. So maybe you need to talk to your insurance about what you are entitled to recover.

 

Did you actually rent (or make an effort to rent) a replacement car of like kind (ie, a rental Ferrari, Lamborghini, etc) during the 46 days that you were without the car? In Texas, this is a factor as to showing actual damages due to loss of use.

 

I think it’s valid, too, although I’m not surprised at their denial. That’s a common first-round response from an insurance company.

How much are you claiming for loss of use and how are you justifying it?

Matt

 

Oh. That’s a different thing.

That’s more like you losing the use of a second home versus someone else losing a rental property. One is losss of personal use, the other is income loss.

I think you want to argue personal use loss, not income loss, but I don’t know how to quantity that.

Matt

 

$400 x 46 days, or $400 x ~ 5 weekend days?

 

Yeah, that probably won't fly.

You've mentioned earlier it's a weekend car; there's a tough road ahead to prove you're entitled to $18,400 for a 46 day period without your car... especially considering you didn't rent a replacement, therefore the monetary damages are theoretical.

 

There is no straight answer. Consult with a lawyer specialized in dealing with auto insurance claims.

Also, have they paid for loss of value?

 

I do not want to come across as sounding mean, so do not take it the wrong why...... it is just what is running through my head. Is there a big difference between this situation vs having a car at the dealership where they end up waiting on parts they should have had ... or because the dealership got too busy and things took longer than they should have?

I lost the use of my car this summer too, for a number of reasons..... but I do not think it is right to sue the dealership for loss of use. Maybe you have a case in Texas, but I doubt you would get loss of use $ anywhere else in the world.

Plus, it wasn’t a moving accident, there is no risk of structural damage (I assume).... hopefully as good as new...... so I personally would be happy with that.

If this car was a source of income, that might be a different story in my eyes.

 

when my car is in the shop due to anothers "fault" i always rent a car.....

 

I agreee that it’s more than zero. But I think you need a better method to determine what that is.

I’d suggest consulting an expert, either in the law or in insurance or in valuation, but it might not be worth the cost.

Matt

 

Reality check on isle 6.

Car was on tow anyway so subtract whatever time frame for service it was heading towards.

Subtract likely no actual use (with proof of real use over last several years to average them).

You can’t do an amateurish copy of a rental off the internet and expect any sane company to simply pay that.

Call an attorney and expect a fight equivalent with the $ involved.

Opinions online are worth what you paid for them.