Minor hit/run damage and State Farm

Page 2 of 2  
wrote:

gmail.com> wrote:

Insurance is for the big stuff, go ahead and file, dont be suprised if you are dropped from the 2 claims.
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
at Gmail Dot Com wrote:

No.
Collision insurance pays for damage to your car in an accident that was your fault -- obviously not the case here. I'm not sure whether this falls under comp or uninsured-motorist, but it's definitely *not* collision.
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Jul 17, 4:45 pm, snipped-for-privacy@milmac.com (Doug Miller) wrote:

This is incorrect. Collision insurance is precisely there to pay for repair of the covered vehicle, regardless of who is at fault. If another party is at fault and can be located, then your insurance company can go after them to recover, but their first reponsibility is to pay for repair of the covered vehicle following a collision, withour regard to who is at fault. That's why it's required for an auto that is financed. The party providing the financing wants to know that the car will be paid for if hit and damaged, regardless of who is at fault, whether the other party has insurance, can be located, etc.
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
on 7/17/2008 11:57 AM Peetie Wheatstraw said the following:

The 94 TBird does not have a bumper, it has a rubber valance, backed by some steel framing. What does this damage consist of? Paint scrapes? Take it to a vehicle detailer, one of those guys that touch up minor damage and wear for used car dealers. The price will probably be 1/3rd the cost of replacing and painting the valance.

--

Bill
In Hamptonburgh, NY
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Finally got their field-claims guy over here. Estimated damage at $626, cut a check for 376.
You'd think their field guys would estimate at-or-below the dealer's body shop ($520 in this instance): not necessarily the case, 'specially with nickel/dimers.
There's a lot of "don't file a claim"-type paranoia out there. Some of it is justified, and some is not.
Cheers, Peetie
On Thu, 17 Jul 2008 10:57:52 -0500, Peetie Wheatstraw

Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
just dropped sf for aig. 7/08. saved $200/year on 2 cars.
i havent filed a claim in over 15 years. seemed pointless to pay higher premiums.
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I've been pitching aig mail flyers in the trash for years. Just like geico's.

If you wanna run down coverage/premiums, etc, I'll listen.
If you have evidence that aig provides good service, I'll listen.
If not, you haven't told me anything.
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

aig is probably as bad as sf. my point is i'm retired and drive less than 1k per year. i'll take the extra $ and put it in the bank.
coverage, on paper, was the same.
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I got no problem with that. But I haven't had any problems with sf. Only 2 small "not-at-fault" claims in 10 years, but, when I approached 'em very carefully implicitly asking for something reasonable, they responded with something reasonable.
I don't like ins. co's. There are all manner of ins. co's out there (including sf) that are playing all manner of games with their customers. Maybe even worse with health ins (seen Sicko?). The less games an ins. co. is playing, the more I find 'em tolerable.

Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

(safeco) is half what I paid to sf. Those bastards. I'd been with them since I was 23 and only filed one claim when I was burglarized. They paid up but they made me feel like I was the criminal.
Don't ever file a homeowner's claim because when you go to look for a new policy that is the first question they ask: "Have you filed a claim in the past X years?"
The guy who helped me: https://www01.answerfinancial.com/homepg_retail.aspx?a=retail&reset=true get my new policies said the driving forces in determining your premiums is your credit rating and the # of claims you file. Fortunately for me I was OK on both: No claims in a gazillion years and good credit.
It sounds like you have a healthy distrust of ins co's. Good because they don't trust us much either.
The following is a rant so feel free to avoid:
No I haven't seen "Sicko"? I retired comfortably at 51 from the health care industry so I can't complain. I do find it odd that Americans are the most obese and out of shape people on the planet and then have the gall complain about not having good healthcare. My wife works in an emergency room and many of the uninsured are homeless drug addicts "seeking". Michael Moore is a fat idiot. BTW: I voted *against* Bush in the last 2 elections so it has nothing to do with that. If anything, Michael Moore helped Bush get elected with that other idiotic movie of his.
A much better movie is http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0390521/ . This is where America's real heathcare problem lies.
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Yeah, it -was- a good deal silly. And like shooting fish in a barrel, to boot.
While there's something to your point, it tells a lot less than 100% of the story.
Let's play the "Choose which folks to count" game. Choose one of the following from which to draw inferences:
1.) The number of US folks whose behavior has caused serious health problems, and bitch about health ins. costs.
2.) The number of US folks whose health problems have other sources, who work hard but don't earn much $ (lack of education, etc), and can't afford health ins. b/c it costs vastly more than in most industrialized countries.
If you've got the ax to grind, I say "grind on". I won't have any more to say about it.
Peetie
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

nah...it's just the Michael Moore types get me riled.... no personal responsibility.
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Peetie Wheatstraw wrote:

Not sure I would declare victory yet. Still time for the "Dear Friend" letter telling you that your outrageous behavior of filing a claim must be answered with a rate increase.
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Peetie Wheatstraw wrote:

Yes, that is correct. "Uninsured Motorist" covers bodily injury stuff only.

I don't know about other places, but in Cawlifornia you have the right to take your car to a repair place of YOUR choice.

Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

No, it's not correct. Collision covers damage to the insured's car in an accident that was the insured's fault.
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Jul 18, 2:11 pm, snipped-for-privacy@milmac.com (Doug Miller) wrote:

Again, that's incorrect. Collision covers damage to the insured's car REGARDLESS of who is at fault in a collision. Now, if there is another party that can be located and made to pay, then the insurance company can and likely will go after that other party to recover some or all of the money they are out. But their first obliation is to pay for the repair to their insured parties vehicle, subject to deductible, etc.
If it worked as you say, consider this. Let's say I have collision insurance and get into an accident with party B. No tickets were issued and from the facts given by both parties, my insurance company says I was not at fault, party B was. And party B's insurance company, based on their interpretation of the facts, says their insured is not at fault. Following your premise, I'd be in no mans land because my insurance company says I'm not at fault and it would be unclear who would ever pay to repair my car damage. Fortunately, it doesn't work that way. If you have collision coverage and you have a collision, your insurance company is responsible to pay.
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Similar for me was under Uninsured Motorist. Should be NO debit or "black mark" against you for policy matters
On Thu, 17 Jul 2008 10:57:52 -0500, Peetie Wheatstraw

Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
snipped-for-privacy@optonline.net wrote:

Certainly. In the absence of weather, darkness, or other mitigating factors, when someone collides with your car in a parking lot and then flees, we're allowed to presume deliberate malice! That's a crime.
Cops SHOULD get involved when there's a possible crime.
Add pictures here
✖
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.