QuestionI was in an a 3 vehicle accident about 100 days ago. I was stopped on a road, and a vehicle rear ended me and pushed my car into the vehicle in front of me. The insurance company of the driver that hit me has claimed liability for the accident.
My vehicle was declared a total loss. About 3 weeks after the accident, the insurance company made me an offer for my property damage. It was what I would consider "reasonable", but it was based on a Houston zip code where my Dad lives (he owns the car) rather than my California zip code (where the car was garaged and will be replaced). Nonetheless, I was close to accepting the offer.
Due to a limits issue, the claim was put on hold. The liable insurance company told me they had not heard from the insurance company of the vehicle in front of me; without knowing what the damage was to that vehicle, they could not send me a check because the total property damage in the accident could approach or exceed the liability policy limits.
The issue is finally resolved and they are ready to send me a check, but now we are negotiating "loss of use" payment. So far, they paid for 5 days of a rental car. In addition, they sent me a check for $220 that bounced because they stopped the check without telling me. Now, they offered to resend the check for $220, but offer no additional loss of use. I have been without a vehicle since the accident, borrowing friends cars, my boss' car, trying to work from home, etc. I did not have the money to get a new car or pay for a rental (especially when I didn't know if they would reimburse me). They refuse to pay additional loss of use or a loss of use allowance and said it was my duty to mitigate costs.
How long are they obligated to pay me a loss of use allowance? Though they made me an offer, I didn't have the option of accepting it two months ago. Am I out of luck here?
Thanks in advance for your time and help.
AnswerHi David,
This is a tough situation. In most cases, an insurance company does not owe additional loss of use due to coverage issues. The idea of mitigating your loss means that you should have replaced the car the day after you were told it was a total loss. Of course that is rediculous, so the insurance company is required to pay reasonable loss of use or rental. The problem is what is reasonable. The insurance company will say what they have already paid is reasonable and of course you feel you should be paid for the 100 days you did not have a car. This is where you just have to negotiate. Because the only other alternative is to file a law suit against the at-fault driver. Then you will get what ever the judge says you are entitled to. But in most cases you will will have to pay an attorney to go to court with you that will not be reimbursed. Your attorney fees could be more than the judgement you receive.
Just try to be a bit tough with them. Explain your position. If the adjuster will not deal with you then ask to speak to a supervisor or manager. The more noise you make, the higher you go, the more likely you will get at least a bit more.
I hope this helps
Richard Hixenbaugh
