You are here:
Auto Insurance Claims/ins claims
Advertisement
Question
My neighbor's new Toyota scion "blew up" while parked behind mine. My entire back bumper, tail lights, license plate lights are melted. He has full coverage and his insurance company told me that since no one was at fault, his insurance doesn't cover the damages done to my car. Is this right?????
Hi Jennifer,
What an interesting argument!
For those that think new cars are safer and not prone to fire, think again!
The tighter they shoehorn combustibles (Plastic accelerants, such as polyethylene) to ignition sources, the more these events will happen. All under the ruse of fuel efficiency.
Now, for your problem. I suppose it would depend, if the state it happened in is a no fault state, how your policy is written and the laws.
Now, as I always state, I am not a lawyer. I cannot give legal advice, however I like to argue many issues stemming from my long time with court experience.
I do not know if you have a good argument here, but this is how I would proceed.
First, your comprehensive insurance should pick up your repairs assuming you have comprehensive coverage (Fire & theft).
Now, if this situation happened to me and I did not have comp (which I always do), I would consider small claims court. Obviously, this was not your fault (however, you might share partial blame for parking in front of the burning vehicle), I would consider suing the owner of the vehicle, Toyota, (anyone that previously serviced it) and his insurance company for your loss.
You could go another step and find out if an Origin and Cause investigation was performed to determine the cause and origin of the fire. You might even find more companies to name for your suit.
Granted, there is no intent and this could be considered an act of God. I would want to know how it could possibly be perceived that I would be responsible for repairing my car.
Get an estimate for repairs; take plenty of pictures of the damage. In other words, build your case.
The judge may tell you that the insured, car maker, (any one that serviced the car prior) or the insurance company is not responsible, but this way you know for sure, because the judge of a small claims court knows the local and state laws that would apply to this situation.
The purpose of the court is to make us whole. No better, no less. If a judge found in your favor, chances are you would not get any incidentals like loss of work, pain and injury. You might make a difference! It might be fun!
Note: Some may not realize, but I donate my own time answering these questions and I really enjoy answering them to the best of my ability. The only reward, for this I can get from this site is for you to fill out the expert rating and nomination.
I would really appreciate your input with your nomination. Thanks to all!
Please feel free to check out my website as well!
Rob Painter http://www.autotheftexpert.com
Good luck!
Rob
- Add to this Answer
- Ask a Question
| Rating(1-10) | Knowledgeability = 10 | Clarity of Response = 10 | Politeness = 10 |
| Comment | the response i got back from my inquery was great and fast!!! | ||
Related Articles
- Small Claims Lesson - Appeal If You Can - Reader Stories: Have You Been in Small Claims Court? Were You the Plaintiff, the Defendant?
- Small Claims Court - Small Claims - Small Claims Process
- Get an Attorney to Advise You for Small Claims Cout - Reader Stories: Have You Been in Small Claims Court? Were You the Plaintiff, the Defendant?
- Small Claims Court - File Claim in Small Claims Court
- What To Do If An Adjuster Refuses To Cooperate
Answers by Expert:
Rob Painter, Ase, CFEI, CAFATE
Expertise
Please remember. I am not an attorney and cannot legal advice. My answers are based on my experience due to litigation I have been involved in as an expert, for both insurance companies and while oposing them opposing them. I deal with only comprehensive claims on autos related to fire and theft. I have even had the opportunity to rewrite policy coverage language as it relates to vehicle theft and forced entry for insurance defense attorneys.
Experience
Experience in the area: Working with insurance companies and attorneys on these issues for over 20 years. It is very common to have a reported stolen car with a so-called factory anti-theft system to have the theft claim denied. I have served successfully as an expert witness in the courts across the US representing the insured and their attorney revealing that the insurance expert did not take all known theories into consideration before rendering their "Forensic" conclusion. Many insurance carriers us independent "Forensic" experts to examine reported stolen vehicles commonly using flawed methodology implicating the innocent insured with the theft. My job is to determine if the insurance expert reached his conclusions based on accepted scientific principals or just net opinion with no basis other than opinion. My case record against such experts is very compelling.My resume can be seen at the catagory "Auto Theft and Prevention." In "Forensics" the scientific method must be employed. In the forensic locksmith field determining how a reported stolen vehicle was last operated, many processes cannot be duplicated and are conveniently not addressed. If they were, juries would have the opportunity to make a fair and impartial opinion at least about what the expert could or could not prove. There is a purported process determining the last key used. The chances of determining such is very rare uless the key is found in the ignition lock. Experts commonly destroy evidence as well and are rarely questioned on this event. I reveal the weakness in their testimony on such instances.
©2012 About.com, a part of The New York Times Company. All rights reserved.