Expert: Claims Guy - 5/23/2009

Question
If an insured's car clearly was the sole cause of property damage (destruction of part a brick wall on private property in VA) is it worth pointing out to the insurance company why the incident likely could not have occurred as claimed by the insured and suggesting that the company might want to look at the scene. The insured claims his vehicle was properly parked and secured and then rolled on its own across an essentially flat street, over a curb and down a small hill into the wall. The incident was late at night, the insured smelled of alcohol,and the police who responded didn't seem too interested or savvy. Police report not yet available.  There are reasons to question the insured's credibility besides his weird story. But, perhaps the insurance company won't care whether the insured is telling the truth, i.e. whether the incident happened "spontaneously"  as claimed (or whether, perhaps, it's more likely that the insured was trying to park the car and inadvertently drove over a curb and down the hill. The amount of damage is the same regardless and I assume the insurance company would be liable under either scenario.  Thus, is there any point in trying to get the insurance company to assess this matter even tho it  can't be proven that the insured was driving the car when the incident occurred - just that the incident likely didn't happen as claimed. Thanks for reading this.

Answer
You should tell the claim rep everything you know and let them decide how to proceed.  It seems clear they owe for your damage because the insured was liable either way - for reckless driving or for failing to secure his vehicle safely.  Now if he tries to claim some type of unexpected mechanical failure and says he is not liable, you need to raise hell.  

But if they agree to pay your damages, I wouldn't spend too much effort trying to get him in trouble.  That is up to the claim rep to decide how far they want to investigate.  Just tell them what you observed and let them decide.