You are here:

Auto Insurance Claims/Bumper Dispute on Claim

Advertisement

Expert: - 2/19/2010


Question
My son was hit by a passing vehicle that pulled into the front left side of his truck.  There was a broken headlight, damaged fender and dented/damaged chrome bumper on his truck. We filed a claim on the other driver's insurance company. They have agreed to fix the truck except for the bumper.  There is some pre-existing minor damage on the front passenger side of the bumper.  Therefore, they don't want to pay anything on the bumper damage.  Should we press the issue?

Answer
Hello,

If the pre-existing damage basically destroyed the cosmetic effect of the bumper, the insurance company would look at it as you lived with it before and any additional damage would not have matter.

The other way to look at it would be if the bumper is now totally destroyed, they owe you something to make you whole.

Since I do not know how it was estimated (if they would have figured a new bumper or a replate), if the bumper is now damaged beyond use, I would suggest that at the very minimum a used bumper with some scratches be figured by the insurance company. That does not better you, but makes you whole.

Rob

Auto Insurance Claims

All Answers

Answers by Expert:

Ask Experts

Volunteer

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.