Insurance Claim Advise

[itstheinsurance.com]

I hope to get some advise from someone who might have experience in a similar situation.

I was involved in a three car rear-ended accident. The third car in the back of me hit the car behind me and pushed it into my car. There was no bodily injury, just property (car) damage.

It was determined to be the third car's driver's fault as he hit the middle car and pushed it into my car. However, he only has limited coverage, and apparently with the minimum of $5,000 property damage.

The total damage to the two cars are more than the policy limit of $5,000.

How should the insurance company determine to compensate my car and the middle car? Would this be a 50/50 split? I was told that it might come down to the car that suffered the heavier damage will get a higher compensation. Does anyone know if there is any legal precedent or guideline in determining the compensation in a case like this?

Thanks in advance.

They will prorate the damages. IE you have 6000 in damages and the other party has 4000 in damages. There is the 5000 limit. The insurance company will offer you $3000 and the other party $2000. If both parties agree and sign a release the insurance company will issue payment. If you accept this amount you can not pursue for more damages. That or you can take the other party to court and get a judgement for the damages caused. Hope this helps.

PS: Please feel free to PM me if you have more questions.

 

[MTguy]

Actually, from your perspective, the middle car hit you so you should get middle car to pay for your damages. The insurance company of the middle car will subrogate it from the third car insurance. If the third car don't have enough coverage, middle car insurance company would use its under/un insurance coverage to cover your losses. If that doesn't cover all your losses, then your under/un insurance coverage will kick in.

Hope this helps

I hope to get some advise from someone who might have experience in a similar situation.

I was involved in a three car rear-ended accident. The third car in the back of me hit the car behind me and pushed it into my car. There was no bodily injury, just property (car) damage.

It was determined to be the third car's driver's fault as he hit the middle car and pushed it into my car. However, he only has limited coverage, and apparently with the minimum of $5,000 property damage.

The total damage to the two cars are more than the policy limit of $5,000.

How should the insurance company determine to compensate my car and the middle car? Would this be a 50/50 split? I was told that it might come down to the car that suffered the heavier damage will get a higher compensation. Does anyone know if there is any legal precedent or guideline in determining the compensation in a case like this?

Thanks in advance.

 

[FullAuto]

Actually, from your perspective, the middle car hit you so you should get middle car to pay for your damages. The insurance company of the middle car will subrogate it from the third car insurance. If the third car don't have enough coverage, middle car insurance company would use its under/un insurance coverage to cover your losses. If that doesn't cover all your losses, then your under/un insurance coverage will kick in.

Hope this helps

*waits for Red Blooded American*

 

[djs]

Why?
The answer is so wrong on so many levels its hard to respond to. Now, if you substitute 'property damage' coverage for Liability/UM/UIM, then you can start having a discussion. It will depend a lot on if the 3rd car back is really fully at fault or not.

Insurance companies will work it out.

Dan

 

[Guest]

*waits for Red Blooded American*

I'm actually speechless.......I'm disappointed in myself.......

 

[jwc]

The middle car is not deemed to be at fault because it was pushed into my car by the third car. So his carrier pays nothing on my car's repair.

The third car is totally at fault.

Also, there is no such thing as Underinsured property damage in california. If a car hits you and he does not have enough property damage coverage to fully pay for your car's repair, and you don't have collison coverage, you either have to eat the balance of the repair or take the person to court.

djs has it right from his various responses. itstheinsurance.com has it right on the payment proration, and the possible action that I could have taken.