State Farm Refuses to Pay for Storage - Small Claims Court?
- Thread starter mvarshavsky
- Start date
- 1,473
You bought the policy online now u in trouble. Look ur asking strangers to help you. Your done put a fork in it. Say good buy to Internet insurance.
- Thread starter
- #13
mvarshavsky
New Member
- 8
I really don't follow the "it's your car, you let it go logic". At the point where their client totaled it, it's no longer a car, it's a nuisance. The necessity to store the car arises from their client's actions - these are not something I would've incurred if the car was driveable. What if my financial situation didn't allow me to pay to get the car out? Storing it at a friends' house - that's a stretch; should I seek medical help from my friends in med school to save State Farm some more money while I'm at it? Again, this is why there is a law requiring them to pay for "reasonable storage fees". I don't understand why they are allowed to interpret "reasonable" as anything other than actual.
@FullAuto - not threatening to hire a lawyer, if only because not one out of now three I've spoken is interested in taking the case
- not enough $$$ for them. The amount I'm seeking means it will be Small Claims, where attorneys are not allowed to represent plaintiffs.
@b61mack - it was my old car that my wife drove twice a month; it didn't make financial sense to have full coverage on it. What do you mean by sending a subpoena? I thought only the court could do that?
@FullAuto - not threatening to hire a lawyer, if only because not one out of now three I've spoken is interested in taking the case
- not enough $$$ for them. The amount I'm seeking means it will be Small Claims, where attorneys are not allowed to represent plaintiffs.@b61mack - it was my old car that my wife drove twice a month; it didn't make financial sense to have full coverage on it. What do you mean by sending a subpoena? I thought only the court could do that?
L
luke4275
Guest
I was tending to my hurt wife),
If your wife was hurt, then get a lawyer and sue on that issue.
If your wife was hurt, then get a lawyer and sue on that issue.
- Thread starter
- #15
mvarshavsky
New Member
- 8
@luke4275 - she was hurt, and she might be suing depending on what they offer - but that's a different story; property damage claims are handled separately. I'm not looking to get extra money out of State Farm, I'm only asking for the actual costs incurred.
The don't pass laws allowing tow yards to take ownership of a person's car and auction it off to recover fees during a time of reasonable storage. By the time they take it, it's obviously passed into the realm of unreasonable time of storage (as determined by law). That really shouldn't be a difficult concept to grasp.
Your financial situation is your problem. A carrier won't simply pay for repairs based on a claimant's statement from day 1. They have to contact their insured to get their side of the story. They have to assume liability. They have to inspect the car to determine if they want to attempt repair or if it's more economical to simply buy it. All this has to follow a legal timeline. During that time, it's still your car. They can't simply move it to their lot without your permission. You may not understand that you let your car go, but that's doesn't change the facts.
Just please be sure to update us with the results. I think your best chance is to squeeze them a little more before you go to court. If you do wind up in a courtroom, my guess is you're going to clearly lose.
Your financial situation is your problem. A carrier won't simply pay for repairs based on a claimant's statement from day 1. They have to contact their insured to get their side of the story. They have to assume liability. They have to inspect the car to determine if they want to attempt repair or if it's more economical to simply buy it. All this has to follow a legal timeline. During that time, it's still your car. They can't simply move it to their lot without your permission. You may not understand that you let your car go, but that's doesn't change the facts.
Just please be sure to update us with the results. I think your best chance is to squeeze them a little more before you go to court. If you do wind up in a courtroom, my guess is you're going to clearly lose.
- Thread starter
- #17
mvarshavsky
New Member
- 8
FullAuto, this is pure speculation on your part. Since we're guessing here regarding what was the basis for laws to allow the tow yards to take over vehicles, I would guess it has more to do with their ability to recoup costs and less with what's reasonable in insurance cases (a subset of their business).
The yard took the car over on day 40 (one day before I've received a settlement letter from State Farm) and was sold on day 42. According to your logic, if 40-day mark is the point when it crossed into "unreasonable", State Farm should be covering that 40 days. I would be okay with that.
I did not expect them to pay me anything based on my statements. I expected them to be proactive with their investigation. It took them 4.5 weeks to come up with an offer after the police report became available; I had to provide it to them; they took 2 weeks to interview witnesses which gave statements to the police... and yet another week to give me a settlement offer after accepting liability (all while being aware of the storage situation and not advising me to do anything with the vehicle)! The reason I didn't sell the car to the tow yard and stop the fees is because State Farm had to send an adjuster to look at it, which they never did - hell, the claim representative said they didn't even look at the pictures I emailed them. So the thing you mention about having responsibility to inspect the car is interesting to me - are you familiar with those requirements for the state of CA?
The yard took the car over on day 40 (one day before I've received a settlement letter from State Farm) and was sold on day 42. According to your logic, if 40-day mark is the point when it crossed into "unreasonable", State Farm should be covering that 40 days. I would be okay with that.
I did not expect them to pay me anything based on my statements. I expected them to be proactive with their investigation. It took them 4.5 weeks to come up with an offer after the police report became available; I had to provide it to them; they took 2 weeks to interview witnesses which gave statements to the police... and yet another week to give me a settlement offer after accepting liability (all while being aware of the storage situation and not advising me to do anything with the vehicle)! The reason I didn't sell the car to the tow yard and stop the fees is because State Farm had to send an adjuster to look at it, which they never did - hell, the claim representative said they didn't even look at the pictures I emailed them. So the thing you mention about having responsibility to inspect the car is interesting to me - are you familiar with those requirements for the state of CA?
The normal process is to inspect the car, but there isn't a real requirement to do so. Usually they do this to help establish the value of the car. They will look at things like accessories, wear of the upholstery, tire condition (i.e., tread left), etc. They can call all of this good and use your statement and go with that without having to inspect the car if they feel the car is totaled. It would be strange, but its possible.
You are trying to tie unrelated events together. Okay, they are all related to the accident, but take a different situation. If you had a broken water pipe in your house, would you wait for the insurance company to offer you a settlement to fix the water pipe or would you turn off the water? You would need to turn off the water.
Insurance companies are VERY aware of the outrageous storage fees impound lots charge. They usually move cars out of those lots pretty quickly, but in this case, because you didn't have coverage on your car, you took that responsibility on yourself to mitigate damages (turn off the water). If you would have had collision coverage on your car, your insurance company would have moved it from the impound lot to their own storage lot to avoid these fees.
The fact the impound lot charges these fees doesn't make them reasonable at all. Not sure how you connected those things. Insurance is not a subset of an impound lots business, but they do get paid a lot of insurance checks. Insurance companies do their best to not pay those fees by providing their own lots for storage of totalled cars.
I've never seen an insurance company come close to paying for 40 days of storage in an impound lot. Not to say it isn't worth fighting because it is, just trying to give you insight from someone who has seen this fight before.
As an agent, I warn my clients about the risk of storage fees in these situations.
Dan
You are trying to tie unrelated events together. Okay, they are all related to the accident, but take a different situation. If you had a broken water pipe in your house, would you wait for the insurance company to offer you a settlement to fix the water pipe or would you turn off the water? You would need to turn off the water.
Insurance companies are VERY aware of the outrageous storage fees impound lots charge. They usually move cars out of those lots pretty quickly, but in this case, because you didn't have coverage on your car, you took that responsibility on yourself to mitigate damages (turn off the water). If you would have had collision coverage on your car, your insurance company would have moved it from the impound lot to their own storage lot to avoid these fees.
The fact the impound lot charges these fees doesn't make them reasonable at all. Not sure how you connected those things. Insurance is not a subset of an impound lots business, but they do get paid a lot of insurance checks. Insurance companies do their best to not pay those fees by providing their own lots for storage of totalled cars.
I've never seen an insurance company come close to paying for 40 days of storage in an impound lot. Not to say it isn't worth fighting because it is, just trying to give you insight from someone who has seen this fight before.
As an agent, I warn my clients about the risk of storage fees in these situations.
Dan
I find it very odd they never sent anyone to look at it. Did they actually tell you this? How would they determine it to be a total loss if they didn't look at it? How do they know what to offer you without the inspection report they fill out when it's a possible total loss? When they make you an offer, you should be able to ask for a copy of the inspection report to make sure it's accurate. So if they didn't look at it in person, that just doesn't make sense to me. Maybe things are weird in CA, but around here, they won't be buying a claimant car sight unseen. Buying sight unseen is pretty much limited to an insured's unrecovered stolen vehicle. We have to inspect total burns, tornado cars in fields or in the garage with the house on top of them, etc.
I am not familiar with the requirements of the CA as I am in Oklahoma.
- Thread starter
- #20
mvarshavsky
New Member
- 8
djs, I don't believe your water analogy holds. If the insurance company came to my house and broke my pipe along with the shut off valve, and I had no means of turning off the water - yes, I would expect them to pay for all the water used. Their client ran into me, I can't store the car anywhere else. I fail to see how my having liability-only coverage changes the level of responsibility for State Farm. They had all the information necessary to make a call to move the car to a friendly storage yard that I, as a mere mortal, am not aware of.
I sense a little skepticism from you guys, but I know for a fact they've never seen the car. Last Fri when I got a hold of my claim representative after not hearing from them for a week they finally agreed they need to look at the car (that's 35 days into the case - first attempt they made to look). Within an hour of our conversation I got a call back, and it turned out that they needed me to put a release form with the tow yard before they can look. I did it the following day (Sat) and called State Farm to let them know (in other words I turned it around before the start of next business day). When I talked to the tow yard on Thu, they said nobody has come by. When I talked to State Farm yesterday, they also stated they have never seen the vehicle. And, to be precise, they are not trying to buy the car sight unseen, they are trying to stick me with it after deducting what they think it's worth from the settlement amount.
I sense a little skepticism from you guys, but I know for a fact they've never seen the car. Last Fri when I got a hold of my claim representative after not hearing from them for a week they finally agreed they need to look at the car (that's 35 days into the case - first attempt they made to look). Within an hour of our conversation I got a call back, and it turned out that they needed me to put a release form with the tow yard before they can look. I did it the following day (Sat) and called State Farm to let them know (in other words I turned it around before the start of next business day). When I talked to the tow yard on Thu, they said nobody has come by. When I talked to State Farm yesterday, they also stated they have never seen the vehicle. And, to be precise, they are not trying to buy the car sight unseen, they are trying to stick me with it after deducting what they think it's worth from the settlement amount.
Similar threads
