Plow damage to car while at Aamco - need claim people advice

[tvguy]

It's very different.

In the scenario I gave you, you caused an injury or damage to someone else. You rear ended someone, turned left in front of them, etc... Someone is coming after you, looking for you to pay. Your insurance companies job is to indemnify and protect you so that you aren't exposed financially for your liability/negligence.

Unless I'm misunderstanding you, the scenario where you're looking for them to act on your behalf is one where your car with NO collision coverage gets hit while parked. In that case, you did nothing wrong, so nobody is pursuing you for damages. You have not paid your insurance company a premium to provide damage coverage for your car. There is nothing for them to "protect" you from in that scenario, nothing for them to do. They don't have legal standing to make a claim for you, since they don't own the car, haven't been paid by you for that type of coverage, and haven't made any financial payments (i.e. lien).

Apples and oranges.

Yeah, I guess we are misunderstanding each other. My expectations are based on what my insurance did. I didn't ask them to do it, they offered to do it. Why they offered to do it if it wasn't legal, I don't know. They acted as my agent with the other party's auto insurance. If I am giving them authorization to represent me, how can they not have legal standing? I guess I watch too much People's Court and Judge Judy, because frequently there are people there that are not named in a suit, but have been authorized by the person being sued to act as their representative. I hope I never am in that situation again. But if I am, I will ask and expect them to do it. I am a customer of their business for the insurance protection, and for their expertise in settle my claim with someone else's insurance.

 

[Klayfish]

Don't know what else to tell ya', boss. Been doing this for over 2 decades. I can only guess your agent tried to help you and set up a claim on your behalf. For hitting a parked car, it's a pretty simple and cut and dry thing, so the agent can assist you with that. But those are actions of the agent, not the actual carrier.

If you get rear ended, don't want your carrier to pay your claim (if you even have collision coverage), but expect them to act as your attorney and "go after" someone for you, you will be sorely disappointed.

 

[tvguy]

Don't know what else to tell ya', boss. Been doing this for over 2 decades. I can only guess your agent tried to help you and set up a claim on your behalf. For hitting a parked car, it's a pretty simple and cut and dry thing, so the agent can assist you with that. But those are actions of the agent, not the actual carrier.

If you get rear ended, don't want your carrier to pay your claim (if you even have collision coverage), but expect them to act as your attorney and "go after" someone for you, you will be sorely disappointed.

It wasn't my agent. It was the Allstate Claims rep that handled everything. After the holiday I'll shoot my current agent a note and see if this practice is a thing of the past. But, yes, I will be disappointed if they won't because I expect service along with coverage. I don't expected them to act as my attorney, but as my representative, one with expertise in insurance and claims.

 

[NHdisneylover]

It wasn't my agent. It was the Allstate Claims rep that handled everything. After the holiday I'll shoot my current agent a note and see if this practice is a thing of the past. But, yes, I will be disappointed if they won't because I expect service along with coverage. I don't expected them to act as my attorney, but as my representative, one with expertise in insurance and claims.

Um, maybe I am missing something here, if so fogive me:

if you expect the insurance company to provide you with the service of representing you in the event that someone else damages your vehicle, why do you not purchase the right to that service (collision coverage)?

 

[tvguy]

Um, maybe I am missing something here, if so fogive me:

if you expect the insurance company to provide you with the service of representing you in the event that someone else damages your vehicle, why do you not purchase the right to that service (collision coverage)?

Because I expect that service to be included to all their customers. Part of my premium pays for that service. I base that expectation on what the the claims department did when that situation came up. I didn't ask them to handle the situation, they said that was a service I was entitled to as a customer.

Collision coverage only binds them to pay for damage to my car if something is my fault.

 

[Klayfish]

Because I expect that service to be included to all their customers. Part of my premium pays for that service. I base that expectation on what the the claims department did when that situation came up. I didn't ask them to handle the situation, they said that was a service I was entitled to as a customer.

Collision coverage only binds them to pay for damage to my car if something is my fault.

Holy moly. Think what you want, but unfortunately you're very misguided, on so many levels. I would suggest pulling out your insurance contract and reading it.

Collision coverage will apply absolutely and totally regardless of fault. It's your right not to use the coverage if you choose, but if something isn't your fault and you want to use your collision coverage, they are 100% bound to provide that coverage to you. In fact, that's really its' primary purpose.

Sadly, it's misunderstanding and uninformed expectations like this that often give insurance companies a bad reputation. People don't understand the basic concept of insurance, what it does and doesn't do and how it works. They expect insurance to be like a bank or act as their attorney, and that's just simply not what it is.

 

[Hikergirl]

Because I expect that service to be included to all their customers. Part of my premium pays for that service. I base that expectation on what the the claims department did when that situation came up. I didn't ask them to handle the situation, they said that was a service I was entitled to as a customer.

Collision coverage only binds them to pay for damage to my car if something is my fault.

I'm not even in the insurance industry and I know this isn't true. Collision covers damage regardless of who is at fault. They don't pay for it if you don't have the coverage.

 

[tvguy]

Holy moly. Think what you want, but unfortunately you're very misguided, on so many levels. I would suggest pulling out your insurance contract and reading it.

Collision coverage will apply absolutely and totally regardless of fault. It's your right not to use the coverage if you choose, but if something isn't your fault and you want to use your collision coverage, they are 100% bound to provide that coverage to you. In fact, that's really its' primary purpose.

Sadly, it's misunderstanding and uninformed expectations like this that often give insurance companies a bad reputation. People don't understand the basic concept of insurance, what it does and doesn't do and how it works. They expect insurance to be like a bank or act as their attorney, and that's just simply not what it is.

You understand my comments are based on what my insurance actually did not some wild opinion?

 

[tvguy]

I'm not even in the insurance industry and I know this isn't true.

See above.

 

[Hikergirl]

See above.

See above for what, what you say happens?
You do realize that you aren't the only person on the DIS who has been involved in car accidents with damage and have had to deal with insurance right?
Besides I think I'll take Klayfish's word on it since he actually knows what he's talking about.

 

[Klayfish]

You understand my comments are based on what my insurance actually did not some wild opinion?

Not really going to spend any more time going around in circles with you. Think what you want. I've already told you many times that the one isolated incident you speak of probably didn't happen exactly as you recall. In the off chance it really did, someone potentially risked their job for you and went waaaay outside of what they're supposed to do, consider yourself amazingly lucky. Your statement above about collision coverage is outright false, through and through...no way to twist or interpret it differently. It's simply wrong.

If you feel you know how it all works, fantastic.

 

[tvguy]

See above for what, what you say happens?
You do realize that you aren't the only person on the DIS who has been involved in car accidents with damage and have had to deal with insurance right?
Besides I think I'll take Klayfish's word on it since he actually knows what he's talking about.

Ok

 

[tvguy]

Not really going to spend any more time going around in circles with you. Think what you want. I've already told you many times that the one isolated incident you speak of probably didn't happen exactly as you recall. In the off chance it really did, someone potentially risked their job for you and went waaaay outside of what they're supposed to do, consider yourself amazingly lucky. Your statement above about collision coverage is outright false, through and through...no way to twist or interpret it differently. It's simply wrong.

If you feel you know how it all works, fantastic.

Like I said that IS how it worked, and I hope NEVER to be in the situation again, and I will be disappointed if what you say is now the practice.

 

[NHdisneylover]

Because I expect that service to be included to all their customers. Part of my premium pays for that service. I base that expectation on what the the claims department did when that situation came up. I didn't ask them to handle the situation, they said that was a service I was entitled to as a customer.

Collision coverage only binds them to pay for damage to my car if something is my fault.

Thanks for answering. I am honestly utterly confused as to why you think that service is covered by your premiums if you do not pay premiums for collision, but I do appreciate you trying to explain.

Your thoughts on this remind me of the people who routinely show up on cruise critic upset that they did not buy any sort of cancellation insurance for the trip, then had a personal emergency which prevented them going on a cruies at the last miute and are angry that the cruiseline does not offer them a full refund.
These people seem to be unwilling or unable to understand that they are not entitlted to coverage they did not buy and feel the big cruise lines ought to just be so kind hearted as to offer that coverage anyway for free beucase cruises are expensive.
I'm not seeing a difference between that and your thoguhts on collision---seems you got very lucky and were gifted help once as a kindness and now think you are entitlted to such consideration. Too bad you are not just grateful for that kindness.

 

[tvguy]

Thanks for answering. I am honestly utterly confused as to why you think that service is covered by your premiums if you do not pay premiums for collision, but I do appreciate you trying to explain.

Your thoughts on this remind me of the people who routinely show up on cruise critic upset that they did not buy any sort of cancellation insurance for the trip, then had a personal emergency which prevented them going on a cruies at the last miute and are angry that the cruiseline does not offer them a full refund.
These people seem to be unwilling or unable to understand that they are not entitlted to coverage they did not buy and feel the big cruise lines ought to just be so kind hearted as to offer that coverage anyway for free beucase cruises are expensive.
I'm not seeing a difference between that and your thoguhts on collision---seems you got very lucky and were gifted help once as a kindness and now think you are entitlted to such consideration. Too bad you are not just grateful for that kindness.

Well, I have to be honest.....and stepping into another minefield.......when my mom had a stroke 2 months before a family cruise in 2012 HAL and Alaska airlines refunded her cruise and air fare without hesitation. But we had a group of 6 going, and she was the third person in one of the cabins. Let the flaming begin! But my Travel Agent may have pulled some strings without my knowledge to make that happen.

 

[NHdisneylover]

Well, I have to be honest.....and stepping into another minefield.......when my mom had a stroke 2 months before a family cruise in 2012 HAL and Alaska airlines refunded her cruise and air fare without hesitation. But we had a group of 6 going, and she was the third person in one of the cabins. Let the flaming begin!

that the cruiseline chose to make a nicve gesteure I do not hold against you. If you think that entitles you to similar treatment in the future and refuse to buy cancellation covergage---then yes I would consider you out of line.


My own in laws had to cancel a cruise on RCI once. They nearly always bus insurance, but bought the cruiwse only a month out and figured they were good. The day before their flight to Europe for the cruise my mother in law ended up in the hospital with suspected heart issues and was told not to travel. They called the line to cancel and told the rep they knew they had not bought coverage but were hoping to at least get port fees back (my faily of 4 was still sailing)--the line choose to give them a credit for the full amount to be used within a year. They were GRATEFUL and wrote a thank you and everything. We've been on several cruises with them since, and they always buy the insurance now (we do not---but we know the risk we take and choose that as the better cost for us given how often we travel).

There is a world of difference between accvepting a gesture of good will when offered and being thankful for it as just that and expecting to receive freebies as an entitlement.

 

[tvguy]

that the cruiseline chose to make a nicve gesteure I do not hold against you. If you think that entitles you to similar treatment in the future and refuse to buy cancellation covergage---then yes I would consider you out of line.


My own in laws had to cancel a cruise on RCI once. They nearly always bus insurance, but bought the cruiwse only a month out and figured they were good. The day before their flight to Europe for the cruise my mother in law ended up in the hospital with suspected heart issues and was told not to travel. They called the line to cancel and told the rep they knew they had not bought coverage but were hoping to at least get port fees back (my faily of 4 was still sailing)--the line choose to give them a credit for the full amount to be used within a year. They were GRATEFUL and wrote a thank you and everything. We've been on several cruises with them since, and they always buy the insurance now (we do not---but we know the risk we take and choose that as the better cost for us given how often we travel).

There is a world of difference between accvepting a gesture of good will when offered and being thankful for it as just that and expecting to receive freebies as an entitlement.

Never hurts to ask.

 

[msjprincess]

Never hurts to ask.

You're right, but in most instances the cruise line will not issue a refund. If they did so regularly no one would buy insurance anymore.

 

[tvguy]

You're right, but in most instances the cruise line will not issue a refund. If they did so regularly no one would buy insurance anymore.

Well, THAT would be yet another minefield since my Travel Agent does not sell Travel Insurance anymore and has big signs saying that they officially have no recommendation on whether it should be purchased.
Apparently they got tied up in a lawsuit as a co-defendant with a Travel Insurance company whose policy they sold to a client and it cost them a lot of money.

 

[NHdisneylover]

Well, THAT would be yet another minefield since my Travel Agent does not sell Travel Insurance anymore and has big signs saying that they officially have no recommendation on whether it should be purchased.
Apparently they got tied up in a lawsuit as a co-defendant with a Travel Insurance company whose policy they sold to a client and it cost them a lot of money.

That's odd. I wonder if one of their agents misrepresented what a policy covers to a client and then the agencys was on the hook for an uncoverd claim or soe such? But it doesn't much matter, you do not have to buy coverage through your travel agent in order to have coverage

ok, so if you booked another cruise---would you find and purchase insurnce for it on your own? Or would you choose to be uninsured for trip cancellation and the like? If you chose to be uninsured would you feel entitled to a refund from the cruise line if you made a last minute cancellation?