So my son used the old Impala last week, and while he had it parked in the school parking lot, another kid hit the vehicle while getting into the spot beside him. No questions about fault, they waited for him to come out, admitted what happened, fully owning up to it.
Their new vehicle has extensive side damage. The Impala has what visually looks quite minor. Front left corner, dent in the fender and bumper cover, dislodged fog light and grille, and scratched up on a the left headlight assembly (in a corner on the fender side, edge where there is no lighting or reflector). The Impala looks its age, and certainly has battle scars elsewhere, which is how we got it last year.
This "minor" damage according to two local autobodies is likely to be close to or greater than the current value of the car. A write-off is a very real possibility.
We have collision coverage with our insurer (blanket for all our vehicles that way). We could go through them, and they have been great to deal with in the past for us.
We could also deal directly with the other owner's insurer. Which is what we would have to do anyway if we didn't have collision coverage.
The choices have now boiled down to two options for us.
1. Start the claim through our insurer. The car will likely go into either their contracted estimator or an autobody on their approved list. One of two possible outcomes in this scenario: the value of the repairs is estimated to be greater than the threshold for write-offs, or, somehow, the value of the Impala, in the eyes of our insurer, is greater than any of us at this point are estimating and/or the repairs less than we are figuring, and the car gets repaired. The two insurance companies figure out who pays who, and not really my concern in this scenario, though in arriving at values and the repair/write-off decision, I understand this involves both adjusters.
2. We go through the other owner's insurer directly. The other owner has found a body shop that, apparently is not on any approved lists of the insurance companies my broker works with, and have been cautioned that they have heard mixed reviews of their work, and that there is likely a reason why no insurer has them on their list. But, this body shop figures they can get the repairs below the write-off threshold, (used and jobber parts, no warranty on work, etc).
The back and forth with my broker, she's been strongly implying that the second approach we need to exercise extreme caution and we may not be happy with the outcomes, or we could still end up with a write-off situation.
What would you do and why?
I'm not overly keen on the idea of having to replace an the Impala with an unknown in the same sort of value range. I wouldn't say I have an emotional attachment (at least not enough to sway my decision) to the Impala, but more of a practical/financial preference.
Their new vehicle has extensive side damage. The Impala has what visually looks quite minor. Front left corner, dent in the fender and bumper cover, dislodged fog light and grille, and scratched up on a the left headlight assembly (in a corner on the fender side, edge where there is no lighting or reflector). The Impala looks its age, and certainly has battle scars elsewhere, which is how we got it last year.
This "minor" damage according to two local autobodies is likely to be close to or greater than the current value of the car. A write-off is a very real possibility.
We have collision coverage with our insurer (blanket for all our vehicles that way). We could go through them, and they have been great to deal with in the past for us.
We could also deal directly with the other owner's insurer. Which is what we would have to do anyway if we didn't have collision coverage.
The choices have now boiled down to two options for us.
1. Start the claim through our insurer. The car will likely go into either their contracted estimator or an autobody on their approved list. One of two possible outcomes in this scenario: the value of the repairs is estimated to be greater than the threshold for write-offs, or, somehow, the value of the Impala, in the eyes of our insurer, is greater than any of us at this point are estimating and/or the repairs less than we are figuring, and the car gets repaired. The two insurance companies figure out who pays who, and not really my concern in this scenario, though in arriving at values and the repair/write-off decision, I understand this involves both adjusters.
2. We go through the other owner's insurer directly. The other owner has found a body shop that, apparently is not on any approved lists of the insurance companies my broker works with, and have been cautioned that they have heard mixed reviews of their work, and that there is likely a reason why no insurer has them on their list. But, this body shop figures they can get the repairs below the write-off threshold, (used and jobber parts, no warranty on work, etc).
The back and forth with my broker, she's been strongly implying that the second approach we need to exercise extreme caution and we may not be happy with the outcomes, or we could still end up with a write-off situation.
What would you do and why?
I'm not overly keen on the idea of having to replace an the Impala with an unknown in the same sort of value range. I wouldn't say I have an emotional attachment (at least not enough to sway my decision) to the Impala, but more of a practical/financial preference.
