Diminished value claim for hit and run (California)

[vegtrip]

I'm trying to pursue diminished value claim for a "hit and run" case. A truck driver rear-ended my parked model 3 and sped away.
But, camera captured the nameplate and the cops tracked him down and eventually got his insurance details to me. My insurance
(Costco Connect) tells me that I have to pursue diminished value claim directly with the responsible party's insurance (State Farm in this case).
Does that make sense ? I was thinking my insurance company will work that out with State farm.

Anyone here has any experience pursuing diminished value claim with State Farm or any insurance firm ?
Any recommendations to use a third party for this ?

Thanks !

 

[jjrandorin]

diminished value gets pursued against the at fault insurance (so you need to do that with state farm if they are the insurance for the person that hit you). No insurance company does it for you, not even your own.

 

[Adam3]

It seems like hiring a third party would be worth it - their fee might be outweighted by the additional $$ they get from insurance. But I don't have any first hand experience.

This person seems to be in the business: Establishing diminished value for insurance

 

[CKwik240]

Insurance companies can only legally pursue damages they paid to you that someone else is responsible for. Since your coverage doesn't cover diminished value, they can't pursue it for you. The burden of proof is on you to prove a diminished value case. When I was in the industry only a couple of states mandated diminished value cases and they used a formula. CA does not.

 

[afadeev]

My insurance (Costco Connect) tells me that I have to pursue diminished value claim directly with the responsible party's insurance (State Farm in this case). Does that make sense ?

Yes, it does.

I was thinking my insurance company will work that out with State farm.

Insurance companies can only legally pursue damages they paid to you that someone else is responsible for.

Not just legally.
Financially, your insurance company is incentivized to work on your behalf to get the "at fault" party's insurance to pay for the damages.
In practical terms, your insurance company will usually cover the damages under their own policy (minus the deductible) to expedite the repair process, then pursue reimbursement from the "at fault" party via subrogation. Once that process is settled (can take 2-18 months), you get your deductible amount returned back to you.

Since your policy (most likely) does not carry DV rider, your insurance company has no incentives to pursue that claim on your behalf, and will not authorize a payment to cover DV.

Anyone here has any experience pursuing diminished value claim with State Farm or any insurance firm ?
Any recommendations to use a third party for this ?

Yes, and it is always a messy and prolonged process.
Option 1: If you are comfortable with, and/or enjoy negotiating, insurance settlement claims, you should kick-start that process with your "at fault" party's insurance firm, SF. That is, assuming, that they've conceded that their insured is at fault.
Option 2: If not, you might have to hire a local attorney, who specializes in DV claims, to represent you. Which may, or may not, cost more than the value of the DV claim.

I've employed #1 in the past, and got ~90% of what I asked for.
I've heard of others employing #2, with varying outcomes.

Good luck!

 

[CKwik240]

Not just legally.
Financially, your insurance company is incentivized to work on your behalf to get the "at fault" party's insurance to pay for the damages.
In practical terms, your insurance company will usually cover the damages under their own policy (minus the deductible) to expedite the repair process, then pursue reimbursement from the "at fault" party via subrogation. Once that process is settled (can take 2-18 months), you get your deductible amount returned back to you.

What I am saying is that they have no legal right to pursue damages they didn't pay for. If push came to shove, they can't file a lawsuit against three responsible party for the damned they didn't pay for. It's typical they will include uncovered property damage in a succession request, but it's merely a courtesy. Most insurance companies will provide the deductible and reasonable loss of use to the subrogated party if they choose to pay out, but it is in no way legally required.