Originally Posted by not_a_charger
Originally Posted by ruderunner
Years ago I had a customer vehicle towed in after driving over a large rock at the end of a driveway. Damage was all underneath and IMHO mostly cosmetic. Damage included a couple dents in the cradle, scuffs on the oil pan and gas tank and a short section of exhaust that was crushed. Vehicle was a year or two old.

I gave an estimate to repair the exhaust and check the alignment, vehicle was drivable and nothing leaking. The customer called their insurance and things got crazy.

Adjuster ordered a replacement cradle, oil pan, gas tank and complete exhaust. The exhaust was new, everything else was used and honestly no better than what was on the vehicle. I pointed it out to the adjuster and he said do it anyways.

A $200 repair turned into a $5000 claim. A 1 day repair turned into 2 weeks of downtime.


They owed to replace those items. They were damaged in the accident, and they're not repairable. Insurance company was 100% correct. If the customer would've chosen to not complete those repairs and pocketed the difference, it would've been their right to do so, but the insurance company can't say "Bah, just ignore the dents in the cradle and the pan and the gas tank."


Sure they owed to replace the damaged parts, but replacing damaged parts with worn or similarly damaged parts accomplished what?

If it had been all new parts that would have made sense. More expensive? Yes but sensible.


Angry white pureblood male