A while back 'diminished value' was a topic of conversation on this forum. About a month and a half ago I posted a picture of the damage to my C6 Vette while I was backing up in my friend's long driveway one dark night. I got the car repaired at the local Chevy dealership, who, by the way, did a great job of repairing and painting my Vette. The damages totaled about $950 of which I paid the $500 deductible. Well today, just now, I received from my insurance company a check in the amount of $630 and some change with a letter that says, "Pursuant to Section 10 of the March 6, 2002 ruling by the Superior Court of Muscogee County, State of Georgia in Mabry vs State Farm. State Farm is required to assess whether your vehicle has sustained a loss in value in addition to the cost to repair your vehicle. We have made that assessment using a formula authorized for that purpose by the Mabry trial court. That assessment is reflected in the enclosed draft amount of $......'

 

That is very interesting. Congrats. I think.

Means all our rates should be going up pretty soon.

 

They've probably gone up since the court issued its ruling back in 2002. Quite frankly, I rather my insurance company not have sent me the check and instead promised me that my rates wouldn't go up because of that one small incident. Had I not filed a claim I would have had to dish out the entire repair bill of $950, but now I end up with $163 in the pocket for diminished value and a car that might appear in Carfax as being involved in a fender bender. I guess it means that when I sell my Vette I have to subtract $630 from the Kelley Blue Book value..

Anecdotal comment: The dealership has a brand spanking new unsold '07 C6 in their body shop that was rear ended at a convenience store where it had gone for fueling when the accident happened. Repairs to that car are on hold until the party at fault pays $6000 in diminished value in addition to the repair costs. If the insurance company doesn't pay for the diminished value I feel sorry for the young female who rear ended it because she could be sued by the dealership since the issue is always between the victim and the culprit. I can see a court case out of this where the young female is sued by the dealership and then the young female turns around and sues her insurance company for not paying up in accordance with the courts judgment in 2002..

 

Good luck to her..... reminds me of when I tried to buy a "DEMO" '98 C5 from a dealer in Texas.....besides the 6000 miles it had on it, it was stolen b/w the time I discussed it with them over the phone and when I was supposed to travel (200+ miles) to look it over and hammer out a deal.....high speed chase down I 10 ended with spike strips and four flats with the whole passenger side mangled by mile marker on the side of the road..... new body panels, paint and tires later they called back and were willing to let me have it at MSRP .....actually had the nerve to act offended when I walked on the deal.....

I'll bet they would have pocketed the "diminished value" check without saying a word to me as well.....

Back to the topic, this is probably a really bad precedent b/c it is almost entirely subjective...... can't imagine that if this becomes the norm that all of our rates won't go up significantly..... will probably induce a whole new genre of insurance scams as well.....

 

A "minor" repair like that may not show up. But if it does, you won't necessarly deduct $630. You'll deduct whatever it takes to make the sale, which could be more, or it could be less. Buyers don't follow KBB.

 

I rolled into a car with my C6 and my rates went down this year about $20. I had a $1000 dec so i had to eat the damage cost on my car.

 

just curious why you reported it to insurance and risk an increase in rates for who knows how many years....I would think an increase over time would be more than $430....

 

that is why I have $1000 deductible

 

Rates went down for Corvettes this year in Toronto so my '07 C6 is actually $10/month cheaper (even with a depreciation waiver) than my '03 Accord.

 

Because of my experience with my insurance company who I've had since 1976 and as incredulous as it might sound, each of my 3 kids totaled their cars and my premiums on the cars they drove were never increased. As for me, and my wife, I have never had to file a claim until now on a car where I or she is listed as the principal driver. Prior to that one of my kids tried an exit out of the garage without opening the garage door. I paid the entire cost of the door thinking it would keep my car insurance premiums down, but unbeknownst to me that little accident would have been covered under the home owner's policy rather than the car's policy. I don't expect my premiums to go up from this small incident, but who knows.

 

I wonder if that diminished value ruling in Georgia applies to other states. Hmmm. I'll have to inquire next week.

 

I would like to know also.

 

Whenever I hear of an engine being replaced under warranty the idea of diminished value occurs to me. The owner no longer has a matching numbers car and this engine replacement, even if totally the fault of the manufacturer, might be seen as a subsequent buyer as indicative of abuse by the owner.

So how about a diminished value payment from the mfg whenever an engine gets replaced? Actually, a new engine might be a very good thing if, for example, the car had some miles on it then gets the new engine....the engine would have considerably fewer miles on it than the rest of the car etc.

 

Good attitude.

 

VIN number is not stamped on the block of the LS7 engine.

Engine casting numbers are.

On the LS7 the EUN number is located here, behind the alternator. http://forums.corvetteforum.com/show...&postcount=902

According to this post the engine is "usually" scanned before installation into the Z06 and most times the EUN can be matched with the VIN.
http://forums.corvetteforum.com/show...post1561254021

From the EUN number it can be determined the day, date of the engine build along with which engine of the day and from off which line it came.
http://forums.corvetteforum.com/show...post1558239671
http://forums.corvetteforum.com/show...post1558609543
http://forums.corvetteforum.com/show...post1556567349

Build dates for GM (small block) engines, and this LS7 is a small block, always precede the build date of the car.

As far as "numbers matching" on a C6 Z06. The only problem one could run into is if the build date of the engine, from the EUN number, followed the build date of the car.

Even in this case, it is documented that the engine was replaced under warranty by GM, I don't see that as a big problem in terms of diminishing the value of the car for collection purposes.

 

About 2 yrs ago I had a guy hit me in my then C5 and he did $18k plus in damage. I got $3500 "diminished value" from USAA. As for Carfax it's a scam because it's only as good as the garbage inputed. $18k damage and the day I sold it there was a clean Carfax on the vehicle.

 

As you were notified, the Mabry court required that insurers pay diminished value to insureds and claimants in the state of Georgia, but it didn't demand they use the 17c formula they use to compute what they owe. They only do that because they can and because it saves them money. 17c was a formula used in another case by another court. Mabry said it could be used for settling auto claims in GA in the absense of another method of calculation.

Diminished value is a negotiation just as the remainder of an insurance claim is, and if you didn't counter their offer with a more legitimate one, you probably got ripped off.


For information on diminished value click here.

 

I had a lady back into me(don't ask, she said she was sorry), her insurance company paid for the 2100 in repairs (well over half were parts, it was at 3 mph)...perfect job, no trace, nothing structural.

Now, they asked for my insurance company's name. I refused (though I'm sure they could find out, no problem). At the very least why risk my insurance company knowing (easily) for a few hundred bucks?

PS, my rates have not changed since the incident about 18 months ago......

 

Why would you think your rates would change. You weren't at fault nor did your ins co have to pay.....

 

Subjective??? How so? And just in case you hadn't noticed, insurers are making more profit now than they were in 2002. Care to explain?

One more thing...What is it about diminished value that makes you think it is a scam?