Seeking legal advice/help pertaining to car accident and insurance company.

[Doppelgänger]

OK, bear with me on this.

History-
-I was hit on Wednesday October 31, 2012. I was not at fault, the other person was. Damage was to my driver door and fender and bumper. I immediately called her insurance (The Hartford) to start the process of filing a claim. I had a body shop picked (Performance Collision) for the repairs but it is it not one of their "preferred" shops. I was told I needed to take the car to one of their preferred shops or wait for an adjuster to come look at the car before I could take it to Performance.
- On Thursday, I took the car to ABBRA in Buckhead to get an estimate/quote to satisfy Hartfords requirement.
- On Friday, 11/2, the car was dropped off at Performance. We went over the damage and I pointed out that I had Speedfilm apply a paint protection film to the bumper and that they needed to remember to add this into the repairs.
- On Wednesday 11/7, an adjuster from Hartford went to Performance to look at the car since Peroformance wanted to fix it correctly by replacing parts. ABBRA's estime just had to fill and paint the damage.
- On Wednesday 11/7 I get the estimate/suppliment from the adjuster via email, look over it and see a quote for a NEW OEM MAZDA door skin and a used fender written up. I immediately called Mazmart to check what their prices were on those parts compared to what the insurance company authorized for. Insurance quote was $844 for a new OE door skin and a LKQ fender (used fender) for $217. Mazmart came back with $(a much lower amount) for a new door and $(a much lower amount than list) for a new fender. I immediately called Performance back and gave them the contact information for Mazmart to order the parts through. Mazmart can order parts directly through Mazda NA just like any Mazda dealership or other parts supplier can. The difference between the LKQ fender and a new OEM one was very little.
- On 11/8 I received an email from Performance confirming the reference to Mazmart for the parts and how the savings on the door skin could cover the slight difference in the fender
- On 11/28 the parts were available at Mazmart for pickup and were picked up by Performance.
- On 12/5 the car was painted.
- On 1/8/13 Speedfilm applied the paint protection film and Performance called to tell me the car would be ready for pickup on 1/9
- On 1/10/13 I picked up the car from Performance. I could not pick it up on 1/8 because of my work and school schedule.

I had been told that the paint needs to be fully cured before the film can be applied because of the out-gassing process of the paint as it cures and that 30 days is standard for paint to fully cure. Speedfilm said the curing period is set by the bodyshop. I had the rental car for 72 days. When I dropped the car off at Performance, I was taken over to Enterprise to get my rental car. I provided Enterprise with my claim information, made my deposit and got my rental car. Little beknown to me, there was a failure in communication between Enterprise and Hartford and no reservation number was made to Enterprise for my rental car. So I get a call from Enterprise on Thursday 1/10 stating that they had not been able to get in touch with the insurance company about billing for the rental car. When I picked up the car on 1/10, I went to Enterprise to get everything straightened out. I managed to get in touch with Hartford and get them to call Enterprise. On 11/16 I get a call from Enterprise telling me that the insurance company had only alotted and paid for 11 days of rental car coverage, leaving a $x,xxx.xx bill remaining. I called Hartford and asked them what was going on and they are standing by the fact that "I had the rental car too long when I didn't need to" and that they are not liable for covering the remaining days.

My side-
- The car was in on 11/2, Hartford's adjuster didn't look at the car until 11/7 and parts were order no later than 11/8 or 11/9. Parts arrived on 11/28 to Performance. That is 13 days right there and it's all justifiable for ordering/shipping time for parts. The car was painted on 12/5 but even then, it would need to be "finished up" after paint. The insurance company is telling me that I "could have just driven the car while I waited for the paint to dry before applying the protection film". I argue that the car is my daily driver and driving it for 30 days would most certainly result in debris damage to the bumper and that it would negate the point of applying the film....it would be pointless to apply the film over paint chips. Furthermore, the car is my only car...what was I supposed to do? Walk everywhere?

If anyone on here deals with law, attorneys or has friends or a connection to an attorney who deals with insurance companies, I would greatly appreciate it. Anyone who can provide helpful insight or advide to my situation would be greatly appreciated as well. There are more details to this story, but I am pressed for time to leave for school. I will add more when I get home.

[Vteckidd]

Any lawyer would take your case, but honestly i dont think you need one. You explained it very easily, they agreed to the protection being put on, and that means they authorized the process to be carried out per the manufacturer. You should have a rental car as long as the repairs take.

As long as you dont have anything that says you ARENT allowed a rental car past 11 days, they have nothing. Inform them of impending legal action, within a week they will just cough it up. Its not worth it to them to pay thousands in legal fees to get out of a rental car. Whats a 72 day rental cost anyway? Enterprise can just convert it to a monthly rental im sure. Prob $2000?

[Doppelgänger]

Oops, I see I was typing too fast yesterday...lol

Well, "agreed to put the protection" on can go one of two ways.
1) It was implied that it would be replaced on the given fact that the insurance company must pay for the car to be repaired to the condition of the vehicle before the accident.
2) It was not written up in the initial estimate. I did make Performance aware of the car having the film upon the initial drop off and they should have passed this onto the adjuster when he came out to see the car. But it seems the adjuster was not aware of the film needing to be applied given the estimate I received from him did not have it listed. But to me, point #1 overrules #2 regardless.

IMHO, when the insurance company and the policy holder came to an agreement on coverage, the insurance company assumes all liability for any situation that policy holder may create, and in this case, they caused damage to a car with special conditions/parts that are not of normal/general repairs, but too bad, they agreed to cover the policy holder. Unfortunately these mindless souls that work in claims are not car people and don't seem to understand why the car should not have been driven after painting and before film application...I need to make them understand this. I also don't feel the insurance company was in touch with Performance to check up on the car on a regular basis nor kept up with Enterprise on the increasing bill. I think I'm going to call an attorney or two just to see what they say before I call the insurance company again and speak to the claim handler's supervisor.

[Sammich]

The car wasnt totaled, you dont deserve to pay that shit, in my accident, my car was totaled so when i got the salvage title back, they stopped paying on my rental, in essence they were done w/ the case, they werent done w/ your case because you didnt have your vehicle back...IMO...insurance companies, especially when you arent at fault, you get fukd all sorts of ways. Get a lawyer if you feel the need because they will give you teh run around, all damn day

[David88vert]

Your body shop should be able to resolve this issue, or refer you to a lawyer. They have had to have run into these issues before, if they have been in business a long time.

[Vteckidd]

Oops, I see I was typing too fast yesterday...lol

Well, "agreed to put the protection" on can go one of two ways.
1) It was implied that it would be replaced on the given fact that the insurance company must pay for the car to be repaired to the condition of the vehicle before the accident.
2) It was not written up in the initial estimate. I did make Performance aware of the car having the film upon the initial drop off and they should have passed this onto the adjuster when he came out to see the car. But it seems the adjuster was not aware of the film needing to be applied given the estimate I received from him did not have it listed. But to me, point #1 overrules #2 regardless.

IMHO, when the insurance company and the policy holder came to an agreement on coverage, the insurance company assumes all liability for any situation that policy holder may create, and in this case, they caused damage to a car with special conditions/parts that are not of normal/general repairs, but too bad, they agreed to cover the policy holder. Unfortunately these mindless souls that work in claims are not car people and don't seem to understand why the car should not have been driven after painting and before film application...I need to make them understand this. I also don't feel the insurance company was in touch with Performance to check up on the car on a regular basis nor kept up with Enterprise on the increasing bill. I think I'm going to call an attorney or two just to see what they say before I call the insurance company again and speak to the claim handler's supervisor.

If they approved the work to be done, and the extra protection was in that estimate, then your golden. If its not, then you have an uphill battle.

The bodyshop, as david suggested, should be able to sort this out. All they need say is its included in every repair, or it was explained to the adjuster that it would be put on.

what it sounds like is they didnt know this special film was being applied, didnt know it would take a 30 day cure process, and you had a rental car for 72 days. They arent happy about that added cost. But as you explained even the 11 days wouldnt have worked considering the time it took to get parts.

[Doppelgänger]

No real new progress here. I've obtained copies of invoices from the body shop showing parts being paid for/arriving on various dates from 11/28 up to 12/13. I also obtained all notes pertaining to my file at Enterprise.
I called the supervisor at the insurance company yesterday and really didn't get anywhere. When I asked "Yes or no. Do you, the company, have to return a vehicle to its owner in the condition it was in before the accident?" to which he replied "Within reason". WTF? Anyway. I also asked why I was never contacted by them about the length of time I had the rental car before it got to being "an unreasonable amount of time" and he said that I had "reasonable responsibility" to contact them about it when I picked it up. The only solace I got was that the supervisor said if I could provide a timeline of work performed by the body shop, that he would look over it and determine if they will pay anymore of the rental car bill. I indeed was able to get a timeline from the shop, but it's really just notes and abbreviations of work performed with dates upuntil a "completed" status on 12/20**. He said they will also look into Mazda's parts to see what the lead time was on the parts at the time they were ordered. I think this is unlikely to happen, but I am currently trying to obtain any kind of documentation showing the exact time the parts were ordered...and if it shows what I think it will show, then it will be justifiable why the shop was delayed in starting to work on the car. So if I am lucky right off the bat, I can get them to cover up until 12/20. But he did mention that most of this is more or less all my fault because I decided to not use their preferred shop (ABRA) and the "my shop" is responsible for the problems too. Leading me to know what my rights are in this case.

** Though the body shop shows "completed", this means the paint and body work were done. The Speedfilm still needed to be applied to the car to put it in the condition it was in before the accident, which requires curing time. I obtained information from DuPont that they request 90-120 days for curing time before applying any kind of paint protection/sealant. There were 21 days between the "completed" status and the car having the film applied. Which leads me to the next situation- Them claiming I could have driven the car while the paint cured vs. me knowing the bumper would obtain damage if driven regularly for 30 days and that applying the film over paint chips negates the point of the film. I can't drive the car, it's my only car and I need transportation while the car cannot be driven. To me, it would be no different than the body shop spraying paint on the car and not being able to apply the clear coat and then telling me to drive the car until they can apply the clear coat, which would be a problem because it's pretty much guaranteed that in 30 days of driving that the paint would be damaged and no shop worth a damn would clear over damaged paint. So why would I willingly let damage occur before applying a protection product I had paid out of pocket previously for? That is my dilemma. I wish I could have the body shop put in writing that they would not recommend any vehicle be driven between painting and film application....that would help me out immensely.

The last piece I am trying to deal with is that it is implied that I am responsible for the lack of reservation set up between the rental car and the insurance company. I was never told I needed to personally perform this. It seems logical that when I picked up the rental car, the company would have verified that the insurance company was indeed paying for it. With the way I picked up the car, anyone could go get one..all I did was provide them with contact information and a claim number and was let go with the car. The insurance company sees me as just picking up the car and sticking them with the bill, like they're completely unaware that I would have been getting a rental. I'll admit that with any previous insurance company claim, this is the procedure I have followed.

Oh well, back to digging up information.

[Sil'vr-Boi6]

Sup,.....nice to meeting you at Sat. Junction Meet. And sorry to here about the accident. Incidents like this usually suck and both parties usually come out of pocket. Believe me--I know, this happened to my evo 3 weeks ago. To keep the story short; I got into a fender bender 1-2mph(rear bumper). I was at fault(ticketed). I'm with progressive(I pay for full coverage/500 deduc./rental provided up to 30days/yada yada). My insurance took care of the other parties car(which was a out of state rental--go figure). I was also given a rental. I don't have advice ...sorry man, I'm useless. I just wanted to give P.O.V from the other side of guilty party. Only other advice I can give is to ask your insurance company where are they out sourcing repair facilities?(this is if you're doing repairs with your insurance instead of your own repair.)are they ASE certified?will OEM/aftermaket parts be used(in many scenerios if your car is not 2-3yrs old aftermarket parts will be used)?......I was fortunate enough in getting an answer to who and the kind of quality the repair shop offers. Since I opted to get work done with progressive; I knew where, how long, what parts, how much clear coat and the exact tech who drove my car and painted it. In a nutshell I'm saying give as much info the part to minimize delays of the part, get to know the repair persons. that is all.

[Doppelgänger]

Yeah, this is no fun at all. I am learning that I cannot find any one cause of this (thought someone has told me this is all my fault). I know how I feel about many aspects of all of this though...from the rental car company not verifying the claim with the insurance company before I was allowed to leave (or since I picked it up at 5pm- the rental company not following up the next day) or not having proof that they attempted to verify the bill be payed by the insurance company right after I picked up the rental...to me being the one that has to prove when the parts were ordered and when they arrived (not my job!)...to not wanting the paint to be damaged before having the film applied (I took steps to do this when I payed out of pocket to have the film applied). Seeking black-and-white answers to my questions and opinions has been a real PITA. But I'll admit that this is one hell of a learning experience and will be very much on the ball if this ever happens again.

I'm thinking I might end up getting the ins. to cover up to Dec 20th, which would be a good start and reduce the amount out of pocket I'll probably end up paying. But I still don't feel I am responsible for not driving my car from the 20th to the 10th (21 days). I feel that it would have been negligence on my part if I were to have driven the car and incurred damage to the paint before having the film applied that is supposed to protect the paint. What logical sense does it make to run an extremely high risk of damage before the car is put in the condition it was in before the accident?

[Doppelgänger]

Update- some progress made. Unfortunately I still need to try to get them to understand why driving the car from the 20th to the 10th would have been a bad idea and not in their best interest.

[masanomi3]

1-800-411-PAIN.

[C230K]

.....

[Doppelgänger]

Sorry, I'm too honest for that bullshit...and anyone who milks that shit needs to choke on their own vomit....alone...with no way to call for help.

[Black R]

Yep, go after them for medical if they won't cough up the $ for repairs.

I've done it before.

Play the game, or lose.

[ISAtlanta300]

Doppel, I really feel bad for what happened, but it is very hard to 'beat' the insurance company at their game.

Personally, what I think will happen is that they will return the car to you in the condition it was in, minus the film, as that would be considered an 'add-on', or 'aftermarket' part. Cars don't come with these film from the factory. It was applied to you afterwards. (even if it was dealer installed, it is an optional accessory/ add-on). So the insurance argument will be like: "Yes, we will repair your car's fender/ bumper to like new condition, which we did". and "Yes, we will apply the film for you, but we will not pay for the rental/ waiting period". why? because it is not their responsibility that the paint needs to cure, and secondly, it is considered an aftermarket / add on part.

Don't get me wrong. I am not defending the insurance company. However, do you have something in writing that they will cover the rental for xxx days? When I had my accident, i spoke with the adjuster and they will give you xx days of rental. If you needed more days, you would call in, and they will approve / extend. If you keep the car without telling the insurance, it's on you. When my car was totalled, they gave me 1 week rental to look over the paperwork and assess value. As the rental return day was approaching, I called them to see if they were ready. They were not, so we extended it for another week, etc. That's how it usually works. Lots of calling and following up and a major pain in the ass.

Now you claim that someone from the insurance company said it was ok for the paint protection to be applied. However that person may have not been knowledgeable enough to know that the paint needed to cure. Granted, that's on them. However, that does not mean he gave the ok for another month of rental. The insurance will still pay for the paint protection, but on their schedule. i.e. when you are ready to have it put on. That's what you need to fight them on.

It will be a hard battle, not totally impossible, but here are what's again each party:

Insurance:
they promised (verbally?) to put paint protection on the car. Their ignorance of the time of curing is against them and not your fault

You:
you may not have an approval in writing that they allowed you to extend the rental.
your paint protection will be treated as an 'add on accessory', like wheels


What I would do is start writing letters to the insurance company. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't, but will give you an idea what to do next. I would say leave legal option as a last resort as insurance companies are usually lawyered up the ass.....

[Doppelgänger]

Vernon- You indeed do have some valid points and facts, but some aspects are missing. I'll address those as well as other aspects of what I've learned in this whole process and some courses of action I feel should have been taken in order for this deal to have gone smoother. Now that the insurance company has agreed to pay for the rental from 11/1-12/20, part of the situation that I was fighting has been resolved- like the lack of communication between Enterprise and the insurance company that snowballed into the reason no later follow-ups had taken place. Bear with me here.

When I had my accident, i spoke with the adjuster and they will give you xx days of rental. If you needed more days, you would call in, and they will approve / extend. If you keep the car without telling the insurance, it's on you.

Yes and no. As far as I have learned from talking to State Farm and others, when making a claim to your policy, there is a rental car coverage agreement if you have added that to the policy. In this case, yes, you are correct that there are xx days or a maximum dollar amount that your policy will cover for you. If more time is needed, it can be authorized with appropriate documentation/agreement. On the other hand, when you are the non-fault driver making a claim against the at-fault's insurance, there is no set number of days or a maximum dollar amount for rental car coverage. However, when an estimate is written up by the insurance company, there is an automatic calculator that looks at the type of parts being repaired/replaced, the amount/hours of body work/paint being called for and an estimated lead time for the parts to calculate a number of days needed for a rental car, should it be needed. This is "estimated" by software, not a person and is not a contractual agreement to coverage. In my case, the original estimate had this at the bottom:

Rental Calculator

Labor Hours - 18.8 HRS
Refinish Hours - 7.3 HRS
Mecanical Hours - 0.0 HRS
Frame Hours - 0.0 HRS
Days - 5 DAYS

So based on the write-up, the calculator determined that 5 days were all that was needed. When I took the car to Performance, their original estimate did not have a rental car calculator because it was not initially written up as an insurance estimate, it was a general damage estimate. This estimate was then submitted to Hartford for approval. When Hartford received this estimate, they deemed it to be significantly more then their recommended shop's estimate (ABRA) and sent out an adjuster to re-appraise the damage and work out an agreement for repairs. They agreed on a new estimate for repair. However, the agreed estimate also only had 5 days of rental car coverage calculated based on number of hours of work needed. As soon as the supplement was approved, I received a copy and the process moved forward (see note on 11/7 in OP). Mind you, this is already 7 days into the claim.

Also, I was contacted by a friend who actually works for an insurance company and handles automotive claims. I was told directly from this person that there is no set number or cutoff for a rental car for the non-fault's claim...that they can't just say right away "you only get xx days and we stop paying". If contact with the insurance company was made when I picked up the rental, the insurance company would have been "in the loop" on the billing, they probably would have made contact with me well before the number of days became "unreasonable" and we would have resolved any issues. Like I said above, that aspect has been resolved after a conference call with Performance, Hartford and me....only after I had been doing all the footwork for the insurance company when they could have simply called Performance and asked them for a timeline of events when they got the rental car bill. But they did not. They simply scoffed at the bill which caused Enterprise to contact me with "what I owed"....putting all of this into motion.

Now you claim that someone from the insurance company said it was ok for the paint protection to be applied. However that person may have not been knowledgeable enough to know that the paint needed to cure. Granted, that's on them. However, that does not mean he gave the ok for another month of rental. The insurance will still pay for the paint protection, but on their schedule. i.e. when you are ready to have it put on. That's what you need to fight them on.

Insurance:
they promised (verbally?) to put paint protection on the car. Their ignorance of the time of curing is against them and not your fault.
It will be a hard battle, not totally impossible, but here are what's again each party:

You:
you may not have an approval in writing that they allowed you to extend the rental.
your paint protection will be treated as an 'add on accessory', like wheels

This is where the other problem lies, a paradox, and where I am trying to help them understand this process. To me, the paint protection is a very special beast here. While it is indeed an add-on accessory (like my bumper), it has a very specific function- to protect the paint from damage. I can understand that if I had a cosmetically damaged wheel that would need an extended number of days to replace, I could drive the car until a replacement was located and ordered. I also see it that if the wheels was damaged to a point of being a safety concern, the car would be deemed "undrivable" until the replacement situation was resolved (be it by replacement or exhausting available reasonable resources and paying the owner a dollar figure). But the paint protection does not work like that. I understand that the insurance company probably has not dealt with this product as it is still fairly new. But they need to become familiar with it. I have tried to explain the product and the purpose of the product and the required process to applying the product to a freshly painted surface. But I feel they simply just don't care to want to understand it and to know how to deal with it later. I also feel that a lot of the cars with the film are on "nicer" more luxurious vehicle....and feel many people with such cars probably have other cars. In that case, it would be completely understandable to not cover a rental car. But I do not have a second car to use. So I drive it home and park it....then what? I still need to go to work and school. How do I do that? I'm having a very hard time accepting the fact that I should be responsible for not wanting to damage the paint before the job was complete and that I should be expected to "fend for myself" for those 21 days for a situation that was caused by their policy-holder. Why should I have to either pay out of pocket for a rental car or be left car-less and figure out how to get to school and work?

I would be very confident in appointing myself as "an expert" on the subject of discussing MY car and what would happen to the paint if I were to regularly use the car for 30 days while the paint properly cured. I have been through the process of having bumpers painted and seeing damage occur in a very short time period several times in the 10 years I have been driving a modified car. I know this so well that I paid out of my own pocket to have my bumper protected to prevent chip damage. My point being that if I drive the car, I can say without a doubt, that damage to the paint would occur. If the paint was damaged, it would NOT be in the condition it was in before the accident and before the claim is closed. So now I would have a bumper with damaged paint AND the car is not "completed" in the sense that the film has not even been applied. On TWO occasions dealing with this I have been told "well, if damage happens before the film is applied, then we will have the shop submit a supplement and repaint the bumper"...I was told this by the adjuster and by the supervisor at Hartford. Now what kind of logical sense does that make? Why would you be willing to pay for another supplement for damage that could very easily be prevented? This is what I am trying to make them realize.

OK, I'm finally about to wrap this up. Really. Bottom line is that their policy holder caused an accident and damaged my car and all I wanted was to have it returned in the condition it was in before the accident. When the Hartford and that policy-holder agreed to a contract, the Hartford assumed any liability to any situation the policy-holder could cause. So here is my new presentation I am about to bring to the table in an attempt to get this resolved. I've thought long and hard about how I can make my case in a way they can understand. I think I maybe have been conveying my defense on a "consumer" level too much. So I shall present my next round of defense as something like this:

By not driving the vehicle for the curing period required by the manufacturer of the paint as well as the guideline of the repair facility, and by recommendation of the manufacturer of the protection film, I was acting in the best interest of the insurance company to limit and prevent any further expenses relating to my claim. It would have been negligent on my part to not prevent damage to the paint before the repairs were completed by taking delivery of the vehicle and driving it before the application of the paint protection film. You (the insurance company) have expressed at least two times, by two people, that had damaged occurred that it would have been handled by approving a supplement for the part to be painted again. Not only would this extend this the claim further, it would also nearly meet the initial cost of the rental car for the 21 days between when the shop "completed" the work on December the 20th and the date the rental car was returned on January 10th, which amounts to $550.29. Since you have admitted that if damage occurred you would have approved a supplement for repair, which according to the estimate would cost ~$352.80*, there would also need to be the added cost for a rental car. I would estimate about 3-6 days (leaving the chance that a weekend could be involved) for an added cost of anywhere between $78.61 and $157.23*, for a total of $431.41 - $510.03 to repaint the bumper and cover a rental car. So a "savings" by you of between $40.26- $118.88 from the original $550.29 for the 21 days of rental car coverage you are currently not covering as part of the claim. I would like come to a settlement on the $550.29 as soon as possible to resolve this matter. *Numbers are based on the final supplement (bumper repair) and the same rate for the rental car from Enterprise ($22.99/day + $1.50/day VLRF +7% tax).




As far as Enterprise goes, I'll be contacting their corporate offices to see if I should have been allowed to leave before verifying the claim was valid. I really want to know if they were supposed to do this or not. When I talked to one branch, they said they are supposed to, but the branch manager at the location I used said such calls "are a courtesy service they do for customers" and that they are not required to contact the insurance company when a claim is not set up in their ARMS pre-approved reservation system. If they are, then some fault is on them, but if not then I feel the insurance company should have either contacted me asking about the subject or even ask about the rental car when following up with the body shop. I know I tried several times to contact my "claims representative" and was never contacted back, though I doubt they will have any record of me calling him. The notes from Enterprise show where they made a follow up call on 12/12 and never received contact from Hartford. I would like to imagine that any proof of them failing to return calls would give me even more leverage in all of this. Furthermore, they had approved a rental car when they wrote the estimate (and I know when I set up the claim I said that I would be picking up a rental car when I dropped my car off). I do see two things here though, I see where I assumed that Enterprise and Hartford would make contact or that Hartford would have followed up with me or returned my calls. I also now see that I could have called them and told them I was in a rental car shortly after picking it up. I do know that they knew I had one at one point when I talked to the adjuster in late December and told him I had it, but what he knows on that subject probably does not matter nor does it give me ground to say 'Well I told your adjuster I had one and that he should have done something with that knowledge!".

Oh well, we'll see where this goes.

[ISAtlanta300]

LOL holy wall of text.... but yes, your defense is very nicely written and you should put that in writing and fax it to the insurance company. You never know. I myself have had 50% fault overturned to 0% (rightly so, in my opinion), by writing it out and stating my defense.

The whole issue is that speedfilm, but also understand that insurance companies are not 'car guys' like us, and to them their usual modus operandis is fix, paint and release. LOL.

But good luck! Let us know how it goes and the outcome.

[Doppelgänger]

Oh, after re-reading that, I hope I didnt come off as arrogant or condescending. I was kinda also posting with the idea of anyone else reading this might learn something if they are ever in a similar situation.

I do plan on making a couple of calls tomorrow before contacting the insurance company again because if I har to pull out my "last resort", I want to know I can really stand behind it.