Subaru Forester Owners Forum banner

2017 - Help with diminished value claim after accident?

11K views 36 replies 12 participants last post by  DragonSubie7 
#1 · (Edited)
So, last week, I was rear ended in my 4 month old '17 Forester XT Touring with Eyesight and Nav.

The other insurance made an initial estimate of only $2k in damages, but that isn't going to be close to the actual total. They are doing the teardown estimate right now, and I should hear back soon about the extent of the damages. I know there is underlying damage because you can see that the rear quarter panel has moved forward (panel gap with the door shows this), and the hatch and bumper are not the only things damaged. It will probably not be near enough to total it, but I am worried about structural damage.

I read elsewhere that I should look into filing a diminished value claim for this accident.

Basically, from what I have seen, the other insurance company should owe me the difference between what the vehicle was worth right before the accident, and what it is worth now that it has been in one (assuming it gets fixed and not totaled.)

So, I asked the adjuster about this, and he initially tried to dismiss this, and after further questioning he said that they only pay when I sell the vehicle and can prove that I was only able to get a reduced amount because of disclosing the damage. He also said that if that was a long time from now, they might not still have the records from this claim, and it might be hard to re-open the claim years later. He then forwarded me on to someone else in the company that will respond directly to the diminished value aspect of the claim (with no response from this person yet).

I have seen other posts online that mention that the diminished value should be calculated as of the time of the accident, not years later when I sell the vehicle, but it is difficult to obtain pricing on a used '17 XT (because there really aren't too many yet, and NADA, KBB, etc don't have used pricing yet). I've also seen a lot of people say the insurance company will only accept "licensed appraiser's" values or actual loss values.

If I try to trade it in or sell it now, I would be forced to cover the depreciation, plus the diminished value out of pocket (or roll it in to the new vehicle) while I wait for the claim to hopefully be paid. I do this later when the depreciation is closer to what I owe, there's a chance they have purged the claim from their records. (Plus, I don't feel safe driving around a vehicle with an infant son and another baby on the way in a car that has had structural repairs, regardless of how well the repairs are made.)

So, does anyone have experience with a Diminished Value claim? What was your experience, and what did you need to do to prove the value drop?
 
See less See more
#2 ·
Here's pics:







The other guy's car:



No injuries on either side, so that's the most important part, of course.
There was enough force to tweak the front end of the Taco. The hood doesn't open and close right, and the grill clearly moved over, fender tweaked... Don't care much about the damage to his truck, other than it tells how much force was in such a simple accident.

For the Forester, it is obvious the Gate, Bumper, Bumper Brace, Right Muffler (maybe y-pipe, maybe further forward?), Rear Parking Sensors, and Emblems, need to be replaced. The Quarter Panel, possibly spare tire well, and structure that the gate latch is mounted to need to be repaired/replaced. This is based on what I could see at the time, and I am still waiting on the body shop to write the full estimate. I told them my concerns for Unibody damage, and they are supposedly looking into it, but I am going to want some verification on what they checked (to make sure they actually checked it). There's a chance some of the suspension braces/mounts were affected too, but I didn't look under the car before the body shop took it. I just think that with the force needed to push the quarter forward, other things underneath were pushed forward as well. It seems like such a basic accident, but there were a lot of forces involved still.

Once metal is bent, and then bent back, it is much weaker than before. (Imagine bending a paperclip and then bending it back, it becomes weaker, and will break with less force than when new. If they end up repairing the bent parts, I am worried about reduced crash capacity with my family inside. (What if I get rear ended again?) But, with this being brand new a couple months ago, I've got to worry about the immediate depreciation if they don't total it, if I want to trade this for a car that hasn't been in an accident. (Regardless of the diminished value that I talk about in the OP.) I feel like I am probably going to be stuck with the repaired car, and just be constantly worried about getting in another accident until I pay down the depreciation more.

Hopefully I will have an update tomorrow from the body shop.
 
#4 ·
Looks like more than 2000 in damages. I was involved in an accident where a street cleaner backed into me and the damages were 5k.
New hood and head with grill assembly. When you have the car repair make sure that OEM parts are used and take it to your repair shop!
I did look into filing a diminishing value claim. I was told I lost about 3000 in the value of the car, in Pennsylvania I have a two year window to file a diminishing value calm. The body shop did a excellent job in repairing the car. From your pictures it looks like cosmetics damages,
under the rear bumper cover there an steel beam and that should have absorbed the impact and hopefully no real damage to the unibody.
Just need to wait and see once they take it apart.
 
#5 ·
Looks like more than 2000 in damages. I was involved in an accident where a street cleaner backed into me and the damages were 5k.
New hood and head with grill assembly. When you have the car repair make sure that OEM parts are used and take it to your repair shop!
I brought it to the body shop I chose, it is the one the dealer where I bought my car uses. They've done work on previous cars of mine. With the age of the vehicle, they will use OEM parts, but I will double check that.

I did look into filing a diminishing value claim. I was told I lost about 3000 in the value of the car, in Pennsylvania I have a two year window to file a diminishing value calm. The body shop did a excellent job in repairing the car.
$3000 seems a little low to be honest, since now your vehicle history always shows it's had a collision claim against it.
Initial numbers look like I should see about $8k+ drop based on vehicles for sale currently with and without damage (If I were to sell it today).
A 17 XT Touring with Eyesight/Nav with a "Branded Title" is listed for $26,500, A used 17 XT Touring without Eyesight/Nav is listed for $33,500. That's $8k difference, add in the value for the ES/Nav and the difference is even more. (Both vehicles have about the same mileage as my car, and are located within a couple hundred miles, so they are in the same market).

From your pictures it looks like cosmetics damages,
under the rear bumper cover there an steel beam and that should have absorbed the impact and hopefully no real damage to the unibody.
Just need to wait and see once they take it apart.
There is definitely structure damage, even if it is only minimal. The rear quarter panel pushed forward into the rear door, I didn't notice until looking at the gap between the door and quarter. The steel beam behind the bumper cover looks bent as well, but I didn't take a thorough look at it before the body shop took it. I am hoping the body shop will let me come and take a look at it with the panels off (and hopefully get some pictures).
 
#7 ·
+1 on OEM parts.

I found this website which I thought was rather interesting.

Make a diminished value claim | CarInsurance.com

Also, I'm not an ambulance chaser, and I'm not a big fan of them, but ... make sure your body is really okay. Just like old sports injuries can cripple you when you're 40 or 50 or 60 or 70, soft tissue damages from years prior can surface and significantly impact your ability to do things (when you're old). And you don't want to be prevented from getting or keeping that 30 year younger trophy girlfriend / boyfriend !! ;-)
 
#8 ·
I saw that website. I am still waiting on the protocol for the insurance company for Diminished Value claims. It seems to depend on what insurance company it is through for what the process is. I'd like to avoid paying out of pocket for an appraisal if I don't have to, and of course would prefer to not have to pay an attorney if I can avoid it.

For the medical stuff, I don't feel any different, even after a day or two, so I'm not worried about any bodily injury. I'm glad that I'm not even sore or anything from it.
 
#10 ·
Unless your state is different most attorneys will only take a 33% cut if they recover. Also, the above posters are correct. You never know about soft tissue injuries. They can pop up out of nowhere at any time. I would call an attorney because I can promise you the insurance companies are not looking out for your best interest.
 
#11 ·
The other insurance adjuster is full of crap. Their job is to lowball you and deflect blame where and when possible. Depending on your state, your actions should vary. A no fault state means you should let your insurance deal with it and have them sue theirs. In most cases, your premiums will adjust accordingly even if you aren't at fault.
 
#12 ·
Well, body shop called me to let me know they had the car apart, and don't see any evidence of damage beyond cosmetic pieces. They are going to see if the other insurance will cover a laser measure to be sure, but they are saying it will only be Rear Bumper Cover, parking sensors, tail gate and emblems. There is still going to be diminished value, but not as much as it would have been with repaired structural damage.

They also noticed I am missing a nut on my exhaust flange (since they were looking at the exhaust to see if anything got pushed forward.) So now I have to take that up with Subaru.



It kind of looks like there never was a bolt there, or if it was, it was never torqued down. Vehicle only has 5k miles, and has never been worked on, so I think they missed this when they were assembling it. Makes me wonder what else they missed.
 
#15 ·
This is starting to look like I might have to fight a bit more to get DV. Here's the response I got from the other guy's insurance:

"I mailed out a letter last week explaining Allstate’s position regarding DV. Once you’ve had a chance to read it and have any questions, please let me know..."

I haven't received the letter yet, so I currently don't know what it says.

I have sustained actual loss, and in Colorado, DV is acknowledged by Legal Precedent, with the damages being the difference between the value of the vehicle immediately before the accident, and immediately after (not at the time of sale, possibly years later). This damage includes inherent diminished value now that the vehicle has a record of being in an accident. (Between a car with repaired damage and one without, which would you buy? What if the repaired car were less expensive? How much less expensive is enough.)

I also found I should be looking for Loss of Use as well. The Forester XT Touring is a top-of-the-line vehicle for its class, and my lease payments each month are $X, the rental they gave me is the base model and if I were to lease that same vehicle, I would have paid $Y each month. Loss of use should equal (X-Y)*(# of days without use/# of days in the month).

I've been reading other forums and blogs mentioning that Allstate seems to be one of the worst with either flat denying DV, or lowballing so much that it is laughable. Those posts mention that they had luck bringing suit against the other driver in small claims court (if it was under the state's limit), but I really don't want to have to deal with court. Some of them had luck just threatening to do that, but I don't want to threaten legal action unless I am ready to follow through.

I also realize I should have filed DV with my '15 Forester XT after a lady backed into the car in a parking lot (post about that is probably lying around here somewhere). The dealer definitely reduced the trade value because of the repairs (Even though they were the ones to perform the repairs). I'm not sure what I can do about that now that it is 4 months after trading it, but I'm going to try for that as well. (Just happens to have also been through Allstate)

I really don't want to involve courts, but I want what "makes me whole" (and what is legally owed to me) as if the accident didn't happen.
 
#17 ·
Here is Allstate's response:

Based on Allstate accepting liability, our essential legal and liability obligation is to pay the cost of repairs to restore your vehicle back
to pre-accident condition and supply you with a rental while your vehicle is being repaired. Provided a vehicle has been repaired to its
pre-accident condition a vehicle should not lose any value. There can be an inherent or psychological impact where a prospective buyer
might want to pay less for the vehicle if two of the exact same vehicles were sitting side by side for sale.

In response to your inquiry regarding diminution in value to your vehicle, third party claimants “may pursue” a claim for
diminution of value, though the requirement to establish the amount of damages rests with the person making the claim.

As to any loss of value – this obviously has no impact in the process of repair or while you own the vehicle and can only be determined, accurately, when you would sell a vehicle, after repair.

The only way to "support" a claim for diminished value is to sell or trade-in your vehicle to “clearly show evidence” that there has
been a loss of value. If your vehicle is sold or traded-in, Allstate will revisit your diminished value claim request.

Based on Allstate’s review, Allstate respectfully advises no offer will be forthcoming on your claim for diminution in value.

Keep in mind that a diminished value is only the measurement of difference in value as negotiated between you and a seller without regard to quality of repair or other vehicle conditions affecting the agreement.

Important: Again, if, at some point you sell or trade your vehicle in and it's "supports that there is a loss of value from this accident", Allstate will re-evaluate
its position and re-evaluate your diminished value claim.
It looks like I am going to have to step it up and fight this.
 
#20 ·
Nope, maybe most people will, but I'm not going to take this lying down.

Wondering why there isn't any folks who can able provide some inputs on how to navigate this.This cant be first time.

I did read that dealer can provide a traded-in value vs new car and be that can one one of the supporting documents in establishing diminution in value. Talk to dealer and see if they have some inputs
The dealers I talked to have provided estimates, but there really aren't used '17s out there to compare values to, so the numbers are all over the place, and the dealers are not willing to certify their numbers without that.
 
#19 ·
Wondering why there isn't any folks who can able provide some inputs on how to navigate this.This cant be first time.

I did read that dealer can provide a traded-in value vs new car and be that can one one of the supporting documents in establishing diminution in value. Talk to dealer and see if they have some inputs
 
#22 ·
Here is my thorough, thoughtfully and respectfully worded response:

Thomas,

What documentation is required to prove this loss? If I do trade in the vehicle at the diminished value, how do I document the value had it not been in an accident? If I were to actually trade it in, I want to be sure I am doing everything I need to in order to receive what is owed to me.

There are a few things that don't make sense about this:

1. If I were to trade in the vehicle for another vehicle, I would be receiving the "trade in value" for my current car, but paying the "retail value" for the replacement, and would sustain a loss from that difference. This imposes an undue hardship for me to pay out of pocket for the difference in value, in addition to the diminished value.

Example: If I were to trade my 2017 Subaru Forester XT Touring in for another used 2017 Subaru Forester XT Touring that is similarly equipped, the transaction would look like the following:

Trade in Value (in pre-crash condition) - approximately $31,075 according to a recent inquiry to a local dealership for this specific VIN

Trade in Value (with accident reported on vehicle history, but other wise repairs completed correctly.) - approximately $27,300 according to the same dealer.

Replacement vehicle price - $34,500 - based on adjusting the vehicle I listed earlier that is similar, but does not have navigation, eyesight, and other comparable equipment.

If I were to trade it in before this crash, I would be required to come up with $3,425 out of pocket to get the same vehicle (If the vehicles were parked next to each other, you would not be able to tell them apart, even with vehicle history reports), simply because of the difference between trade in and retail value.

If I were to trade it in now, after the crash, I would be required to come up with $7,200 out of pocket due to both the diminished value and to the difference between trade in and retail value. (Again, this would be what would be required for me to be restored to a situation comparable to the "Pre-Crash Condition") Also, this would be at the risk that Allstate decided not to pay the DV claim, or decides to pay a reduced amount, etc. I would need some type of assurance that the value will be recovered.

This is a diminished value of $3,775 (what I have calculated that I am rightfully owed in this situation).

According to the letter you pasted, for me to receive the diminished value, I will need to spend the additional $3,425 to do so. How does that make any sense? This would place an undue hardship for me to come up with this difference just to receive what I am owed. Remember - if this crash would not have happened, I would not trade in the vehicle for many years, and would not have incurred the additional $3,425 difference between retail and trade values. That is, unless Allstate will reimburse me for this additional hardship.

It is important to note that currently there are not any vehicles comparable to my vehicle on the private party market in this area due to the very young age of the vehicle. Also, trade in values are not easy to obtain on a vehicle that is only 4 months old, as typically people don't trade in a vehicle this new because of the generally massive depreciation with new vehicles. The values were obtained through a dealership that I had quoted a new vehicle replacement with.​

2. Even though Allstate has provided a rental car, it is not anywhere near comparable to my vehicle, and regardless of the diminished value, I am sustaining loss-of-use.
My 2017 Forester is "fully loaded" with almost all available options, and is considered top-of-the-line for the segment. The rental that was provided is a base model, and I am losing the use of the extra features I am paying for. My lease is $469 per month, however a lease on the rental (2017 Hyundai Santa Fe Sport Base) would be $249 per month (according to Hyundai's website). This is a difference of $220 per month, or an additional $7.23 per day of lost use (Monthly lease multiplied by 12 months, divided by 365 days).
This is an actual loss, not an inherent loss. As soon as my vehicle is repaired, the total loss of use can be calculated by simply multiplying $7.23 by the number of days I was without my vehicle.​

3. The damage occurred now, and the loss of value was immediate, so the claim should be based on the current inherent loss in value due to the spoiled vehicle history report.
If I were to wait to trade in the vehicle, such as in 3 model years, the diminished value would be less.
The difference between a vehicle in "Clean Trade In" condition vs a vehicle in "Rough Trade in" condition (because of the tarnished vehicle history) for a used 2014 Subaru Forester XT Touring with Eyesight and Navigation is only $2,525.
As the vehicle gets older, this diminished value is reduced even further. Also, as Mike stated, there is a chance that as time goes by, old, closed claims would be purged from the records, and much harder to initiate a diminished value claim. What if I don't ever sell the vehicle?​


The point of insurance in this situation is for me to recover damages related to your insured driver's mistake. The letter you sent me seems that Allstate is trying to do what they can to prevent fulfilling their legal obligation to compensate me for these damages.

Also, according to this precedent:

Courts have held that “the measure of damage is the difference between its value immediately before its damage and immediately thereafter, together with any expense of reasonable efforts to preserve or restore it.” Trujillo v. Wilson, 117 Colo. 430, 434, 189 P.2d 147, 150 (Colo. 1948)
It seems based on this, that Allstate's liability is to compensate the difference between the value immediately before the damage, vs immediately after proper repairs are completed. This does not state that the vehicle need to be sold to receive the compensation.
Essentially, I would be selling my vehicle to Allstate at the pre-crash value, and then immediately purchasing it back at the reduced value.

Thomas, obviously part of your job is to reduce the amount of financial impact for each claim, but in my situation, I am only asking for what I am entitled to, and I am not seeking frivolous or excessive damages. It honestly should not be this difficult to be "made whole" or restored to the same condition I would have been had the other driver not hit my vehicle. The way this claim has been handled makes me want to never consider Allstate to insure any of my property, ever.

Please answer the first question I posed about required documentation in the event I trade the vehicle in, but also respond to my points above.

Thank you
So, we will see what their response is.
I know I have a good basis for a legal claim, but man, I really don't want to have to do that. I will have to start looking into that just in case.
 
#24 ·
They do actually owe me for diminished value from the '15 I traded for the '17.

In the '15, I was backed into in a parking lot. I didn't know about diminished value when I traded it in, but now I do. I started looking at my records and it happens to be that that driver in that claim also had Allstate. I talked to the adjuster from that claim, and they referred me to this same Thomas guy.
So, I am curious what documentation I need to prove the diminished value for that accident because it is now 4 months after trading it in. Current values are very different from where they were 4 months ago. I happen to still have the NADA guides pricing for the '15 that I printed to bring to the dealership, but I don't know if that is enough.

As of 10/28/16 when I printed it, Rough trade in was 20,500, and what I was given for my '15, Clean was $23,475. Difference of $2,975. Compared to today's values: Rough $18,675, Clean $21,200. Geez, that's a lot of depreciation in only 4 months. ($1,825 and $2,275 drop respectively. :surprise: )

I totally forgot that I am also paying taxes on the diminished value and need to request that as well for both of these situations.
 
#26 ·
Here is his response:

according to Carfax (and, mentioned below when referring to your monthly payment) the Forester is a Leased vehicle. If this is the case, ONLY the owner/s of a vehicle can legally pursue a diminished value claim. Your contractual obligation is to have the vehicle repaired while in your position (throughout the lease term). Once returned to the owner/s (Leasing Co) when the lease is termed, the lease company would contact Allstate if they are interested in pursuing a DV claim...
My response to that:

No, this is actually extremely incorrect.

If I trade in the vehicle, I have to pay the "purchase amount" to buy the vehicle from the leasing company. This in turn makes me the temporary owner of the vehicle. This then allows me to sell/trade the vehicle in to the dealership. At that point, the leasing company is not owed anything and CAN NOT LEGALLY pursue diminished value because the lessee bought it from them to satisfy the obligation. At that point, I would be the one to receive the damages and would be LEGALLY able to pursue the diminished value.

This is what happened when I traded the '15 Forester for my current '17 Forester.

I know you are doing everything in your power to not pay out what is owed to me, which is against the law, but I want to make something VERY CLEAR:

I will not back down on this, and I am willing to do everything in my power to receive what is owed to me, legally, due to the mistakes of both drivers that caused damage to both of my vehicles.

I am only seeking what would make me in the same position I would have been, had it not been for the mistakes of both of these drivers. I am not asking for excessive damages, only what is legally entitled to me.


Let me ask a simple question. If I were to buy the vehicle TODAY from the leasing company, and TOMORROW trade it in, what would I need to provide to prove the diminished value and seek compensation for those damages?
His response back:

“at the time of both losses”, the vehicle owners were the Lease company. Based on this fact, you cannot pursue a DV claim. This is Allstate’s final decision on your DV claims.
Since that is their "final" decision, I am starting to talk with attorneys on this.
It sucks that it had to get to this point, but I am not going to back down on this.

Allstate will never ever get my business after this, and I recommend anyone else avoid them by all means.
 
#28 ·
OK. Slightly interesting turn of events.

I looked at a different vehicle the other day (in an effort to get the diminished value if I did actually trade it in), and told that dealership that I am waiting to hear back about this mess before committing to anything. They called today to check in, and I told them that I was likely going to have to take this to court, but for now, I am no longer interested in trading it in, at least until this mess is done.

He asked who did (or is doing) the repair work, and he said that since the dealership's body shop is the one doing the repair, he knows the quality of work that they perform, and would offer a trade value as if the damage never happened. I bought the Subaru from AutoNation Subaru, and the vehicle I am looking at is through a different AutoNation dealership. AutoNation is performing the repairs now.
If this is actually the case, then I think I would be likely to do it, and if it all works out, I would probably not pursue legal action. It would basically solve all my current problems. If I tried to pursue legal action, they can just say I was offered full value, and dismiss the case, so it wouldn't be worth doing.
For the old trade, I may have to find someone to testify about the vehicle value, but that may be hard to do this long after the fact.
Now I am hoping this all works out. I was honestly looking at keeping the Forester for a good amount of time, but with this opportunity, it might be sayonara, and better for me in the long run.

I still hope that by posting this here, it might help someone else in a similar situation. And if the trade thing doesn't work out, I will post what happens with taking this to court.
 
#31 ·
The deal I talked about in the quoted post above was legit, and here's what I drove home on Saturday:



This dealer offered the full trade value for the FXT, and with college graduate discount and other incentives, I was able to cover the depreciation, and end up with lease payments equal to what my FXT was.
This also means I have no more to deal with Allstate. When the Subaru is done, I write over the check from Allstate, and deliver it to the GMC dealer.

If I didn't do this deal, it was highly unlikely that I would find something like this in the future.

This means I no longer own a Forester, but I will check in on this forum from time to time to see what you guys are up to.

For someone looking at the Diminished Value part of this story, don't give up. Keep pressing the insurance company. This is something they legally owe you (check your state laws of course though.) I only "gave up" because I was able to avoid the diminished value in this case.
 
#30 ·
From what I reading -Leased- changes the dynamics here.Under lease the owner is not you but leasing company and All state has it covered..under the clause ONLY the owner/s of a vehicle can legally pursue a diminished value claim

Yes you are correct to if you trade it in..You are the owner..then you can pursue the DV claim. Only option is to buy the car outright from leasing company and then file DV,but then make sure you can file DV after that,given that accident occurred under old owner ie leasing company.

I am really sorry and really feel bad for you..Given both the times it was not your fault.Until this post of yours i didn't even know about diminished value.

If i am correct, its both All State at both sides.I am wondering if other party had other Insurance .Who would be taking initiative to fight for DV you or All State on you behalf with other Insurance company.
 
#32 ·
When there is an accident that damages my vehicle, as part of the settlement, you should always demand payment for diminished value of your wrecked/repaired vehicle.Because...if the accident shows up on Carfax, etc, many dealers wont even take it on trade, at best, a reduced trade in value, because thet are going to have trouble selling it. Tell your ins co that it is not enough to just repair it, you want more $ because of decreased sales value sfter a wreck.
 
#35 ·
You can "demand" anything, but that doesn't mean that you will get it.

In the original OP's case, he did not pursue getting the DV, and if he did the recovery would have been $0.00.
He got full value for the trade. There was no diminished value.
Allstate's responses might not have been well received, but were on a firm legal standing.
Only a car owner, not a leaser, can get diminished value in an accident, just like a renter can't get property damage awards for a house.

The problem with getting diminished value, is that LEGALLY, you have to PROVE the amount you are seeking, and opinion doesn't count.
In court you would have to have realized your damages, not anticipate them... Why?
Okay, you have $3,000 estimated in diminished value. You keep your car for 15 years and give it to one of your kids..
What is the actual diminished value?
Zero.
The anticipated diminished value scenario never happened.

Any anticipated DV will also change over time.
That $3000 now could easily be $1500 in several years, as the DV value is reduced with the value of the car as it ages.
Can you prove when in the future the sale will occur? Nope.

That's why Allstate correctly stated that the only way to prove DV is selling/trading the car where the amount is no longer theoretical.
It may not appeal to the person seeking damages, but that's the way the law works.
To wit:
In United States law, ripeness refers to the readiness of a case for litigation:
"A claim is not ripe for adjudication if it rests upon contingent future events that may not occur as anticipated, or indeed may not occur at all."

This is the situation in a DV case where the car's actual diminished value has yet to be determined.
 
You have insufficient privileges to reply here.
Top