Quote:
Originally Posted by 97 SL320
So you would rather them blindly pay any claim that comes their way? The ins co asking for proof isn't a sign of them being "difficult".
|
If this company wants to assess the trans, so as to limit their loss, they are free to ask permission from the owner to take the car to the shop of their choosing to tear down the trans... just as they would be free to have their own adjuster or a shop of their choosing do an estimate on collision damage, if they don't agree with what the customer submits from their own bodyshop. To suggest the customer pay to tear down a trans for the adjuster's convenience is a non-starter.
To alter the scenario: when one of their clients runs into your car, next week, and they say the damage is cosmetic and you argue the car has to be put onto a frame machine to be fixed properly... you will be okay with the tow to the shop, and any teardown required to fully assess damage being on your dime until they decide to agree with you?
Quote:
|
How does the ins company know that someone making a claim didn't have a trans that failed on it's own then buddies up with a tow company to file a false claim?
|
Ok so the scenario would be that a tow company employee is risking his job to file a false claim on his employer's policy, so a pal can get an old Mercedes transmission repaired or replaced with a used one (they won't be buying him a rebuilt, that is for sure)? If this were a 2010 BMW SUV, with a trans worth $8k, I could stretch to envision that. If you can even imagine that as a scenario for an old 722, well wow....
The entire issue with what the owner's manual says is actually a red herring as far as I am concerned. The best practice in towing is to tow the car with the drive wheels off the ground. Period. Now had the driver asked to see the owner's manual, and indeed seen the proviso on short distances, I agree that would put him off the hook. Otherwise the question is not what footnote Mercedes put in the book... In the absence of the driver having confirmed such practice was acceptable, it boils down to what should have been done.
Quote:
|
Do ins companies pay for crash damage and not even look at the car? ( Or at least have an ins certified body shop have a look.)
|
This is a sub-$1,500 claim (they are not going to buy the customer a rebuilt or new trans, they will pay for a used one, their obligation is only to put the car back into the same condition as pre-incident). In fact, many companies now pay out low $$$ value claims such as that without sending an adjuster, or at most a 'mobile adjuster' working out of a minivan comes, lays eyes on the car and cuts a cheque without preparing a detailed estimate.
But even if they do want to "look".... does the customer have to pay for that to happen?