hey guys
I just had an appointment with the snakes at the assessment centre and as usual they are giving me grief.

I have a crunched quarter panel rear right which also got hailed on.
The assessor won't let approve the hail damage claim unless the crunched panel is also fixed. He says that he can't guarantee the work because in the end the quarter panel is still damaged?

I don't quite understand his reasoning because in my opinion, all you need to do is just punch out the hail and leave the crunched panel as is. I do not feel right about him requiring me to either fix it privately or take out another claim in order to settle my hail claim.

Having said that however, he did tell me that it will be cheaper for me to fix it all up in one go and organise something with my panel beater because it's already being re-sprayed and he's already taking the panel off to punch it out so it will cost less for me to have him punch out the crunch as well.

This is a moot point really though because my panel beater said he would do it for free anyway.

I'm just a little miffed that he is trying to force my hand into doing this and for the sake of not getting bullied around i want to kick up a stink and let them know they should either just fix the hail and leave the crunch because that's what i'm paying them for or if they have such a big problem with it then they should fix it at their own expense since it's necessary to give effect to my hail claim as they argue.

Do any of you guys know why the insurance company is so reluctant to just fix the hail and leave the damage? And i find it hard to believe that he is asking me to fix the panel cause it will be cheaper for me to do it all in one go as if he is doing me a favour.

There has got to be something in it for him, i just don't know what it is and it's making me feel uneasy.

Any ideas?

 

You're with Just Car aren't you?

Why didn't you say you did it trying to get the car out of the hail?

 

Well that is now it happened actually.
And i tried that when i made the claim and they said no its two separate claims.

********.

 

Thanks Kallie.
I know that's how it works and that is what i would have done but i'm just concerned that he is actually not willing to repair my car at all unless that crunch is fixed too?

That doesn't seem right.
Yeah it's a good idea if i fix it at the same time but to say he won't fix my hail unless that crunch is fixed too seems a little bit wrong.

Nevertheless, i will go through and fix it since its free and even if it isn't, it's still cheaper this way but i just don't know why he is not willing to fix my car unless i do so.

Seems like it's none of his business whether i fix it or not since the hail damage can be pushed out although they are on the same panel.

The only thing i can think of is that he is worried that if i don't fix it my car will have significant pre-existing damage and it affects their salvage cost if i write off the car or that they may incur greater liability if i get rear-ended and they can't separate further (but smaller) damage that may occur over the pre-existing larger damage.

 

Lesson learnt? Don't use Just Car!

 

That just about nails it.

They want the entire car fixed so in the event of another wreck etc.. they are not dragged into pre-existing damage.
Plus if the car has a loan on it they are obligated also to the lien holder, bank or whatever to return the car to it's former state and they have to certify to the bank after the repair they have done that.

 

Thing is that most insurance companies would be insisting they do the repairs due to the fact that they ahve to guarantee them.

MOST general insurance companies would've worked out some sort of deal for him ... but because he's with Just Car he's being stiffed.

 

Remind me which insurer owns Just Car again. NRMA isn't it?

 

Allied Australian Motor Insurers

 

True.

However, read their PDS and you'll find you might as well have got third party and kept your money in your pocket. Their repair policy wouldn't be satisfactory for many of us.

 

sorry to hear of your pain but the last bit of the second paragraph sort of gives his reason. they have to warrant the work and don't want a latter repair causing problems. I can kind of understand that if hail damage is on the rear quarter panel also.

I'd strike a deal with the panel beater if possible. I just had a dint and scratch taken out of my rear quarter panel and it was about $440 however it wasn't bad enough to distort any of the sharp creases.

 

isnt the issue here that they are forcing you to make 2 claims and therefore 2 exceses? If so tell them to **** off and make 1 clam for the hail and tell the panel beater that you will pay for the other damage seperately but he can do the job in one go.

 

+1 That does seem to be the issue.

 

 

Nice!

 

AAMI, Lumley, NRMA.

The repair business is one of the most criminal of all.

Imagine this;
You are an assessor working for XXXX insurance. Your week's work involves visiting about panel shops assessing damage on maybe 50-100 cars a week. You know all the owners and work out a nice deal with some of them that you let a bit extra through for a share of the work.

This whole scenario is partly why the "preferred repairer" thing was started.
Some insurers straight up charge the repairer a fee.