Any Insurance Experts?

[lBasket]

I'm assuming you mean diminished value.

Yep that sounds like the right term.

Quick google search I found this

Colorado is a diminished value state​

Colorado is a diminished value state, meaning drivers are allowed to recover diminished value from the at-fault party’s insurance company. When your vehicle experiences an accident, even if it is fully repaired to its pre-loss condition, the resale value decreases.

Unfortunately you had a hit and run so I'm not sure how they handle that. It might be similar to being at fault. I believe your insurance company does not have to pay these diminished value claims if you are at fault.

As for total loss, it looks like CO is 100%. Meaning the value of the repair has to be 100 or greater than the value of the car. So I doubt they will total your vehicle.

Yeah, I wished they'd have totalled it but insurance has already told me it's very unlikely. That's pretty shitty that I'm "at fault" for just having bad luck, but that definitely sounds like the shady BS they'd have setup. I wonder if it'd be worth calling an insurance attorney and see if they'd answer a few questions for free.

 

[Apparition]

Yep that sounds like the right term.

Yeah, I wished they'd have totalled it but insurance has already told me it's very unlikely. That's pretty shitty that I'm "at fault" for just having bad luck, but that definitely sounds like the shady BS they'd have setup. I wonder if it'd be worth calling an insurance attorney and see if they'd answer a few questions for free.

Free advice would be good

 

[lBasket]

Free advice would be good

Unless it's shit advice

Oh, you sneak edited and now my comment doesn't make sense lol

 

[Apparition]

Unless it's shit advice

Oh, you sneak edited and now my comment doesn't make sense lol

I'm skilled like that.

 

[RHanna]

Yep that sounds like the right term.

Yeah, I wished they'd have totalled it but insurance has already told me it's very unlikely. That's pretty shitty that I'm "at fault" for just having bad luck, but that definitely sounds like the shady BS they'd have setup. I wonder if it'd be worth calling an insurance attorney and see if they'd answer a few questions for free.

I don't think they call it at fault but you still have to pay a deductible. A lawyer isn't going to get you far I don't think. They would rather go after an injury case, especially if it's against someone else at fault.

How much do you think the vehicle is worth? Is it even close to the 100%? When I wrecked a truck that I owned in KY I wanted them to total it and I had to reach 75% I asked and was told that if any additional work was needed that it would go against that 75%. Not sure if I believe that.

I will say that out of all the insurance products, auto is probably more scrutinized and regulated by the state than any other product.

 

[lBasket]

I don't think they call it at fault but you still have to pay a deductible. A lawyer isn't going to get you far I don't think. They would rather go after an injury case, especially if it's against someone else at fault.

Yeah, was hoping they'd at least give me some background info on the laws and how they relate.

How much do you think the vehicle is worth? Is it even close to the 100%? When I wrecked a truck that I owned in KY I wanted them to total it and I had to reach 75% I asked and was told that if any additional work was needed that it would go against that 75%. Not sure if I believe that.

It was like 32k new.

Okay yeah, we're definitely really far away from totalling. Good to know it has hardly depreciated I suppose.

I will say that out of all the insurance products, auto is probably more scrutinized and regulated by the state than any other product.

That is good at least... it better be, if it's not an option to not pay for it. Gov forcing you to purchase a service from a private company and not regulating it is horse shit

 

[RHanna]

That is good at least... it better be, if it's not an option to not pay for it. Gov forcing you to purchase a service from a private company and not regulating it is horse shit

I'm talking in general terms and not you specifically.
It's generally inversely related to the knowledge of the buyer. For example, auto insurance is heavy regulated because it's sold to the general public while commercial property insurance isn't because it's sold to businesses that generally have a better understanding of the insurance they are buying.

Not really going to help with your claim but...
Auto insurance is an "adhesion" contract where one party has more power than the other (insurance company versus consumer). On the flip side, if it is taken to court, they will read the contract with reasonable expectations. This only means that the court will interpret the contract with the reasonable expectation that the consumer should expect out of the contract. The court could force the insurance company to pay under certain circumstances because of that adhesion contract.