Question about car insurance claim

[purbeast0]

I posted this here instead of the garage since this isn't really car related but more insurance related. It's going to be a bit lengthy due to details of everything...

Feb 2nd my wife got into an accident that was not her fault. It was driveable as she was rear ended, but the muffler was dangling and it was clear there was a hole or broken exhaust because it sounded really loud when driving and giving gas.

About 2 weeks later she goes to pick her car up. When she got home, the car was CLEARLY not fixed and the exhaust sounded like a damn race car still. Clearly there was a hole in it or something wrong with it. Everything else was fixed though.

So she takes it back and they look at it, and they see there is some rust on the exhaust but it needs to be replaced. They are trying to say that we are responsible for 50% of the cost because it is a "wear and tear part and has signs of wear with the rust on it" or something along those lines.

So of course we think this is complete bullshit because prior to the accident, there was no issue with holes/leaks in the exhaust, regardless of the condition of the exhaust. We now have supervisors involved and she's gone back twice and gotten loud with them and they keep trying to give her the run around saying that we have to pay 50%.

The lady that hit my wife was Geico insured as we are too. My wife today went in for the 3rd time to have the supervisor look at it and she said she was still getting the run around, and after getting somewhat loud with them about the situation and said fine give us the bill, but you're going to lose a Geico customer for over 20 years over $250. Once she said that, the mechanic (who is not affiliated with Geico) saw how upset she was and said he would cover the cost of installation so basically it's going to be free for us, but only because the mechanic is being cool as shit about it.

So as someone who's not gotten into accidents before, is this common practice, for the insurance companies to weasel their way out of having to pay for parts in accidents? It just seems like complete bullshit how they won't give us the car back in the condition it was in prior, without us having to pay. I don't even care if they give us a used exhaust, or one with rust on it, just fucking give it back to us without the current problem. It just seems like complete bullshit and after it's all said and done I'm going to shop around for insurance and let Geico know exactly why I am doing that.

 

[ctbaars]

On the surface. Yes. It is this common practice. Sometimes called Betterment.

 

[cbrunny]

I thought Americans loved insurance? This seems totally normal to me.

It is complete bullshit, don't get me wrong, but also completely normal.

 

[ponyo]

How an insurance processes a claim says lot about that company. What good is insurance if it's not there for you when you need it? If insurance company did that to me, I would change company ASAP.

 

[Aikouka]

I think it's really two problems here...

1. I've always heard that Geico is pretty thrifty when it comes to paying out. This directly relates to #2.
2. You're both with Geico. In other words, Geico will have to pay. If the driver-at-fault was with a different insurance company, Geico would likely fix the muffler and charge the other insurance company.

To be fair, I wouldn't be surprised to see many insurance companies cheap out if #2 is true. If they can pass the buck onto another company, then they probably don't care about claiming something as long as it's within reason.

 

[tailes151]

Legally, Geico hasn't done anything wrong. It's somewhat odd for depreciation to be taken on something like a muffler, but if the person inspecting the car noted the rust, it makes some sense.

A much more common example is tires. If someone wrecks into you and it bursts a tire or two, and the tires are all but bald, the insurance company is not going to give you a brand new set.

You can likely tell them that you're willing to accept a used part, but I believe the duty to find that used part would fall on you. Not 100% sure on that last aspect though.

 

[SearchMaster]

It's hard to believe that they would treat an innocent customer (you) like that, but it should tell you that if they're willing to fight you over $250 when you've paid them faithfully for 20 FUCKING YEARS, that they are not going to treat you well when you are actually at fault.

Disclaimer: ever since I found out that Geico was buying police radar for the sole purpose of having grounds to raise customer rates, I have been on the "fuck Geico" bandwagon. I know Allstate and Progressive (and probably others) have started doing it to but it was Geico's brilliant idea in the first place.

 

[purbeast0]

It's hard to believe that they would treat an innocent customer (you) like that, but it should tell you that if they're willing to fight you over $250 when you've paid them faithfully for 20 FUCKING YEARS, that they are not going to treat you well when you are actually at fault.

Disclaimer: ever since I found out that Geico was buying police radar for the sole purpose of having grounds to raise customer rates, I have been on the "fuck Geico" bandwagon. I know Allstate and Progressive (and probably others) have started doing it to but it was Geico's brilliant idea in the first place.

Well to be fair Geico has been good when my wife has gotten into accidents. They definitely handled everything in that case perfectly. But once this is all done I'm going to call Geico and complain to them and tell them I'm shopping around.