Can I release insurance of all liability and not put us at a disadvantage somehow?

G

GrumpyWillis

New Member
Jurisdiction
Tennessee
This is in TN

Little bit of back story: me and my wife got rear ended by a truck a couple weeks ago. The man admitted fault, his insurance is fixing the car. The first claims person Asked if we were injured I said no but a little sore. She said since I said that she had to open a medical claim and I'd be contacted. Fast forward to beginning of this week a claims guy from there called asked how we were. I told him we're completely fine we were just sore the day after. and he then offered us $1000 pain and suffering each to release medical liability. ($2000 total) We are not injured and are perfectly fine and never expected to get any money from that side. So a huge bonus for us. The issue is we each have to sign a release for ALL liability not just medical. I was driving the car but the car is my wife's car. It's not in my name at all.

So the question: would I be fine to release them of all liability in exchange for $1000 check? (I could really use the money now rather than in a month or two once the cars fixed) my wife would hold off and not sign hers yet until everything is done including a diminished value claim as the car is only a year old.

Would it put us at any disadvantage for me to release them of liability since the car is not mine? My wife would still have the claim against them so I'm thinking it's fine. I'm just trying to see if maybe I'm being duped or something and they could some how say they're not liable for something with her since I signed the release. I don't know the law so just making sure of this. Also we were both sent separate docusigns her name is not on mine and vice versa.
 
The other driver's insurance company might not give you any money for the injury unless both of you sign the releases. You'll find that out quick enough when you tell them that you want to hold one of the releases back.

If you release the car damage claim along with the injury and there is hidden damage discovered during the repair process you may be out of luck for that and any diminished value.

A couple of weeks is too early to settle on an injury claim. You don't know if there may be any residual effects later. A couple of months is a better idea.

On the other hand, you can always tell the claim rep that if he wants a quick settlement on everything he can kick up the offer a few more thousand to take care of unexpected expenses.
 
zddoodah said:
Sure. You can only release that which is yours to release.



None that I can think of, but it might be helpful if you quoted the release language you're being asked to sign.
Click to expand...
zddoodah said:
Sure. You can only release that which is yours to release.



None that I can think of, but it might be helpful if you quoted the release language you're being asked to sign.
Click to expand...

adjusterjack said:
The other driver's insurance company might not give you any money for the injury unless both of you sign the releases. You'll find that out quick enough when you tell them that you want to hold one of the releases back.

If you release the car damage claim along with the injury and there is hidden damage discovered during the repair process you may be out of luck for that and any diminished value.

A couple of weeks is too early to settle on an injury claim. You don't know if there may be any residual effects later. A couple of months is a better idea.

On the other hand, you can always tell the claim rep that if he wants a quick settlement on everything he can kick up the offer a few more thousand to take care of unexpected expenses.
Click to expand...

the claims guy actually mentioned only I should sign mine right now because if we both did we wouldn't have an open claim anymore and our cars still in the shop. But was still leery as I didn't know if there was some weird legal thing that if I released them from
Liability it would somehow give them an upper hand when negotiating for diminished value for example. I wouldn't think it would. But just making sure 100%
 

Attachments

  • E2597D2D-30A2-4E19-8D2C-20EDAADBA1B8.jpeg
    E2597D2D-30A2-4E19-8D2C-20EDAADBA1B8.jpeg
    1.1 MB · Views: 6
thedavephan said:
I didn't know if there was some weird legal thing that if I released them from
Liability it would somehow give them an upper hand when negotiating for diminished value for example.
Click to expand...

In a way, it would give them the upper hand because your claim would be closed and the claim rep could rightly refuse to discuss your wife's claim with you. Her car, her claim. She'd be dealing with the claim rep on her own. Is she capable of doing that?

You might be going to suggest that your wife give you power of attorney. Well, the claim rep has no obligation to accept that because you would be practicing law without a license. She'd still be on her own.

Worse, TN appears to make it difficult and expensive (you would need to hire an expert) to prove diminished value.

In Tennessee "the measure of third-party damages is either repair costs or the difference in market value immediately before and after the accident. It is not both. There is no definitive case law indicating that a diminution in value measured after the repair is a recognized element of allowable damages in Tennessee. GEICO v. Bloodworth, 2007 WL 1966022 (Tenn. App. 2007). Although Bloodworth did not specifically pronounce that post-repair diminution in value claims are viable in Tennessee (it was a class action suit and the issue had to do with certification as such), it did say that in in order to prove residual diminution in value, the owner has to prove (1) the vehicle's preaccident condition and value (taking into consideration, e.g., other damage to the vehicle); (2) the vehicle's post-accident value; and (3) proof that the repair did not restore the vehicle to substantially the same value it had before the accident. Government Employees Ins. Co. v. Bloodworth, 2007 WL 1966022 (Tenn. App. 2007)"

From: DIMINUTION OF VALUE IN ALL 50 STATES (00165375).DOC (mwl-law.com)

I can't tell you which way to go but it seems to me that you will have a bit more leverage if you deal with all the claims at the same time.
 
adjusterjack said:
In a way, it would give them the upper hand because your claim would be closed and the claim rep could rightly refuse to discuss your wife's claim with you. Her car, her claim. She'd be dealing with the claim rep on her own. Is she capable of doing that?

You might be going to suggest that your wife give you power of attorney. Well, the claim rep has no obligation to accept that because you would be practicing law without a license. She'd still be on her own.

Worse, TN appears to make it difficult and expensive (you would need to hire an expert) to prove diminished value.

In Tennessee "the measure of third-party damages is either repair costs or the difference in market value immediately before and after the accident. It is not both. There is no definitive case law indicating that a diminution in value measured after the repair is a recognized element of allowable damages in Tennessee. GEICO v. Bloodworth, 2007 WL 1966022 (Tenn. App. 2007). Although Bloodworth did not specifically pronounce that post-repair diminution in value claims are viable in Tennessee (it was a class action suit and the issue had to do with certification as such), it did say that in in order to prove residual diminution in value, the owner has to prove (1) the vehicle's preaccident condition and value (taking into consideration, e.g., other damage to the vehicle); (2) the vehicle's post-accident value; and (3) proof that the repair did not restore the vehicle to substantially the same value it had before the accident. Government Employees Ins. Co. v. Bloodworth, 2007 WL 1966022 (Tenn. App. 2007)"

From: DIMINUTION OF VALUE IN ALL 50 STATES (00165375).DOC (mwl-law.com)

I can't tell you which way to go but it seems to me that you will have a bit more leverage if you deal with all the claims at the same time.
Click to expand...


I told the claims guy of my reservations and he changed the document I have to sign. What is your thoughts on this? It puts a pending next to property damage but all the other language is basically the same.
 

Attachments

  • F214176C-2600-4DB5-974F-223DED923636.jpeg
    F214176C-2600-4DB5-974F-223DED923636.jpeg
    663.2 KB · Views: 8
Thanks for all the advice.

I ended up telling the claims guy at the insurance company that I didn't want to sign anything until everything else was settled because signing something that said "all claims" made me uncomfortable.

Our car was fixed adequately and we just reached a final settlement today for $2200 diminished value and the $1000 each for me and the wife for bodily injury "pain and suffering" for a total of $4200 coming directly to us plus roughly $6000 paid to the body shop. Didn't even have to argue about the diminished value, it's only $300 off of the estimate I got at a Diminished a value appraisal website. I could have probably tried to get more but the stress of negotiating isn't worth it to me. I guess what they say about farm bureau being half decent is true.
 

Share this page

Get a free case review from a lawyer
Back
Top