Certified Body Shop

Hi, I might repair my car at Dealer Body Shop. They are certified by my
insurance but not certified by another party's insurance . I heard
that, if one is certifed, they do not have to negotiate with adjuster
and just need to fax necessary info to insurance company.

I do not want to file a claim to my insurance because my deductible is
high and I have to pay certain amount for rent car. I know that I will
eventually have these back because I am not at fault. However, I am
sure it will take some time.

1. Do you think my car can get better care with my insurace coverage at
Toyota Body Shop because they do not have to negotiate?

2. Is there any disadvantage using my insurace, when another party is
at fault?

Thanks in advance!

wrote:

> Hi, I might repair my car at Dealer Body Shop. They are certified by my
> insurance but not certified by another party's insurance . I heard
> that, if one is certifed, they do not have to negotiate with adjuster
> and just need to fax necessary info to insurance company.
>
> I do not want to file a claim to my insurance because my deductible is
> high and I have to pay certain amount for rent car. I know that I will
> eventually have these back because I am not at fault. However, I am
> sure it will take some time.
>
> 1. Do you think my car can get better care with my insurace coverage at
> Toyota Body Shop because they do not have to negotiate?

Take it where you feel like taking it. The vast majority of
insurance policies allow you to take your car to any shop of your
choice. As long as they use the same "book" labor and charge
similar labor rates compared to other shops in your area, you
should be OK. I haven't heard of an adjuster who looked at a
professionally calculated estimate and said "NO WAY".

I recently had work done. My adjuster recommended a place, and I
wasn't in the mood to look around. They were "certified" by the
insurer, but I was still pleased with the work.

> 2. Is there any disadvantage using my insurace, when another party is
> at fault?

I'd pick my own. Generally a lot easier to deal with, and they'll
end up doing the hard part (the paperwork). It's your insurer's
job to do the arguing.

"y_p_w" > wrote in message
ink.net...
>
>
> wrote:
>

> > 2. Is there any disadvantage using my insurace, when another party is
> > at fault?
>
> I'd pick my own. Generally a lot easier to deal with, and they'll
> end up doing the hard part (the paperwork). It's your insurer's
> job to do the arguing.

Not true, this is a common misconception. Only if Carrie files a claim
against her own insurance does her insurance company do the arguing.
And unless she has comprehensive coverage on her vehicle, even if the
accident was the other parties fault her insurance won't let her file
against
them - she will have to file against the other party's insurance company.

If Carrie has some authoratative or obvious reason that it's the other
party's fault, such as a police report, or the other party rear-ended her
or hit her or some such, the best thing would be for if she has
comprehensive
to file a claim against her own insurance company, and then take her car
to the body shop of her choice and let the body shop argue with her
insurer.

If Carrie does not have comprehensive then the best thing is for her
to file a claim against the other insurance company then take the car to
her body shop of choice and let the body shop argue it out with the
other insurance company.

The worst thing is for Carrie to file a claim against either insurance
company and take a check as a payoff. Almost certainly costs to
fix it will be higher - she should have the body shop do the billing,
-after- the claim is filed.

If Carrie is in a -no-fault- state then things may be different.

Carrie's first call should be to her insurance agent to discuss what
the best way to file would be - not to the bozos here on Usenet
who frequently give out -wrong- insurance advice in the auto
newsgroups. And in particular someone who blithly takes their
car to a shop recommended by their adjuster. There's been many
cases of insurance companies getting fined heavily for the practice
of 'steering' work in the past and for good reason. And it's pretty
obvious that a shop that has a kickback deal setup with an insurance
company adjuster knows that they are going to get steady work, and
so doesen't have the incentive to do a good job that competition
and repeat business generated by reputation would normally spur.
That's not to say all shops in these kickback arraingements are
bad - just a higher percentage than normal.

Ted

Ted Mittelstaedt wrote:
> "y_p_w" > wrote in message
> ink.net...
> >
> >
> > wrote:
> >
>
> > > 2. Is there any disadvantage using my insurace, when another
party is
> > > at fault?
> >
> > I'd pick my own. Generally a lot easier to deal with, and they'll
> > end up doing the hard part (the paperwork). It's your insurer's
> > job to do the arguing.
>
> Not true, this is a common misconception. Only if Carrie files a
claim
> against her own insurance does her insurance company do the arguing.
> And unless she has comprehensive coverage on her vehicle, even if the
> accident was the other parties fault her insurance won't let her file
> against
> them - she will have to file against the other party's insurance
company.
>
> If Carrie has some authoratative or obvious reason that it's the
other
> party's fault, such as a police report, or the other party rear-ended
her
> or hit her or some such, the best thing would be for if she has
> comprehensive
> to file a claim against her own insurance company, and then take her
car
> to the body shop of her choice and let the body shop argue with her
> insurer.

I had a police report in hand (other driver's fault) when I chose a
body shop in '96. My insuraqnce company service was very good. The
paint work was good, but I had some alignment issues that I let go.

> Carrie's first call should be to her insurance agent to discuss what
> the best way to file would be - not to the bozos here on Usenet
> who frequently give out -wrong- insurance advice in the auto
> newsgroups. And in particular someone who blithly takes their
> car to a shop recommended by their adjuster. There's been many
> cases of insurance companies getting fined heavily for the practice
> of 'steering' work in the past and for good reason. And it's pretty
> obvious that a shop that has a kickback deal setup with an insurance
> company adjuster knows that they are going to get steady work, and
> so doesen't have the incentive to do a good job that competition
> and repeat business generated by reputation would normally spur.

I've asked friends for a recommended body shop, and have been
disappointed with the work. I didn't think I could do any worse.

> That's not to say all shops in these kickback arraingements are
> bad - just a higher percentage than normal.

What I found in my last trip to the body shop was excellent work.
All the pieces fit. The paint job was at least as good as the
factory paint (which wasn't perfect). When I said there was a
scratch in the left headlight assembly, it was replaced when
others might have tried buffing it out.