To make your draft letter
to the automobile insurance company
more consistent
with the laws of Washington,
vet and edit your draft letter
against the laws of Washington
that I copied and pasted below.

In the “What I would do today” module
of wasyourcartotaledorstolen.com,
I told you that,
if I had not yet agreed
to a valuation amount
for my total-loss vehicle,
then I would write a letter
to the automobile insurance company.

In that letter:

I would find fault
with the valuation methodology
that the automobile insurance company’s
valuation-services vendor
used to produce their valuation
of my total-loss vehicle.
If the automobile insurance company
sent me a deeply flawed
market valuation report
like the CCC market valuation report
that Travelers sent to me
or like the CCC market valuation report
that Maria’s insurance company
sent to her, then I might argue
that the valuation services vendor
had motive, means, and opportunity
to generate an unfair, inaccurate,
low valuation for my total-loss vehicle.
I would reject
the automobile insurance company’s
valuation offer.
I would propose
that the automobile insurance company
value my total-loss vehicle
at my total-loss vehicle’s
J.D. Power Buy from Dealer price.
I would argue
that the J.D. Power Buy from Dealer price
for my total-loss vehicle
is a fair and unbiased calculation
of my total-loss vehicle’s
actual cash value.

Some parts of my letter would be different
depending on whether my total-loss claim
was a first-party claim or a third-party claim.

Then, in the “Let’s get to work” module,
I offered you
polite and muscular model letters
in docx format that,
if you wish to do so,
you can use as the starting point
for your letter
to the automobile insurance company
if you have not yet settled
your total-loss claim.

I suggested that you edit your draft letter
to make your letter consistent
with your total-loss vehicle’s
J.D. Power valuation,
make your letter consistent
with the CCC market valuation report
or other market valuation report
that you received
from the automobile insurance company,
and, if your total-loss claim
is a first-party claim,
make your letter consistent
with what your automobile insurance policy says.

Now I take you through another way
in which you may wish
to edit your draft letter.

The laws that regulate
how automobile insurance companies
are required to value total-loss vehicles
and settle total-loss claims
are different in different states.

Hence, if you are using
my model letters
as the starting point for your letter
to the automobile insurance company,
then you or the attorney with whom you meet
will need to vet your draft letter
against the laws of your state.

You or the attorney
will need to edit your draft letter
to make it fully consistent
with the laws of your state.

To make it possible for you
to vet and edit your draft letter
against the laws of your state,
I have copied and pasted below
what I believe to be
the most relevant and useful provisions
of the laws of Washington
that regulate
how automobile insurance companies
that do business in Washington
are required to value total-loss vehicles
and settle total-loss claims.

If you read through the excerpts
of the laws below,
you may be able to make
some of the required changes,
modifications, and deletions
to your draft letter yourself.

Where you are not sure what changes,
modifications, or deletions to make
to your draft letter,
you may want to leave them
for the attorney to make
when you meet with her or him.

If you have not done so already
(and you wish to do so),
download one of my starter documents.

If your total-loss claim is a first-party claim, download
Marlow_First_party_Not_yet_settled_letter.docx.

If your total-loss claim is a third-party claim, download
Marlow_Third_party_Not_yet_settled_letter.docx.

If you have not done so already,
in your word-processing software,
use “Find and replace” ➞ “Replace all”
to replace the specifics
of my fictitious total-loss claim
with the specifics
of your total-loss claim.

Print the draft document.

Your draft docucment
will be easier to work with
if you print it on only one side
of the paper.

Follow the instructions
that I embedded in the draft document.

Depending on whether your total-loss claim
is a first-party claim
or a third-party claim
and depending on whether you choose
to work with my polite model letter,
to work with my muscular model letter,
or to blend the two model letters;
you need to know or need to find
or need to ask an attorney
the answers to one
of the following sets of questions:

Questions for a first-party claim.

Questions for a third-party claim.

vet_your_draft_letter_against_your_state_s_lawsChapter

If your total-loss claim
is a first-party claim,
then, to adapt
my first-party model letters
to the laws of your state,
you need to know or need to find
or need to ask an attorney
the answers to these sets of questions.

In my polite model letter
and in my muscular model letter,
I suggest that you add, leave in,
or take out certain sentences
depending on what your state’s laws
say about a particular aspect of the law.

To decide what to do
if you are using either of my model letters
as the starting point for your letter,
here are the questions
that you need to know or need to find
or need to ask an attorney
the answers to.

FIRST-PARTY total-loss claim.

I’ve included these questions
in the docx model letters
just before each letter.

In your printout of the docx document,
underneath each question,
you will find Yes ( ) No ( ) check offs.

FIRST-PARTY total-loss claim.

When, in a section of the law,
you find the answer to a question,
you may wish to download a PDF
of that section of the law.

To do so,
at the end of that section of the law,
click “Verify statute or Download PDF.”

You may wish to print those PDFs.

On each printout,
next to the paragraph of the law
that answers a question,
you may wish to write down
the question that the paragraph answers.

(Do not write down
just the question number because,
when you edit your starter document,
the question numbers will adjust
to your changes.)

If you follow this procedure,
then those marked-up PDF printouts
may facilitate your conversation
with the attorney with whom you meet.

FIRST-PARTY total-loss claim.

questions_of_law_for_first_party_total_loss_claimsChapter

To adapt
my polite first‑party model letter
to the laws of your state,
you need to know or need to find
or need to ask an attorney
the answer to this question.

If your state’s laws mention N.A.D.A. Guides
as an approved source
of valuations of total-loss vehicles,
then, most likely,
your state’s commissioner of insurance
has approved J.D. Power
as an authorized source of valuations
for total-loss vehicles.

In 2015, J.D. Power acquired
NADA’s Used Car Guide
and www.nadaguides.com.

The company has rebranded
NADA Guides as J.D. Power
and rebranded www.nadaguides.com
as www.jdpower.com.

Whether your state’s laws
mention N.A.D.A. Guides or not,
to be sure of the correct answer
to this question,
ask the attorney with whom you meet.

Does your state’s
commissioner of insurance
approve J.D. Power
as an authorized source
of valuations for total-loss vehicles?

FIRST-PARTY total-loss claim.

questions_of_law_for_first_party_polite_letterSubchapter

To adapt
my muscular first‑party model letter
to the laws of your state,
you need to know or need to find
or need to ask an attorney
the answers to these questions.

In many states, state law says that,
for a comp vehicle to qualify
as substantailly similar
to a total-loss vehicle,
the comp vehicle must be
the same make, same model,
same model year, same trim level,
same major options,
and have similar mileage.

In some states, state law goes on
to limit the mileage difference
between a comp vehicle
and a total-loss vehicle.

For example, the New Jersey
administrative code that governs
automobile physical damage claims
says:

“ ‘Substantially similar vehicle’ means
a vehicle of the same make, model, year
and condition, including all major options
of the insured vehicle. Mileage
must not exceed that of the insured vehicle
by more than 4,000 miles.”

Do your state’s laws say that,
for a comp vehicle to qualify
as substantially similar or comparable
to a total-loss vehicle,
the comp vehicle’s mileage
must be similar
to the total-loss vehicle’s mileage?
Do your state’s laws go on
to limit the mileage differences
between total-loss vehicles
and substantially similar
or comparable vehicles?

FIRST-PARTY total-loss claim.

In most states,
courts have decided that the state’s
automobile insurance regulations
take away
a first-party claimant’s right to sue
his or her automobile insurance company
for punitive damages
(also called exemplary damages)
if his or her automobile insurance company
not only acts in breach of contract
but also engages
in reprehensible bad-faith misconduct.

These court decisions typically argue
that only the state’s
commissioner of insurance
can fine or otherwise punish
an automobile insurance company
for engaging
in unfair claim settlement practices
and in reprehensible misconduct.

In a few states, however,
the laws that regulate
how automobile insurance companies
that do business in the state
are required to value total-loss vehicles
and settle total-loss claims
explicitly give total-loss claimants
the right to sue
his or her automobile insurance company
for punitive or exemplary damages
if his or her automobile insurance company
not only acts in breach of contract
but also engages
in reprehensible bad-faith misconduct.

Do court decisions in your state
take away your right to sue
your automobile insurance company
for punitive or exemplary damages
if your automobile insurance company
not only acts in breach of contract
but also engages
in reprehensible bad-faith misconduct?

Most likely, you will need
to pose this question
to the attorney with whom you meet
because the answer to this questions
depends on court decisions.

Or do the regulatory laws of your state
explicitly give you the right to sue
your automobile insurance company
for punitive or exemplary damages
if your automobile insurance company
not only acts in breach of contract
but also engages
in reprehensible bad-faith misconduct?

You may be able to find
the answer to this question
in your state’s laws below.

FIRST-PARTY total-loss claim.

In many states, court decisions say
that an automobile insurance company
is not responsible for the validity
of valuation opinions
that it buys
from other corporations.

The regulatory laws of a few states
say that an automobile insurance company
is responsible
for the validity of valuations
that it uses
to value claimants’ total-loss vehicles.

Do the regulatory laws of your state
hold your automobile insurance company
responsible for the validity
of its valuation of your total loss vehicle?

FIRST-PARTY total-loss claim.

(The discussion and question that follow
are the same as for question 1. above
for the polite model letter.)

In 2015, J.D. Power acquired
NADA’s Used Car Guide
and www.nadaguides.com.

The company has rebranded
NADA Guides as J.D. Power
and rebranded www.nadaguides.com
as www.jdpower.com.

Whether your state’s laws
mention N.A.D.A. Guides or not,
to be sure of the correct answer
to this question,
ask the attorney with whom you meet.

Does your state’s
commissioner of insurance
approve J.D. Power
as an authorized source
of valuations for total-loss vehicles?

FIRST-PARTY total-loss claim.

questions_of_law_for_first_party_muscular_letterSubchapter

Keep an eye out
for paragraphs of the law
that may prove useful to you
if your automobile insurance company
does not agree to the valuation amount
for your total-loss vehicle
that you propose in your letter.

While you are looking for the answers
to the previous questions
for your first-party total-loss claim,
you may wish to keep an eye out
for answers to a few questions
that are outside the scope
of your letter
to your automobile insurance company.

The answers to these questions
may prove useful to you
if your automobile insurance company
does not agree to the valuation amount
that you propose in your letter.

For each of these questions too,
you may wish
to download, print, and mark up
a PDF of the section of the law
that answers the question.

FIRST-PARTY total-loss claim.

If you dispute the valuation amount
that your automobile insurance company
proposes for your total-loss vehicle,
the laws of your state may require
your automobile insurance company
to go ahead and pay you
the amount of money
that is not in dispute.

The amount of money
that is not in dispute
includes the valuation amount
for your total-loss vehicle
that your automobile insurance company
proposed.

To require
your automobile insurance company
to go ahead and pay you
the valuation amount
that is not in dispute,
the laws of your state
may say something like this:

If an insurer and the insured
or third-party claimant are unable to agree
on the value of the automobile,
an insurer shall pay the insured
or third-party claimant
the amount of the automobile’s value
that is not in dispute
as provided in section 3,
chapter 65, Oregon Laws 2009.

An insurer is not obligated
to pay the undisputed amount
until the insured
or third-party owner of the automobile:

(a) Agrees to execute documents
sufficient to transfer ownership
of the automobile
to the insurer; and
(b) Authorizes the insurer,
at the insurer’s expense,
to move the automobile
to a disclosed location
selected by the insurer,
where the automobile
will remain available
for inspection and evaluation
for not fewer than 14 calendar days.
After the expiration of the 14-day period,
the insurer may proceed
with the salvage sale of the automobile.

If you dispute the valuation amount
that your automobile insurance company proposes for your total-loss vehicle,
do the laws of your state require
your automobile insurance company
to go ahead and pay you
the amount of money
that is not in dispute?

FIRST-PARTY total-loss claim.

In the laws below,
you may find that your state legislators
have given you a right of recourse.

If you have a right of recourse
and your automobile insurance company
refuses to value your total-loss vehicle
at its actual cash value,
then you may be able
to get additional money
from your automobile insurance company
if you exercise your right of recourse.

FIRST-PARTY total-loss claim.

If your state’s legislators
have given you a right of recourse,
they may also have given
your automobile insurance company
dubious ways to preclude or satisfy
your exercise of your right of recourse.

Your automobile insurance company
may be able to preclude your exercise
of your right of recourse if,
when they send you a settlement check,
they identify
an allegedly substantially similar vehicle
for sale at a local automobile dealership
that you allegedly can buy
for their valuation amount.

Likewise,
your automobile insurance company
may be able to satisfy your exercise
of your right of recourse if,
after you exercise your right of recourse,
they identify
an allegedly substantially similar vehicle
for sale at a local automobile dealership
that you allegedly can buy
for their valuation amount.

FIRST-PARTY total-loss claim.

If either of these possibilities come to pass,
you likely will want to inspect
your automobile insurance company’s
candidate right-of-recourse vehicle
to determine if that vehicle
is, in fact, substantially similar
to your total-loss vehicle—
same make, same model, same model year,
same major options, similar mileage,
and same or better condition.

You likely will want to verify
that your automobile insurance company’s
candidate right-of-recourse vehicle
is for sale at the automobile dealership
that your automobile insurance company
alleges at the price that
your automobile insurance company alleges.

FIRST-PARTY total-loss claim.

If the laws of your state
give you a right of recourse,
counting from the day
that your automobile insurance company
puts the initial settlement check in the mail,
you likely have only so many days
in which to exercise your right of recourse
or you lose your right of recourse.

FIRST-PARTY total-loss claim.

Do the laws of your state
give you a right of recourse?
If you have a right of recourse,
do the laws of your state allow
an automobile insurance company
to preclude your exercise
of your right of recourse if,
when they send you a settlement check,
they identify
a substantially similar vehicle
for sale at a local automobile dealership
that you can buy
for their valuation amount?
If you have a right of recourse,
do the laws of your state allow
your automobile insurance company
to satisfy your exercise
of your right of recourse if,
after you exercise your right of recourse,
they identify
a substantially similar vehicle
for sale at a local automobile dealership
that you can buy
for their valuation amount?
If you have a right of recourse,
how many days
after your automobile insurance company
sends you a settlement check
do you have to exercise
your right of recourse
before you lose it?

FIRST-PARTY total-loss claim.

In some states, the law allows
an automobile insurance company
to take away
a first-party claimant’s right of recourse
if the automobile insurance company
invokes the appraisal clause
in the claimant’s automobile insurance policy.

In your state,
do you lose your right of recourse
if your automobile insurance company
invokes the appraisal clause
in your automobile insurance policy?

FIRST-PARTY total-loss claim.

The laws of some states prohibit
an automobile insurance company
from saying that,
if you cash or deposit a settlement check,
then, thereby, you agree to the settlement.

Such a prohibition may use such language
as this:

“No insurer shall issue a check or draft
in payment of a claim that contains
any language or provision that implies
or states that acceptance of the check or draft
constitutes a final settlement or release
of any or all future obligations
arising out of the loss.”

Do the laws of your state prohibit
an automobile insurance company
from saying that, if you cash or deposit
a settlement check, then, thereby,
you agree to the settlement?

FIRST-PARTY total-loss claim.

questions_of_law_in_case_first_party_letter_failsSubchapter

The legislators of a few states
give rights to first-party claimants
that legislators of other states
take away from first-party claimants.

Are your state legislators right givers?

Or right takers?

At least one state
has a consumer-protection law that says
an automobile insurance company
cannot require a first-party total-loss claimant
to resolve a claim-settlement dispute
through private arbitration unless
the claimant’s automobile insurance policy
allows the claimant to resolve the dispute
through a small-claims lawsuit instead.

Do your state’s consumer-protection laws
give first-party total-loss claimants
the right to have a dispute resolved
through a small-claims lawsuit
in lieu of having that dispute resolved
through private arbitration?

FIRST-PARTY total-loss claim.

In a few states,
if a party to a written contract
not only breaches the terms of the contract
but also acts in bad faith,
the laws of the state
regard that act of bad faith
as a tort against the non-breaching party
to the contract.

In your state,
if your automobile insurance company
not only breaches the terms
of your automobile insurance policy
but also acts in bad faith,
does their bad-faith misconduct
give you a cause of action
against them under tort law?
If the answer
to the previous question is yes,
then is your cause of action under tort law
exempt from your automobile insurance policy’s arbitration clause?

FIRST-PARTY total-loss claim.

To skip over questions
for a third-party claim, click here.

FIRST-PARTY total-loss claim.

questions_of_first_party_consumer_protection_lawsSubchapter

If your total-loss claim
is a third-party claim,
then, to adapt
my third-party model letters
to the laws of your state,
you need to know or need to find
or need to ask an attorney
the answers to these sets of questions.

THIRD-PARTY total-loss claim.

I’ve included these questions
in the docx model letters
just before each letter.

In your printout of the docx document,
underneath each question,
you will find Yes ( ) No ( ) check offs.

THIRD-PARTY total-loss claim.

When, in a section of the law,
you find the answer to a question,
you may wish to download a PDF
of that section of the law.

To do so,
at the end of that section of the law,
click “Verify statute or Download PDF.”

You may wish to print those PDFs.

On each printout,
next to the paragraph of the law
that answers a question,
you may wish to write down
the question that the paragraph answers.

(Do not write down
just the question number because,
when you edit your starter document,
the question numbers will adjust
to your changes.)

If you follow this procedure,
then those marked-up PDF printouts
may facilitate your conversation
with the attorney with whom you meet.

THIRD-PARTY total-loss claim.

questions_of_law_for_third_party_total_loss_claimsChapter

To adapt
my polite third‑party model letter
to the laws of your state,
you need to know or need to find
or need to ask an attorney
the answer to this question.

In 2015, J.D. Power acquired
NADA’s Used Car Guide
and www.nadaguides.com.

The company has rebranded
NADA Guides as J.D. Power
and rebranded www.nadaguides.com
as www.jdpower.com.

Whether your state’s laws
mention N.A.D.A. Guides or not,
to be sure of the correct answer
to this question,
ask the attorney with whom you meet.

Does your state’s
commissioner of insurance
approve J.D. Power
as an authorized source
of valuations for total-loss vehicles?

THIRD-PARTY total-loss claim.

questions_of_law_for_third_party_polite_letterSubchapter

To adapt
my muscular third‑party model letter
to the laws of your state,
you need to know or need to find
or need to ask an attorney
the answers to these questions.

In some states, state law goes on
to limit the mileage difference
between a comp vehicle
and a total-loss vehicle.

For example, the New Jersey
administrative code that governs
automobile physical damage claims
says:

Do your state’s laws say that,
for a comp vehicle to qualify
as substantially similar or comparable
to a total-loss vehicle,
the comp vehicle’s mileage
must be similar
to the total-loss vehicle’s mileage?
Do your state’s laws go on
to limit the mileage differences
between total-loss vehicles
and substantially similar
or comparable vehicles?

THIRD-PARTY total-loss claim.

(The discussion and question that follow
are the same as for question 1. above
for the polite model letter.)

In 2015, J.D. Power acquired
NADA’s Used Car Guide
and www.nadaguides.com.

The company has rebranded
NADA Guides as J.D. Power
and rebranded www.nadaguides.com
as www.jdpower.com.

Whether your state’s laws
mention N.A.D.A. Guides or not,
to be sure of the correct answer
to this question,
ask the attorney with whom you meet.

Does your state’s
commissioner of insurance
approve J.D. Power
as an authorized source
of valuations for total-loss vehicles?

THIRD-PARTY total-loss claim.

questions_of_law_for_third_party_muscular_letterSubchapter

Keep an eye out
for paragraphs of the law
that may prove useful to you
if the automobile insurance company
does not agree to the valuation amount
that you propose in your letter
for your total-loss vehicle.

While you are looking for the answers
to the previous questions
for your third-party total-loss claim,
you may wish to keep an eye out
for answers to a few questions
that are outside the scope
of your letter
to the automobile insurance company.

The answers to these questions
may prove useful to you
if the automobile insurance company
does not agree to the valuation amount
that you propose in your letter.

For each of these questions too,
you may wish
to download, print, and mark up
a PDF of the section of the law
that answers the question.

THIRD-PARTY total-loss claim.

In some states, the laws that regulate
how automobile insurance companies
are required to value total-loss vehicles
and settle total-loss claims say
that those laws apply
only to first-party claims.

In some states, those laws say
that the laws apply to first-party claims
and to third-party claims.

In some states, those laws say
that all the laws apply to first-party claims
and only some of the laws
apply to third-party claims.

Ordinarily, in most states,
you have much stronger rights
in the settlement of a third-party claim
than you do
in the settlement of a first-party claim.

The automobile insurance company
that you’re dealing with
on your third-party claim
may think and act like
they can treat you
the same way
that they treat their policyholders
on those policyholders’ first-party claims.

The automobile insurance company
that you’re dealing with
on your third-party claim
may even try to trick you
into conforming
with claim-settlement regulations
that apply only to first-party claims.

Don’t let them!

To be savvy enough
to keep the automobile insurance company
that you’re dealing with
from treating you
like you’re a first-party claimant,
familiarize yourself
with which of your state’s
automobile insurance
claim-settlement laws—
if any—
apply to you and your claim.

If your state’s laws
consistently talk about “the insured,”
and never say that the laws
also apply to third-party claimants,
then that language strongly suggests
that those laws do not apply to you
or to your third-party claim.

You are not the insured.

The at-fault-driver policyholder
is the insured.

Do the laws of your state that regulate
how automobile insurance companies
are required to value total-loss vehicles
and settle total-loss claims
apply only to first-party claims?
Or do all those laws
apply to both first-party claims
and third-party claims?
Or do all the laws
apply to first-party claims
and only some of the laws
also apply to third-party claims?

THIRD-PARTY total-loss claim.

If you dispute the valuation amount
that the automobile insurance company
proposes for your total-loss vehicle,
the laws of your state may require
the automobile insurance company
to go ahead and pay you
the amount of money
that is not in dispute.

The amount of money
that is not in dispute
includes the valuation amount
for your total-loss vehicle
that the automobile insurance company
proposed.

To require
the automobile insurance company
to go ahead and pay you
the valuation amount
that is not in dispute,
the laws of your state
may say something like this:

An insurer is not obligated
to pay the undisputed amount
until the insured
or third-party owner of the automobile:

(a) Agrees to execute documents
sufficient to transfer ownership
of the automobile
to the insurer; and
(b) Authorizes the insurer,
at the insurer’s expense,
to move the automobile
to a disclosed location
selected by the insurer,
where the automobile
will remain available
for inspection and evaluation
for not fewer than 14 calendar days.
After the expiration of the 14-day period,
the insurer may proceed
with the salvage sale of the automobile.

If you dispute the valuation amount
that the automobile insurance company proposes for your total-loss vehicle,
do the laws of your state require
the automobile insurance company
to go ahead and pay you
the amount of money
that is not in dispute?

THIRD-PARTY total-loss claim.

The laws of some states
give third-party total-loss claimants
a right of recourse.

If you have a right of recourse
and the automobile insurance company
refuses to value your total-loss vehicle
at its actual cash value,
then you may be able
to get additional money
from the automobile insurance company
if you exercise your right of recourse.

THIRD-PARTY total-loss claim.

If your state’s legislators
have given you a right of recourse,
they may also have given
the automobile insurance company
dubious ways to preclude or satisfy
your exercise of your right of recourse.

The automobile insurance company
may be able to preclude your exercise
of your right of recourse if,
when they send you a settlement check,
they identify
an allegedly substantially similar vehicle
for sale at a local automobile dealership
that you allegedly can buy
for their valuation amount.

Likewise, the automobile insurance company
may be able to satisfy your exercise
of your right of recourse if,
after you exercise your right of recourse,
they identify
an allegedly substantially similar vehicle
for sale at a local automobile dealership
that you allegedly can buy
for their valuation amount.

THIRD-PARTY total-loss claim.

If either of these possibilities come to pass,
then you likely will want to inspect
the automobile insurance company’s
candidate right-of-recourse vehicle
to determine if that vehicle
is, in fact, substantially similar
to your total-loss vehicle—
same make, same model, same model year,
same major options, similar mileage,
and same or better condition.

You likely will want to verify
that the automobile insurance company’s
candidate right-of-recourse vehicle
is for sale at the automobile dealership
that the automobile insurance company
alleges at the price that
the automobile insurance company alleges.

THIRD-PARTY total-loss claim.

If the laws of your state
give you a right of recourse,
counting from the day
that the automobile insurance company
puts the initial settlement check in the mail,
you likely have only so many days
in which to exercise your right of recourse
or you lose your right of recourse.

THIRD-PARTY total-loss claim.

Do the laws of your state
give you a right of recourse?
If you have a right of recourse,
do the laws of your state allow
an automobile insurance company
to preclude your exercise
of your right of recourse if,
when they send you a settlement check,
they identify
a substantially similar vehicle
for sale at a local automobile dealership
that you can buy
for their valuation amount?
If you have a right of recourse,
do the laws of your state allow
the automobile insurance company
to satisfy your exercise
of your right of recourse if,
after you exercise your right of recourse,
they identify
a substantially similar vehicle
for sale at a local automobile dealership
that you can buy
for their valuation amount?
If you have a right of recourse,
how many days
after the automobile insurance company
sends you a settlement check
do you have to exercise
your right of recourse
before you lose it?

THIRD-PARTY total-loss claim.

The laws of some states prohibit
an automobile insurance company
from saying that,
if you cash or deposit a settlement check,
then, thereby, you agree to the settlement.

Such a prohibition may use such language
as this:

Do the laws of your state prohibit
an automobile insurance company
from saying that,
if you cash or deposit
a settlement check, then, thereby,
you agree to the settlement?

THIRD-PARTY total-loss claim.

questions_of_law_in_case_third_party_letter_failsSubchapter

Questions about the laws of your state
to which the answers
may prove useful to you
if you end up suing
the at-fault driver and his or her
automobile insurance company
for the money
that the at-fault driver’s
automobile insurance company
cheated you out of.

The laws of some states
specify multiple sources
that an automobile insurance company
may use to come up
with an initial valuation offer
for a claimant’s total loss vehicle.

The laws then go on to say
that the automobile insurance company’s
initial valuation offer
cannot be lower
than the lowest valuation amount
from one of these approved sources.

The laws of some states say
that an automobile insurance company
may use as its initial valuation offer
a valuation generated by a valuation source
that uses a computerized data base
that is approved
by the state’s commissioner of insurance.

A state’s commissioner of insurance
may approve valuation sources
such as CCC Information Services
a.k.a. CCC Intelligent Solutions.

CCC Information Services
a.k.a. CCC Intelligent Solutions
produced the garbage-in-garbage-out
CCC market valuation report
for my total-loss vehicle
and produced
the GIGO CCC market-valuation report
for Maria’s total-loss vehicle.

Valuation sources that produce valuations
only for automobile insurance companies
and that use a computerized data base
to produce those valuations
likely produce the lowest valuations
of any of the approved sources.

Such valuation sources may have
motive, means, and opportunity
to undervalue your total-loss vehicle.

Do the laws of your state
specify multiple sources
that an automobile insurance company
may use to come up
with an initial valuation offer
for your total-loss vehicle?
Do the laws of your state say
that the automobile insurance company’s
initial valuation offer
for your total-loss vehicle
cannot be lower
than the lowest valuation amount
from one of the approved sources?
Do the laws of your state
allow an automobile insurance company
to use a valuation
generated by a valuation service
that uses a computerized data base?

THIRD-PARTY total-loss claim.

The laws of some states say
that an automobile insurance company
shall value a total-loss vehicle
at its actual cash value.

The laws of some states
define actual cash value.

Do the laws of your state say
that an automobile insurance company
shall value a total-loss vehicle
at its actual cash value?
Do the laws of your state
define actual cash value?

THIRD-PARTY total-loss claim.

The laws of some states defnine
substantially similar vehicle
or comparable vehicle.

Do the laws of your state define substantially similar vehicle
or comparable vehicle?

Regardless of what the statutory laws
of your state say,
keep in mind
that the fundamental principle
of the law of negligence torts
is this:

When one person,
through an act of negligence,
harms another person;
the negligent person
(or his or her insurance company)
is obligated to pay
the victim of the negligent act
enough money
to make the victim whole
for his or her loss.

That is, the negligent person
(or his or her insurance company)
is obligated to pay
the victim of the negligent act
enough money
to make the victim as well off financially
as he or she was before the negligent act.

If you cannot negotiate
a fair valuation of your total-loss vehicle
with the automobile insurance company,
then you can refuse to agree
to the automobile insurance company’s
valuation of your total-loss vehicle.

You can dispute their valuation.

You can sue the at-fault driver
for the amount of money
that his or her
automobile insurance company
cheated you out of.

THIRD-PARTY total-loss claim.

questions_of_third_party_consumer_protection_lawsSubchapter

If it’s more work
than you wish to do
to vet and edit your draft letter
against Washington’s laws,
then let the attorney
with whom you meet
vet and edit the letter for you.

I’m a do-it-yourself kind of person.

You may not be.

Or you may be too busy
with the rest of your life
to spend a lot of time
working on your total-loss claim.

If, for whatever reason,
you prefer not to vet and edit
a draft letter against your state’s laws,
don’t do it.

You will be sufficiently well prepared
to meet with an attorney
about your total-loss claim
so long as you provide him or her
with copies of:

The market valuation report
that you received
from the automobile insurance company
for your total-loss vehicle,
The Monroney Label window sticker
for your total-loss vehicle,
Your total-loss vehicle’s
J.D. Power Buy from Dealer price,
The specs that the J.D. Power calculator
used to value your total-loss vehicle,
Your draft letter
at whatever stage of development
it happens to be in,
The police report on your vehicle’s
collision or theft, and
If your claim is a first-party claim,
your automobile insurance policy.

If you provide the attorney
with these ingredients,
then he or she can turn the work
that you have done
into an effective letter and package.

skip_this_step_if_you_want_toChapter

Help me create model letters
tailored to the laws of every state.

Send me a few dollars.

Today I’m having to ask you
to do a lot more work
than I would like to.

I’m having to ask you
to vet and edit your draft letter
against the laws of your state
that I copied and pasted below.

As I continue to develop
wasyourcartotaledorstolen.com,
I hope to offer total-loss claimants
starter letters
for first-party total-loss claims
and starter letters
for third-party total-loss claims
that are tailored to the laws
of each and every state.

“Jesus, Jerry!

“That sounds like a helluva lot of work!”

Yeah, I know!

Shows you how much I hate seeing
giant, powerful, unethical corporations
rip off everyday Americans.

With starter letters that are tailored
to the laws of each and every state,
future total-loss claimants
who come to wasyourcartotaledorstolen.com
will have a lot less work to do.

They will be able to create draft letters
that require less of a local attorney’s time
to review, vet, tweak, and strengthen.

I’m itching to do the work.

In the left-hand column
next to each state’s laws,
I hope to give total-loss claimants
a guided tour of the laws that,
in their state, regulate
how automobile insurance companies
are required to value total-loss vehicles
and settle total-loss claims.

On that guided tour,
I plan to explain and comment on
the important provisions
of each state’s laws.

On that guided tour,
I plan to point out
the answers to questions
that, today, I have to ask you
to search for yourself.

On that guided tour,
I plan to point out which paragraphs
of each state’s laws read like
they were written
by a lobbyist who works
for automobile insurance companies.

Total-loss claimants
also will want to know
the answers to other questions
about the laws of their state
that do not appear in the state’s
automobile insurance regulatory laws.

Over time, as I continue my research
and as I receive more and more
pro bono publico guidance
(guidance for the public good)
from attorneys in each state;
I hope to post more and more answers
to these questions.

If I am able to achieve these goals,
then, over time, total-loss claimants
who come to wasyourcartotaledorstolen.com
will be able to gain a fuller,
more accurate, more precise,
and more powerful understanding
of the rights
that their state legislators
have given them
and of the rights
that their state legislators
have taken away from them.

Everyday Americans will be able
to have more knowledgeable
and more productive conversations
with local attorneys.

If everyday Americans
who are fed up
with automobile insurance companies
cheating them and ripping them off
will support my work;
then I may be able to build
my one-person efforts
into an organization.

With an organization,
we may be able to persuade
our state legislators
(and perhaps our national legislators)
to rewrite some of the laws
that make it so easy
for automobile insurance companies
to screw us all.

If you would like to help me
teach everyday Americans
how to get fair valuations
of their total-loss vehicles,
then, at the top right of your screen,

click this image:

Send me a few dollars.

With your help, I’m just getting started.

help_me_create_letters_tailored_to_laws_of_every_stateChapter

The laws of Washington that regulate
how automobile insurance companies
that do business in Washington
are required
to value total-loss vehicles
and settle total-loss claims.

My Comments

Washington Regulations

The regulations that govern
how insurance companies
that operate in Washington
are required to value total‑loss vehicles
and settle total‑loss claims
are part of the
Washington Administrative Code.

Washington Administrative Code

Title 284 - Insurance Commissioner, Office of the

Chapter 284-30 - Trade practices

THE UNFAIR CLAIMS SETTLEMENT PRACTICES REGULATION

Current through Register Vol. 22-18, September 15, 2022

To help you zero in
on the most relevant and useful paragraphs
of your state’s
automobile insurance regulations,
here’s how I have color coded
your state’s laws:

What I believe to be
the most relevant and useful paragraphs
of your state’s law appear in red.

Relevant and potentially useful paragraphs
appear in black.

Paragraphs unlikely to be relevant or useful
appear in grey.

Just in case you landed here
looking for information
about how automobile insurance companies
are supposed to settle claims
in which your vehicle can be repaired
(partial-loss claims),
paragraphs of the law
that deal with repairs
appear in blue.

To make sure that a section
of the law has not changed
since I copied it and pasted it here,
at the end of that section,
click: Verify statute or Download PDF.

If you discover
that a section of a law has changed
or is no longer accessible
through casetext.com,
please send me an email
and let me know
so I can update the law
or update the verify link here.

Thomson Reuters Westlaw
recently acquired Casetext.
I do not know if Thomson Reuters Westlaw
will continue to make these state laws
available to everyday Americans for free.

Section 284-30-300 - Authority and purpose

RCW 48.30.010 authorizes the commissioner to define methods of competition and acts and practices in the conduct of the business of insurance which are unfair or deceptive. The purpose of this regulation, WAC 284-30-300 through 284-30-400, is to define certain minimum standards which, if violated with such frequency as to indicate a general business practice, will be deemed to constitute unfair claims settlement practices. This regulation may be cited and referred to as the unfair claims settlement practices regulation.

Citation:
Wash. Admin. Code § 284-30-300

Verify statute or Download PDF

If verify link fails, Google:
casetext.com, the citation.

With your support, more comments to come.

Section 284-30-310 - Scope of this regulation

This regulation applies to all insurers and to all insurance policies and insurance contracts. This regulation is not exclusive, and acts performed, whether or not specified herein, may also be deemed to be violations of specific provisions of the insurance code or other regulations.

Citation:
Wash. Admin. Code § 284-30-310

Verify statute or Download PDF

If verify link fails, Google:
casetext.com, the citation.

With your support, more comments to come.

Section 284-30-320 - Definitions

When used in this regulation, WAC 284-30-300 through 284-30-400:

(1) ”Actual cash value” means the fair market value of the loss vehicle immediately prior to the loss.
(2) ”Claimant” means, depending upon the circumstance, either a first party claimant, a third-party claimant, or both and includes a claimant’s designated legal representative and a member of the claimant’s immediate family designated by the claimant.
(3) ”Comparable motor vehicle” means a vehicle that is the same make and model, of the same or newer model year, similar body style, with similar options and mileage as the loss vehicle and in similar overall condition, as established by current data. To achieve comparability, deductions or additions for options, mileage or condition may be made if they are itemized and appropriate in dollar amount.
(4) ”Current data” means data within ninety days prior to or after the date of loss.
(5) ”Documented expenses” means specific incurred expenses which are either paid by the group policyholder or paid on behalf of the group policyholder and for which documentation is obtained by the insurer. Such documented expenses include, but are not limited to, training, marketing, consumer awareness, information technology and computer programming and operations and administration. Such expenses must be specifically disbursed and actually incurred within the limits set forth in the policy or policy addendum.
(6) ”File” means a record in any retrievable format, and unless otherwise specified, includes paper and electronic formats.
(7) ”First party claimant” means an individual, corporation, association, partnership or other legal entity asserting a right as a covered person to payment under an insurance policy or insurance contract arising out of the occurrence of the contingency or loss covered by a policy or contract.
(8) ”Group policyholder” means a policy owner under a group policy which provides coverage to an entire group of fifty-one or more individuals.
(9) ”Insurance policy” or ”insurance contract” mean any contract of insurance, indemnity, suretyship, or annuity issued, proposed for issuance, or intended for issuance by any insurer.
(10) ”Insurer” means any individual, corporation, association, partnership, reciprocal exchange, interinsurer, fraternal mutual insurer, fraternal mutual life insurer, and any other legal entity engaged in the business of insurance, authorized or licensed to issue or who issues any insurance policy or insurance contract in this state. ”Insurer” does not include health care service contractors, as defined in RCW 48.44.010, and health maintenance organizations, as defined in RCW 48.46.020.
(11) ”Investigation” means all activities of the insurer directly or indirectly related to the determination of liabilities under coverages afforded by an insurance policy or insurance contract.
(12) ”Loss vehicle” means the damaged motor vehicle or a motor vehicle that the insurer determines is a ”total loss.”
(13) ”Motor vehicle” means any vehicle subject to registration under chapter 46.16 RCW.
(14) ”Notification of claim” means any notification, whether in writing or other means acceptable under the terms of an insurance policy or insurance contract, to the insurer or its agent, by a claimant, which reasonably apprises the insurer of the facts pertinent to a claim.
(15) ”Principally garaged area” means the place where the loss vehicle is normally kept, consistent with the applicable policy of insurance.
(16) ”Shall describe any such payment” means the specific expenses that are described in the group policy-holder’s contract or subsequent contract addendum with the insurer and which establish the limits of acceptable expenses under the contract.
(17) ”Third-party claimant” means any individual, corporation, association, partnership or other legal entity asserting a claim against any individual, corporation, association, partnership or other legal entity insured under an insurance policy or insurance contract of the insurer.
(18) ”Total loss” means that the insurer has determined that the cost of parts and labor, plus the salvage value, meets or exceeds, or is likely to meet or exceed, the ”actual cash value” of the loss vehicle. Other factors may be considered in reaching the total loss determination, such as the existence of a biohazard or a death in the vehicle resulting from the loss.
(19) ”Written” or ”in writing” means any retrievable method of recording an agreement or document, and, unless otherwise specified, includes paper and electronic formats.

Citation:
Wash. Admin. Code § 284-30-320

Verify statute or Download PDF

If verify link fails, Google:
casetext.com, the citation.

With your support, more comments to come.

Section 284-30-330 - Specific unfair claims settlement practices defined

The following are hereby defined as unfair methods of competition and unfair or deceptive acts or practices of the insurer in the business of insurance, specifically applicable to the settlement of claims:

(1) Misrepresenting pertinent facts or insurance policy provisions.
(2) Failing to acknowledge and act reasonably promptly upon communications with respect to claims arising under insurance policies.
(3) Failing to adopt and implement reasonable standards for the prompt investigation of claims arising under insurance policies.
(4) Refusing to pay claims without conducting a reasonable investigation.
(5) Failing to affirm or deny coverage of claims within a reasonable time after fully completed proof of loss documentation has been submitted.
(6) Not attempting in good faith to effectuate prompt, fair and equitable settlements of claims in which liability has become reasonably clear. In particular, this includes an obligation to promptly pay property damage claims to innocent third parties in clear liability situations. If two or more insurers share liability, they should arrange to make appropriate payment, leaving to themselves the burden of apportioning liability.
(7) Compelling a first party claimant to initiate or submit to litigation, arbitration, or appraisal to recover amounts due under an insurance policy by offering substantially less than the amounts ultimately recovered in such actions or proceedings.
(8) Attempting to settle a claim for less than the amount to which a reasonable person would have believed he or she was entitled by reference to written or printed advertising material accompanying or made part of an application.
(9) Making a claim payment to a first party claimant or beneficiary not accompanied by a statement setting forth the coverage under which the payment is made.
(10) Asserting to a first party claimant a policy of appealing arbitration awards in favor of insureds or first party claimants for the purpose of compelling them to accept settlements or compromises less than the amount awarded in arbitration.
(11) Delaying the investigation or payment of claims by requiring a first party claimant or his or her physician to submit a preliminary claim report and then requiring subsequent submissions which contain substantially the same information.
(12) Failing to promptly settle claims, where liability has become reasonably clear, under one portion of the insurance policy coverage in order to influence settlements under other portions of the insurance policy coverage.
(13) Failing to promptly provide a reasonable explanation of the basis in the insurance policy in relation to the facts or applicable law for denial of a claim or for the offer of a compromise settlement.
(14) Unfairly discriminating against claimants because they are represented by a public adjuster.
(15) Failing to expeditiously honor drafts given in settlement of claims. A failure to honor a draft within three working days after notice of receipt by the payor bank will constitute a violation of this provision. Dishonor of a draft for valid reasons related to the settlement of the claim will not constitute a violation of this provision.
(16) Failing to adopt and implement reasonable standards for the processing and payment of claims after the obligation to pay has been established. Except as to those instances where the time for payment is governed by statute or rule or is set forth in an applicable contract, procedures which are not designed to deliver payment, whether by check , draft, electronic funds transfer, prepaid card, or other method of electronic payment to the payee in payment of a settled claim within fifteen business days after receipt by the insurer or its attorney of properly executed releases or other settlement documents are not acceptable. Where the insurer is obligated to furnish an appropriate release or settlement document to a claimant, it must do so within twenty working days after a settlement has been reached.
(17) Delaying appraisals or adding to their cost under insurance policy appraisal provisions through the use of appraisers from outside of the loss area. The use of appraisers from outside the loss area is appropriate only where the unique nature of the loss or a lack of competent local appraisers make the use of out-of-area appraisers necessary.
(18) Failing to make a good faith effort to settle a claim before exercising a contract right to an appraisal.
(19) Negotiating or settling a claim directly with any claimant known to be represented by an attorney without the attorney’s knowledge and consent. This does not prohibit routine inquiries to a first party claimant to identify the claimant or to obtain details concerning the claim.

Citation:
Wash. Admin. Code § 284-30-330

Verify statute or Download PDF

If verify link fails, Google:
casetext.com, the citation.

With your support, more comments to come.

Section 284-30-340 - File and record documentation

The insurer’s claim files are subject to examination by the commissioner or by duly appointed designees. The files must contain all notes and work papers pertaining to the claim in enough detail that pertinent events and dates of the events can be reconstructed.

Citation:
Wash. Admin. Code § 284-30-340

Verify statute or Download PDF

If verify link fails, Google:
casetext.com, the citation.

With your support, more comments to come.

Section 284-30-350 - Misrepresentation of policy provisions

(1) No insurer shall fail to fully disclose to first party claimants all pertinent benefits, coverages or other provisions of an insurance policy or insurance contract under which a claim is presented.
(2) No insurance producer or title insurance agent shall conceal from first party claimants benefits, coverages or other provisions of any insurance policy or insurance contract when such benefits, coverages or other provisions are pertinent to a claim.
(3) No insurer shall deny a claim for failure to exhibit the property without proof of demand and unfounded refusal by a claimant to do so.
(4) No insurer shall, except where there is a time limit specified in the policy, make statements, written or otherwise, requiring a claimant to give written notice of loss or proof of loss within a specified time limit and which seek to relieve the company of its obligations if such a time limit is not complied with unless the failure to comply with such time limit prejudices the insurer’s rights.
(5) No insurer shall request a first party claimant to sign a release that extends beyond the subject matter that gave rise to the claim payment.
(6) No insurer shall issue checks or drafts in partial settlement of a loss or claim under a specific coverage which contain language which release the insurer or its insured from its total liability.
(7) No insurer shall make a payment of benefits without clearly advising the payee, in writing, that it may require reimbursement, when such is the case.

Citation:
Wash. Admin. Code § 284-30-350

Verify statute or Download PDF

If verify link fails, Google:
casetext.com, the citation.

With your support, more comments to come.

Section 284-30-360 - Standards for the insurer to acknowledge pertinent communications

(1) Within ten working days after receiving notification of a claim under an individual insurance policy, or within fifteen working days with respect to claims arising under group insurance contracts, the insurer must acknowledge its receipt of the notice of claim.
- (a) If payment is made within that period of time, acknowledgment by payment constitutes a satisfactory response.
- (b) If an acknowledgment is made by means other than writing, an appropriate notation of the acknowledgment must be made in the claim file of the insurer describing how, when, and to whom the notice was made.
- (c) Notification given to an agent of the insurer is notification to the insurer.
(2) Upon receipt of any inquiry from the commissioner concerning a complaint, every insurer must furnish the commissioner with an adequate response to the inquiry within fifteen working days after receipt of the commissioner’s inquiry using the commissioner’s electronic company complaint system.
(3) For all other pertinent communications from a claimant reasonably suggesting that a response is expected, an appropriate reply must be provided within ten working days for individual insurance policies, or fifteen working days with respect to communications arising under group insurance contracts.
(4) Upon receiving notification of a claim, every insurer must promptly provide necessary claim forms, instructions, and reasonable assistance so that first party claimants can comply with the policy conditions and the insurer’s reasonable requirements. Compliance with this paragraph within the time limits specified in subsection (1) of this section constitutes compliance with that subsection.

Citation:
Wash. Admin. Code § 284-30-360

Verify statute or Download PDF

If verify link fails, Google:
casetext.com, the citation.

With your support, more comments to come.

Section 284-30-370 - Standards for prompt investigation of a claim

Every insurer must complete its investigation of a claim within thirty days after notification of claim, unless the investigation cannot reasonably be completed within that time. All persons involved in the investigation of a claim must provide reasonable assistance to the insurer in order to facilitate compliance with this provision.

Citation:
Wash. Admin. Code § 284-30-370

Verify statute or Download PDF

If verify link fails, Google:
casetext.com, the citation.

With your support, more comments to come.

Section 284-30-380 - Settlement standards applicable to all insurers

(1) Within fifteen working days after receipt by the insurer of fully completed and executed proofs of loss, the insurer must notify the first party claimant whether the claim has been accepted or denied. The insurer must not deny a claim on the grounds of a specific policy provision, condition, or exclusion unless reference to the specific provision, condition, or exclusion is included in the denial. The denial must be given to the claimant in writing and the claim file of the insurer must contain a copy of the denial.
(2) If a claim is denied for reasons other than those described in subsection (1) and is made by any other means than in writing, an appropriate notation must be made in the claim file of the insurer describing how, when, and to whom the notice was made.
(3) If the insurer needs more time to determine whether a first party claim should be accepted or denied, it must notify the first party claimant within fifteen working days after receipt of the proofs of loss giving the reasons more time is needed. If after that time the investigation remains incomplete, the insurer must notify the first party claimant in writing stating the reason or reasons additional time is needed for investigation. This notification must be sent within forty-five days after the date of the initial notification and, if needed, additional notice must be provided every thirty days after that date explaining why the claim remains unresolved.
(4) Insurers must not fail to settle first party claims on the basis that responsibility for payment should be assumed by others except as may otherwise be provided by policy provisions.
(5) Insurers must not continue negotiations for settlement of a claim directly with a claimant who is neither an attorney nor represented by an attorney until the claimant’s rights may be affected by a statute of limitations or a policy or contract time limit, without giving the claimant written notice that the time limit may be expiring and may affect the claimant’s rights. This notice must be given to first party claimants thirty days and to third party claimants sixty days before the date on which any time limit may expire.
(6) The insurer must not make statements which indicate that the rights of a third party claimant may be impaired if a form or release is not completed within a specified period of time unless the statement is given for the purpose of notifying the third party claimant of the provision of a statute of limitations.
(7) Insurers are responsible for the accuracy of evaluations to determine actual cash value.

Citation:
Wash. Admin. Code § 284-30-380

Verify statute or Download PDF

If verify link fails, Google:
casetext.com, the citation.

With your support, more comments to come.

Section 284-30-390 - Acts or practices considered unfair in the settlement of motor vehicle claims

In addition to the unfair claims settlement practices specified in this regulation, the following acts or practices of the insurer are hereby defined as unfair methods of competition and unfair or deceptive acts or practices in the business of insurance, specifically applicable to the settlement of motor vehicle claims:

(1) Failing to make a good faith effort to communicate with the repair facility chosen by the claimant.
(2) Arbitrarily denying a claimant’s estimate for repairs.
- (a) A denial of the claimant’s estimate for repairs to be completed at the chosen repair facility based solely on the repair facility’s hourly rate is considered arbitrary if the rate does not result in a higher overall cost of repairs.
- (b) If the insurer pays less than the amount of the estimate from the claimant’s chosen repair facility, the insurer must fully disclose the reason or reasons it paid less than the claimant’s estimate, and must thoroughly document the circumstances in its claim file.
(3) Requiring the claimant to travel unreasonably to:
- (a) Obtain a repair estimate;
- (b) Have the loss vehicle repaired at a specific repair facility; or
- (c) Obtain a temporary rental or loaner vehicle.
(4) Failing to prepare or accept an estimate provided by the claimant that will restore the loss vehicle to its condition prior to the loss.
- (a) If the insurer prepares the estimate, it must provide a copy of the estimate to the claimant.
- (b) If a claimant provides the estimate and the insurer, after evaluation of the claimant’s estimate, determines it owes an amount that differs from the estimate the claimant provided, the insurer must fully disclose the reason or reasons for the difference to the claimant, and must thoroughly document the circumstances in the claim file.
- (c) If the claimant chooses to take the loss vehicle to a repair facility where the overall cost to restore the loss vehicle to its condition prior to the loss exceeds the insurer’s estimate, the claimant must be advised that he or she may be responsible for any additional amount above the insurer’s estimate.
(5) If requested by the claimant and if the insurer prepares the estimate, failing to provide a list of repair facilities within a reasonable distance of the claimant’s principally garaged area that will complete the vehicle repairs for the estimated cost of the insurer prepared estimate.
(6) Failing to consider any additional loss related damage the repair facility discovers during the repairs to the loss vehicle.
(7) Failing to limit deductions for betterment and depreciation to parts normally subject to repair and replacement during the useful life of the loss vehicle. Deductions for betterment and depreciation are limited to the lesser of:
- (a) An increase in the actual cash value of the loss vehicle caused by the replacement of the part; or
- (b) An amount equal to the value of the expired life of the part to be repaired or replaced when compared to the normal useful life of that part.
(8) If provided for by the terms of the applicable insurance policy, and if the insurer elects to exercise its right to repair the loss vehicle at a specific repair facility, failing to prepare or accept an estimate that will restore the loss vehicle to its condition prior to the loss at no additional cost to the first party claimant other than as stated in the applicable policy of insurance.
(9) If liability and damages are reasonably clear, recommending that claimants make a claim under their own collision coverage solely to avoid paying claims under the liability insurance policy.

Citation:
Wash. Admin. Code § 284-30-390

Verify statute or Download PDF

If verify link fails, Google:
casetext.com, the citation.

With your support, more comments to come.

Section 284-30-391 - Methods and standards of practice for settlement of total loss vehicle claims

Unless an agreed value is reached, the insurer must adjust and settle vehicle total losses using the methods set forth in subsections (1) through (3) of this section. Subsections (4) through (6) of this section establish standards of practice for the settlement of total loss vehicle claims. If an agreed value or methodology is reached between the claimant and the insurer using an evaluation that varies from the methods described in subsections (1) through (3) of this section, the agreement must be documented in the claim file. The insurer must take reasonable steps to ensure that the agreed value is accurate and representative of the actual cash value of a comparable motor vehicle in the principally garaged area.

(1) Replacing the loss vehicle: The insurer may settle a total loss claim by offering to replace the loss vehicle with a comparable motor vehicle that is available for inspection within a reasonable distance from where the loss vehicle is principally garaged.
(2) Cash settlement: The insurer may settle a total loss claim by offering a cash settlement based on the actual cash value of a comparable motor vehicle, less any applicable deductible provided for in the policy.
- (a) Only a vehicle identified as a comparable motor vehicle may be used to determine the actual cash value.
- (b) The insurer must determine the actual cash value of the loss vehicle by using any one or more of the following methods:
  - (i) Comparable motor vehicle: The actual cash value of a comparable motor vehicle based on current data obtained in the area where the loss vehicle is principally garaged.
  - (ii) Licensed dealer quotes: Quotations for the cost of a comparable motor vehicle obtained from two or more licensed dealers within a reasonable distance of the principally garaged area not to exceed one hundred fifty miles (except where there are no licensed dealers having comparable motor vehicles within one hundred fifty miles).
  - (iii) Advertised data comparison: The actual cash value of two or more comparable motor vehicles advertised for sale in the local media if the advertisements meet the definition of current data as defined in WAC 284-30-320(4). The vehicles must be located within a reasonable distance of the principally garaged area not to exceed one hundred fifty miles.
  - (iv) Computerized source: The insurer may use a computerized source to establish a statistically valid actual cash value of the loss vehicle. The source used must meet all of the following criteria:
    - (A) The source’s data base must produce values for at least eighty-five percent of all makes and models for a minimum of fifteen years taking into account the values of all major options for such motor vehicles.
    - (B) The source must produce actual cash values based on current data within a reasonable distance of the principally garaged area, not to exceed one hundred fifty miles.
    - (C) The source must rely upon the actual cash value of comparable motor vehicles that are currently available or were available in the market place within ninety days prior to or after the date of loss.
    - (D) The source must provide a list of comparable motor vehicles used to determine the actual cash value. If more than thirty comparable motor vehicles are located, the insurer need list only thirty but may list more.
  - (v) Cash settlement search area: If none of the methods in subsection (2)(b)(i) through (iv) of this section produce a comparable motor vehicle to establish an actual cash value within a reasonable distance of the principally garaged area, the search area may be expanded in increasing circles of twenty-five mile increments, up to one hundred and fifty miles, until two or more comparable motor vehicles are located. If no comparable motor vehicles can be located within one hundred fifty miles, the search area may be expanded with the agreement of the first party claimant.
(3) Appraisal: If the first party claimant and the insurer fail to agree on the actual cash value of the loss vehicle and the insurance policy has an appraisal provision, either the insurer or the first party claimant may invoke the appraisal provision of the policy to resolve disputes concerning the actual cash value.
(4) Settlement requirements: When settling a total loss vehicle claim using methods in subsections (1) through (3) of this section, the insurer must:
- (a) Communicate its settlement offer to the claimant by phone or in writing and information about this communication must be documented in the claim file, including the date, time, and name of the person to whom the offer was made.
- (b) Base all offers on itemized and verifiable dollar amounts for vehicles that are currently available, or were available within ninety days of the date of loss, using appropriate deductions or additions for options, mileage or condition when determining comparability.
- (c) Consider relevant information supplied by the claimant when determining appropriate deductions or additions.
- (d) Provide a true and accurate copy of any ”valuation report,” as described in WAC 284-30-392, if requested.
- (e) As part of the settlement amount, include all applicable government taxes and fees that would have been incurred by the claimant if the claimant had purchased the loss vehicle immediately prior to the loss. These taxes and fees must be included in the settlement amount whether or not the claimant retains or subsequently transfers ownership of the loss vehicle.
(5) Settlement adjustments: Insurers may adjust a total loss settlement through the following methods only:
- (a) The insurer may deduct from a first party claim the amount of another claim payment (including the applicable deductible) previously made to an insured for prior unrepaired damage to the same vehicle.
- (b) Deductions other than those made pursuant to (a) of this subsection may be made for other unrepaired damage as long as the amount of deduction is no greater than the decrease in the actual cash value due to prior damage.
- (c) If the claimant retains the total loss vehicle, the insurer may deduct the salvage value from the settlement amount, as described in subsection (4)(e) of this section. Upon a request by the claimant, the insurer must provide the name and address of a salvage entity or dismantler who will purchase the salvage for the amount deducted with no additional charge. This purchase option must remain available for at least thirty days after the settlement agreement is reached and the claimant must be advised that the salvage entity may not honor its offer if the condition of the salvage has changed.
- (d) Any additions or deductions from the actual cash value must be explained to the claimant and must be itemized showing specific dollar amounts.
(6) Reopening a claim file:
- (a) The insurer must reopen the claim file if within the first thirty-five days after the date final payment is sent to the first party claimant, lienholder, or both, the claimant is not able to purchase a comparable motor vehicle for the agreed amount but was able to locate, but did not purchase a comparable motor vehicle that costs more than the agreed settlement amount.
- (b) If the claimant has satisfied (a) of this subsection, and if the appraisal section of the policy has not been utilized, the insurer must do one of the following:
  - (i) Locate a comparable motor vehicle that is currently available for the agreed settlement amount;
  - (ii) Pay the claimant the difference between the agreed settlement amount and the cost of the comparable motor vehicle;
  - (iii) Purchase the comparable motor vehicle for the claimant; or
  - (iv) Conclude the loss settlement in the manner provided in the appraisal section of the insurance policy in force at the time of the loss.
- (c) The insurer is not required to reopen the claim file if:
  - (i) The claimant received written notification of the location of a specific comparable motor vehicle available for purchase for the agreed settlement amount and the claimant did not purchase this vehicle within five business days after the date final payment is sent to the claimant, lienholder, or both; or
  - (ii) The appraisal provision was previously exercised.

Citation:
Wash. Admin. Code § 284-30-391

Verify statute or Download PDF

If verify link fails, Google:
casetext.com, the citation.

With your support, more comments to come.

Section 284-30-392 - Information that must be included in the insurer’s total loss vehicle valuation report

The insurer’s total loss vehicle valuation report must include:

(1) All information collected during the initial inspection assessing the condition, equipment, and mileage of the loss vehicle;
(2) All information the insurer used to determine the actual cash value of the loss vehicle;
(3) A list of the comparable motor vehicles used by the insurer to arrive at the actual cash value. This list must include:
- (a) The source of the information used;
- (b) The date of the information;
- (c) The contact information for the seller, the comparable motor vehicle’s vehicle identification number, or both;
- (d) The seller’s asking price;
- (e) The sold price, if available; and
- (f) The location or contact information for each comparable motor vehicle at the time of the valuation.
(4) When the insurer uses a computerized source for determining statistically valid actual cash values after meeting the requirements of WAC 284-30-391(2)(b)(iv):
- (a) The source must provide a list of comparable motor vehicles used to determine the actual cash value. If more than thirty comparable motor vehicles are used, only thirty must be listed.
- (b) Any supplemental information must be clearly identified with a separate heading.
- (c) Any weighting of identified vehicles to arrive at an average must be documented and explained.

Citation:
Wash. Admin. Code § 284-30-392

Verify statute or Download PDF

If verify link fails, Google:
casetext.com, the citation.

With your support, more comments to come.

Section 284-30-393 - Insurer must include an insured’s deductible in its subrogation demands

The insurer must include the insured’s deductible, if any, in its subrogation demands. Any recoveries must be allocated first to the insured for any deductible(s) incurred in the loss, less applicable comparable fault. Deductions for expenses must not be made from the deductible recovery unless an outside attorney is retained to collect the recovery. The deduction may then be made only as a pro rata share of the allocated loss adjustment expense. The insurer must keep its insured regularly informed of its efforts related to the progress of subrogation claims. ”Regularly informed” means that the insurer must contact its insured within sixty days after the start of the subrogation process, and no less frequently than every one hundred eighty days until the insured’s interest is resolved.

Citation:
Wash. Admin. Code § 284-30-393

Verify statute or Download PDF

If verify link fails, Google:
casetext.com, the citation.

With your support, more comments to come.

Section 284-30-394 - Denial of storage and towing costs

Prior to denying storage and towing costs, the insurer must do all of the following:

(1) Advise the first party claimant by phone or in writing before it stops payment for storage of the loss vehicle. This communication must be documented in the claim file. If it is a phone call, the documentation must include the date, time, name of the person contacted and a summary of the conversation;
(2) Provide reasonable time for the claimant to move the loss vehicle before stopping payment for storage. Five calendar days is considered reasonable time unless the claimant agrees to a shorter time period;
(3) Pay any and all reasonable towing charges unless otherwise provided in the applicable insurance policy.

Citation:
Wash. Admin. Code § 284-30-394

Verify statute or Download PDF

If verify link fails, Google:
casetext.com, the citation.

With your support, more comments to come.

Section 284-30-400 - Enforcement

Violations of the standards for unfair claims settlement practices in this regulation are subject to the enforcement provisions set forth in RCW 48.30.010 and also constitute a failure to comply with a regulation pursuant to RCW 48.05.140(1).

Citation:
Wash. Admin. Code § 284-30-400

Verify statute or Download PDF

If verify link fails, Google:
casetext.com, the citation.

“Jerry, looks to me like
the legislators of some states
are pimping us out
to automobile insurance companies.”

“Jerry, I skimmed through the laws
of half a dozen or so different states.

“Looks to me like the legislators
of some states aren’t just making it easy
for automobile insurance companies
to have their way with us.

“Looks to me like they’re pimping us out
to the automobile insurance companies.”

If that’s the conclusion that you come to,
my friend, I cannot necessarily say
that I would disagree with you.

“Our state legislators are pimping out
to automobile insurance companies
the very voters
who voted those legislators
into office?

“How can that be?”

In a word, money!

Every year, in the USA,
automobile insurance companies
collect hundreds of billions of dollars
in automobile insurance premiums.

Money of that magnitude
translates into political power.

Automobile insurance companies
have many ways
in which they can reward
whoever helps them maximize their profits.

Then too, there’s a revolving door
between insurance companies
and state regulatory departments.

Some employees of insurance companies
go on to become
state commissioners of insurance.

Some state commissioners of insurance
go on to become highly-paid employees
of insurance companies
or go on to become
fabulously compensated lobbyists
for insurance companies.

One way for a man or woman
to maximize his or her career income
in the insurance industry
is to help insurance companies
maximize their profits
before he or she becomes
a state commissioner of insurance
and to help insurance companies
maximize their profits
after he or she becomes
a state commissioner of insurance.

“Is there anything we can do?”

In principle, yes.

The Affordable Care Act
limits the percentage
of health-insurance premium dollars
that health insurance companies
can keep for themselves
and their shareholders.

But I have yet to run across a law
that limits the percentage
of automobile insurance premium dollars
that automobile insurance companies
can keep for themselves
and their shareholders.

I’d like to see
our state legislators enact such laws
or our federal legislators enact such a law.

“Until that happens,
we’re goinng to keep getting pimped out
to the automobile insurance companies?”

You read your state’s laws.

You’ve witnessed up close the conduct
of the automobile insurance company
that you’re dealing with
under your state’s laws.

I’ll leave it to you
to reach your own conclusions.

I’m doing what I can to teach folks
how to fight back against rapacious
automobile insurance companies.

From my questions
about your state’s laws,
you learned that the legislators
of some states
give total-loss claimants
rights that legislators
of other states take away.

I would like to see
the legislators of states
that have taken away rights
restore those rights.

I would like to see state legislators
give total-loss claimants
rights that would make it easy
for total-loss claimants
to get fair valuations
of their total-loss vehicles.

I’d like to build an organization
that can try to persuade our legislators
to change some of the laws
that make it so easy
for automobile insurance companies
to have their way with you.

If you would like to help me,
then, at the top right of your screen,

click this image:

Send me a few dollars.

Looks_to_me_like_legisators_of_some_states_are_pimping_us_outChapter

Get your draft document into shape
for an attorney to review it.

When I imagine you meeting with an attorney,
I see your attorney sitting at a computer.

The attorney has your draft letter
up on a computer screen
that you can see.

If someone other than you
did your word processing,
he or she is with you.

The two or three of you also have printouts
of your draft letter and other documents.

The attorney reads through your draft letter.

The attorney comments on
what is good in your draft letter
and on what needs to be fixed,
improved, deleted, or changed.

She or he asks you questions.

To answer some of the questions,
you pull out the document or the page
wherein the answer to that question
is to be found.

At the computer keyboard,
the attorney edits, fixes,
and strengthens your draft letter.

If you will imagine your meeting
with the attorney,
then doing so may help you
shape up and organize your draft letter
and other documents for that meeting.

When you are deciding
what to delete and what to keep,
imagine the workflow
that you want to accomplish
in the hour or so that you will spend
with the attorney.

Imagine how your conversation
with the attorney is likely to flow.

Shape up your draft letter accordingly.

Doing so may mean little more
than putting hard page breaks in places
that will organize the document
into meaningful sections.

Preserve the section of your draft document
where you used
“Find and replace” ➞ “Replace all”
to replace the specifics
of my fictitious total-loss claim
with the specifics of your total-loss claim.

This list of specifics
will give your attorney
the specifics of your total-loss claim
all in one place.

If some of what is in your draft letter
will have no role in the finished document
or in your conversation with the attorney,
then, probably, you can safely delete it.

Keep in mind that you’re not trying to create
a perfectly polished, legally pristine letter.

You’re putting together information
and supporting documents
that an attorney can vet, edit, and shape
into a powerful package.

You’re preparing yourself
for a fast-paced, efficient,
and productive conversation
with an attorney
about how to craft a letter
that will get you a fair valuation
for your total-loss vehicle.

When you’ve developed
your draft letter
as far as you wish to,
find an attorney
who knows how to deal
with automobile insurance companies
on total-loss property damage claims.

Get_your_draft_document_into_shapeChapter

Find an attorney
who is knowledgeable
about automobile insurance
total-loss property damage claims.

See if an attorney in your county
advertises his or her expertise here
on wasyourcartotaledorstolen.com.

Attorneys have many different specializations.

To help you get a fair valuation
of your total-loss vehicle,
you likely will want to find an attorney
who is knowledgeable
about automobile insurance
total-loss property damage claims.

If an attorney in your county
or in a nearby county
advertises his or her expertise
on wasyourcartotaledorstolen.com,
then he or she is likely knowledgeable
about automobile insurance
total-loss property damage claims.

He or she is likely
primed and prepared
to have with you
the kind of conversation
that I’ve prepared you for.

He or she may even
have already created a model letter
that picks up where mine leaves off.

If a local attorney
has already created
a model letter that picks up
where mine leaves off,
then his or her letter
will already be tailored
to the laws of your state.

To see if an attorney in your county
advertises his or services
here at wasyourcartotaledorstolen.com,
at the top of your screen,
click the image

of four attorneys standing together.

Then click your county.

Find_a_knowledgeable_attorneyChapter

Make an appointment with the attorney.

Email your draft letter
and supporting documents
to the attorney.

However you find an attorney
who is well qualified
to help you get a fair valuation
of your total-loss vehicle,
make an appointment
for an hour of his or her time.

If you want the attorney
to have your draft letter
up on a computer screen
during your meeting,
then email your draft letter
and its supporting documents
to the attorney
before your meeting.

If you are going to email your draft letter
and its supporting documents
to the attorney, then you need to write
an email for that purpose.

At the end of your draft document,
I have included as an example
the email that I would write
for that purpose.

If you wish to do so,
you may use my example email
as the starting point for your email.

If, earlier, you used
“Find and replace” ➞ “Replace all”
to change the specifics
of my fictitious total-loss claim
to the specifics
of your total-loss claim,
then those changes
will have rippled through
to my example email.

Make_an_appointment_with_an_attorneyChapter

Meet with the attorney.

If you have a co-pilot,
take him or her with you.

Ask your attorney to:

Review your draft letter
against the CCC market valuation report
or other market valuation report
that you received
from the automobile insurance company;
Review your draft letter against
the J.D. Power Buy from Dealer price
for your total-loss vehicle;
Review your draft letter against
your state’s laws; and
If your total-loss claim
is a first-party claim,
review your draft letter against
your automobile insurance policy.

Ask your attorney, to edit, tweak,
and strengthen your draft letter
as he or she thinks best.

Or, if your attorney wants you
to make the changes to your draft letter,
take good notes of what
your attorney tells you to change.

If you have time enough to do so,
ask the attorney what steps
he or she thinks you should take
if the automobile insurance company
does not agree to the valuation amount
that you propose.

If you don’t accomplish everything
that you wish to in one hour,
make a follow-up appointment.

Do not let
the automobile insurance company
rush you into a settlement
that is not fair to you.

Meet_with_the_attorneyChapter

Email your letter
and its supporting documents
to the automobile insurance company.

If your attorney asked you and your co-pilot
to make the changes to your draft letter,
then make those changes.

Pretty your letter up.

When you’re satisfied with
how your letter looks and reads,
email your letter
and its supporting documents
to the automobile insurance company
that you’re dealing with.

Email_your_letter_and_documents_to_the_automobile_insurance_companyChapter

If your letter and supporting documents
get you a fair valuation
of your total-loss vehicle,
then great!

Congratulations!

High fives!

You rule!

If you’ve made in this far
into wasyourcartotaledorstolen.com,
then you’ve done a lot of work!

You and perhaps a co-pilot
have spent a lot of hours
getting savvy to ways
in which automobile insurance companies
try to cheat people
out of fair settlemets
of their total-loss claims.

If you have succeeded
in getting a fair valuation
of your total-loss vehilce,
then, as we say down South,
I’m proud fer ya!

Your hard work has paid off!

High fives!

God bless you!

If you would like to share
your success story
with other total-loss claimants
in Washington, email me your story.

I’ll create a web page
here in the Washington arena
of wasyourcartotaledorstolen.com
where you and other folks
who live in Washington
can share your stories
with one another.

(I may edit your story a little bit
to keep you and me
from getting into trouble.)

If you would like to help me
help others achieve
what you have achieved,
then, at the top right of your screen,

click this image:

Send me a few dollars.

Congratulations!

And thank you!

If_your_letter_gets_you_a_fair_valuation_high_fivesChapter

If your letter did not get you
a fair valuation
of your total-loss vehicle, then,
if you have a right of recourse,
exercise your right of recourse.

By now, you should know
whether or not your state laws
give you a right of recourse.

You should know how many days
after the automobile insurance company
mails you the settlement check
you have to exercise
your right of recourse
before it expires.

To learn how I would go about
exercising my right of recourse,
at the top of your screen,
click the photo
of the young woman
who is determined

to exercise her rights:

If_your_letter_did_not_get_you_a_fair_valuation_exercise_your_right_of_recourseChapter

If you do not have a right of recourse
or if exercising your right of recourse
did not get you a fair valuation
of your total-loss vehicle,
then you may want to initiate
a small-claims lawsuit
or even a large-claims lawsuit.

To get a fair valuation
of my total-loss vehicle,
I sued the at-fault driver
in a small-claims lawsuit
for the amount of money
that her automobile insurance company,
Travelers, cheated me out of.

I got an additional $5,920 from Travelers.

If your total-loss claim
is a third-party claim
and the automobile insurance company
refused to negotiate
a fair valuation of your total-loss vehicle,
then you can sue the at-fault driver
for the amount of money
that his or her
automobile insurance company
cheated you out of.

If your total-loss claim
is a first-party claim,
then things are much more complicated.

Your automobile insurance policy
may contain an appraisal clause,
may contain an arbitration clause,
or may contain both.

Your state’s legislators
may have taken away rights
that you would otherwise have
under the law of contracts.

Hence, if your total-loss claim
is a first-party claim,
then I suggest that you
ask an attorney in your county
whether or not it makes sense
for you to invoke the appraisal clause
in your automobile insurance policy,
invoke the arbitration clause
in your automobile insurance policy,
or initiate a lawsuit
against your automobile insurance company.

To learn how,
in a third-party total-loss claim,
I would initiate a small-claims lawsuit
and perhaps a large-claims lawsuit,
at the top of your screen,
click the photo of the total-loss claimant
and the attorney
for the automobile insurance company
arguing their case

in front of a judge.

If_your_right_of_recourse_does_not_get_you_a_fair_valuation_you_may_want_to_sueChapter

Nota bene

Jerry Marlow is not an attorney. Neither information nor opinions published on this site constitute legal advice. This site is not a lawyer referral service. No attorney‑client or confidential relationship is or will be formed by use of this site. Any attorney listings on this site are paid attorney advertising. In some states, the information on this website may be considered a lawyer referral service.

Terms of use

Jerry Marlow grants human users of wasyourcartotaledorstolen.com permission to use the copyrighted materials on wasyourcartotaledorstolen.com for their personal use free of charge.

The fee to use copyrighted materials on wasyourcartotaledorstolen.com to train artificial intelligence software (AI) is $4 million.

Reproduction of copyrighted materials on wasyourcartotaledorstolen.com for commercial use without the written permission of Jerry Marlow is strictly prohibited.

Jerry Marlow does not grant users permission to reproduce on other websites any of the copyrighted material published on wasyourcartotaledorstolen.com.

Jerry Marlow does not grant users permission to reproduce via audio, video, or any other audiovisual medium any of the copyrighted material published on wasyourcartotaledorstolen.com.

If you wish to use any of the copyrighted material published on wasyourcartotaledorstolen.com in any way for which permission is not explicitly granted, contact Jerry Marlow at jerrymarlow@jerrymarlow.com.

To make your draft letter to the automobile insurance company more consistent with the laws of Washington, vet and edit your draft letter against the laws of Washington that I copied and pasted below.

If your total-loss claim is a first-party claim, then, to adapt my first-party model letters to the laws of your state, you need to know or need to find or need to ask an attorney the answers to these sets of questions.

To adapt my polite first‑party model letter to the laws of your state, you need to know or need to find or need to ask an attorney the answer to this question.

To adapt my muscular first‑party model letter to the laws of your state, you need to know or need to find or need to ask an attorney the answers to these questions.

Keep an eye out for paragraphs of the law that may prove useful to you if your automobile insurance company does not agree to the valuation amount for your total-loss vehicle that you propose in your letter.

The legislators of a few states give rights to first-party claimants that legislators of other states take away from first-party claimants.

Are your state legislators right givers?

Or right takers?

If your total-loss claim is a third-party claim, then, to adapt my third-party model letters to the laws of your state, you need to know or need to find or need to ask an attorney the answers to these sets of questions.

To adapt my polite third‑party model letter to the laws of your state, you need to know or need to find or need to ask an attorney the answer to this question.

To adapt my muscular third‑party model letter to the laws of your state, you need to know or need to find or need to ask an attorney the answers to these questions.

Keep an eye out for paragraphs of the law that may prove useful to you if the automobile insurance company does not agree to the valuation amount that you propose in your letter for your total-loss vehicle.

Questions about the laws of your state to which the answers may prove useful to you if you end up suing the at-fault driver and his or her automobile insurance company for the money that the at-fault driver’s automobile insurance company cheated you out of.

If it’s more work than you wish to do to vet and edit your draft letter against Washington’s laws, then let the attorney with whom you meet vet and edit the letter for you.

Help me create model letters tailored to the laws of every state.

Send me a few dollars.

The laws of Washington that regulate how automobile insurance companies that do business in Washington are required to value total-loss vehicles and settle total-loss claims.

My Comments

Washington Regulations

Washington Administrative Code

Title 284 - Insurance Commissioner, Office of the

Chapter 284-30 - Trade practices

THE UNFAIR CLAIMS SETTLEMENT PRACTICES REGULATION

“Jerry, looks to me like the legislators of some states are pimping us out to automobile insurance companies.”

Get your draft document into shape for an attorney to review it.

Find an attorney who is knowledgeable about automobile insurance total-loss property damage claims.

See if an attorney in your county advertises his or her expertise here on wasyourcartotaledorstolen.com.

Make an appointment with the attorney.

Email your draft letter and supporting documents to the attorney.

Meet with the attorney.

Email your letter and its supporting documents to the automobile insurance company.

If your letter and supporting documents get you a fair valuation of your total-loss vehicle, then great!

Congratulations!

High fives!

You rule!

If your letter did not get you a fair valuation of your total-loss vehicle, then, if you have a right of recourse, exercise your right of recourse.

If you do not have a right of recourse or if exercising your right of recourse did not get you a fair valuation of your total-loss vehicle, then you may want to initiate a small-claims lawsuit or even a large-claims lawsuit.

To make your draft letter
to the automobile insurance company
more consistent
with the laws of Washington,
vet and edit your draft letter
against the laws of Washington
that I copied and pasted below.

If your total-loss claim
is a first-party claim,
then, to adapt
my first-party model letters
to the laws of your state,
you need to know or need to find
or need to ask an attorney
the answers to these sets of questions.

To adapt
my polite first‑party model letter
to the laws of your state,
you need to know or need to find
or need to ask an attorney
the answer to this question.

To adapt
my muscular first‑party model letter
to the laws of your state,
you need to know or need to find
or need to ask an attorney
the answers to these questions.

Keep an eye out
for paragraphs of the law
that may prove useful to you
if your automobile insurance company
does not agree to the valuation amount
for your total-loss vehicle
that you propose in your letter.

The legislators of a few states
give rights to first-party claimants
that legislators of other states
take away from first-party claimants.

If your total-loss claim
is a third-party claim,
then, to adapt
my third-party model letters
to the laws of your state,
you need to know or need to find
or need to ask an attorney
the answers to these sets of questions.

To adapt
my polite third‑party model letter
to the laws of your state,
you need to know or need to find
or need to ask an attorney
the answer to this question.

To adapt
my muscular third‑party model letter
to the laws of your state,
you need to know or need to find
or need to ask an attorney
the answers to these questions.

Keep an eye out
for paragraphs of the law
that may prove useful to you
if the automobile insurance company
does not agree to the valuation amount
that you propose in your letter
for your total-loss vehicle.

Questions about the laws of your state
to which the answers
may prove useful to you
if you end up suing
the at-fault driver and his or her
automobile insurance company
for the money
that the at-fault driver’s
automobile insurance company
cheated you out of.

If it’s more work
than you wish to do
to vet and edit your draft letter
against Washington’s laws,
then let the attorney
with whom you meet
vet and edit the letter for you.

Help me create model letters
tailored to the laws of every state.

The laws of Washington that regulate
how automobile insurance companies
that do business in Washington
are required
to value total-loss vehicles
and settle total-loss claims.

“Jerry, looks to me like
the legislators of some states
are pimping us out
to automobile insurance companies.”

Get your draft document into shape
for an attorney to review it.

Find an attorney
who is knowledgeable
about automobile insurance
total-loss property damage claims.

See if an attorney in your county
advertises his or her expertise here
on wasyourcartotaledorstolen.com.

Email your draft letter
and supporting documents
to the attorney.

Email your letter
and its supporting documents
to the automobile insurance company.

If your letter and supporting documents
get you a fair valuation
of your total-loss vehicle,
then great!

If your letter did not get you
a fair valuation
of your total-loss vehicle, then,
if you have a right of recourse,
exercise your right of recourse.

If you do not have a right of recourse
or if exercising your right of recourse
did not get you a fair valuation
of your total-loss vehicle,
then you may want to initiate
a small-claims lawsuit
or even a large-claims lawsuit.