What are your rights after an accident and your car has been declared a ‘total loss’? The Frequently Asked Questions on the Washington State Insurance Commissioners site has a good summary answer for this question:

13. They’ve declared my vehicle a total loss but won’t pay me enough to replace it. Is that legal? The company owes you the actual cash value of a comparable vehicle in your local area. You can determine this amount by using dealer quotes and/or newspaper ads or other auto sales publications, as long as the vehicle being sold is comparable to yours in mileage, condition, options, etc. In addition they will pay you sales tax on the value of your vehicle, and pay the unused portion of your registration fees. You may have the option of keeping your car (called - retaining the salvage). If you do, the company will subtract the value of the salvage from the final settlement, as you are keeping the damaged car.

An even better answer is found on the Insurance Commissioner’s web site which has a great brochure you can print called “Total Loss”. It summarizes the laws listed below in a ‘human-readable’ format rather than lawyer-ese.

Revised Code of Washington re Accidents and Insurance:

• 284-30-3901 - Definitions for settlement of vehicle claims.
• 284-30-3902 - When my vehicle is repairable, what can I expect from the insurer?
• 284-30-3903 - Can I get my vehicle repaired at a shop of my choice?
• 284-30-3904 - Will my insurer pursue collection of my deductible?
• 284-30-3905 - If my insurer collects my deductible back, will I recover the full amount of my deductible?
• 284-30-3906 - If another party is responsible for my vehicle damage, can that party’s insurer refuse to settle my vehicle damage and force me to use my own collision coverage?
• 284-30-3907 - How can my insurer settle my vehicle total loss claim?
• 284-30-3908 - Are there factors that may adjust my settlement?
• 284-30-3909 - If my vehicle is determined to be a total loss, can I keep it?
• 284-30-3910 - Can the insurer move my vehicle prior to settlement of the claim?
• 284-30-3911 - What information must be included in the insurer’s valuation report?
• 284-30-3912 - What if I, as an insured, accept the settlement based on my insurer’s valuation and cannot find a comparable vehicle within a reasonable distance of my vehicle’s principally garaged area?
• 284-30-3913 - What must the insurer do prior to the denial of storage and towing costs?
• 284-30-3914 - When I am dealing with someone else’s insurer, what are my rights regarding a rental vehicle?
• 284-30-3915 - What if the other person’s insurer offers a flat rental amount per day, week, or month?
• 284-30-3916 - In a total loss situation, what happens if I have a loan or lease on my vehicle and the outstanding balance exceeds the actual cash value of my vehicle?

According to the Professional Insurance Agents (PIA) Association January 22, 2007 newsletter the Supreme Court will be looking into what insurance companies must do when they charge a consumer more based on the consumers credit history.

The credit scoring controversy has been debated in state legislatures for years and last November Oregonians had a chance to say how they felt about the practice at the ballot box and overwhelmingly answered that it was okay.

Now the highest court in the land — the U.S. Supreme Court — will have a say.

Some justices wondered aloud in last week’s session about the practicality of insurers notifying consumers when a credit check turns into a higher premium. The court is hearing an appeal sent their way by the 9th U.S. Court of Appeals in San Francisco. That court said consumers must be notified and that the two insurers, Safeco and GEICO, violated the Fair Credit Reporting Act by not telling their customers that they were not receiving the best rate available and why.

Commenting on Safeco Insurance verses Burr and the GEICO case, Justice Stephen Breyer said, “If the court adopts the consumers’ argument, there will be tens of millions of notices being sent out. It will have the same effect as consumers receiving privacy notices. It will become meaningless and they will all wind up in the waste basket.”

Safeco’s representative Maureen Mahoney told the high court that credit scoring is only one of 15 criteria used to determine whether a customer’s rates are raised. And she argued if the court upholds the 9th circuit court’s decision each consumer impacted is entitled to receive $1000 — a cost that could make Safeco and GEICO shell out billions of dollars.

The Legislative Agenda put out by the Office of Insurance Commissioner indicates that it will it will introduce legislation this week to reform and modernize agent, broker, and adjuster license processing and administration. The proposal, as outlined in
House Bill 1533 and Senate Bill 5715, are designed to promote:

• Simplification and streamlining of the licensing process, and
• Reciprocity and uniformity with other states’ insurance licensing laws.