A local teen backed into our 530i, and now the driver's door needs to be replaced. The teen's insurance claims adjuster wrote up a low-ball estimate to repair the damage, specifying that our body shop replace our door with a used one. Have any advice on how to persuade Geico to pay for a new, OEM door instead?
Their estimator is literally pointless. You get to specify where repairs are made, period. Go to the shop you like, have them write up an estimate, and submit to the other party. They have to pay to have it fixed, period.
Shouldn't your claims adjustor be writing the claim, and then getting it from their insurance?
Javelin, a little harsh there. Having an attitude like that will make it much more difficult for the OP.
They are paying to have it fixed, with a used door. You won't get GEICO to pay for an OEM door.
Nothing wrong with a decent used door. They have to get your car back to as close to it's pre accident condition as possible. Putting a used door from your model year or newer does that. If a car gets hit on the left, the doors on the right are perfectly fine, why not use them? They were made by BMW, and if you shop is any good at all, they will make sure the door is good quality before putting it on.
In fact, I think I might actually prefer a used door to a new one. The reason is that a used door had it's original paint process done at the factory, and no shop will be able to improve on that, so when they paint whatever door you get, the used door has the OEM finish as a base layer, which will give extra rust protection for the future.
We just had to have the L side driver's door and fender replaced on Chrissy's car after a deer hit me. The replacement door was used, and it looks, fits, and operates perfectly. What's the problem?
I'm with Sonic on this.
Did you have a new door on the car before the accident?
Why should the insurance company put it in BETTER condition than before the accident? That's not their job.
Not harsh at all. Have you ever had to deal with the scum-suckers (insurance in general, and the gecko in particular). Their "repair" ended up totalling my vehicle and requiring a buyback.
The laws are there for a reason. Used does not equal OEM new, period. The OP needs to fight for his rights instead of rolling over, which is what the scum-suckers want you to do.
Option 2, run it through your own insurance and let them fight the other insurance company (assuming you have full coverage). You'll have to pay your deductible but once they settle with the other company they will reimburse you.
But I gotta agree with Sonic, I'd much rather a good used OEM door than aftermarket parts (I know you didnt mention aftermarket at all, just saying OEM New > OEM Used > Aftermarket junk). A new door would be nice but depending on the age of the vehicle new OEM parts aren't always easy to get.
You will also find that after a car is 2 years old, most ins. companies will start specifying used parts and that's spelled out in the policy you signed. I too have no problem with that as long as it's fixed properly and looks good. After the great State Farm aftermarket parts debacle of a few years ago you will also find that the insurance company will guarantee used parts in writing as long as you own the car.
In fact, on cars like, say, an MGB the replacement fenders sold now do not have the same curves and etc unless you get the big $$ British Motor Heritage pieces. It is not easy to spot before it's painted etc, but once installed it is most definitely visible. BTDT.
Curmudgeon wrote: You will also find that after a car is 2 years old, most ins. companies will start specifying used parts and that's spelled out in the policy you signed.
Not that I've made many claims over the years, but USAA has always specified new, OEM pieces for all repairs. They essentially cut me a check for the price the dealer charges for the OEM parts and labor, and then I can do whatever I want with it - buy the OEM stuff, buy used stuff, buy aftermarket stuff, whatever.
They did this with my '92 Accord (in 2002 or so) - front bumper and airbag stuff, as well as some other cars, including 2 stereos getting stolen (old stereos, they gave me "price for comparable current model).
You absolutely have the right to demand new parts. If you think new parts are better, than you decide what goes on there. As for the fact that the door that was totalled was technically used anyway doesn't make up for the fact that your car is now worth less because some donkey ran into you.
Javelin wrote: Not harsh at all. Have you ever had to deal with the scum-suckers (insurance in general, and the gecko in particular). Their "repair" ended up totalling my vehicle and requiring a buyback. The laws are there for a reason. Used does not equal OEM new, period. The OP needs to fight for his rights instead of rolling over, which is what the scum-suckers want you to do.
You can have your piss-poor attitude about insurance, but you have NO CLUE what you are talking about.
There are no "rights" to prevent a used door from going on a new car. There's nothing wrong with a used door. Most shops prefer them anyway, because a new door comes completely empty, and the tech has to 'build' the door and make sure all the parts work, window rolls up and down correctly, etc. The used door 98% of the time will work perfectly when it's installed.
I don't get this aversion to used parts, particularly on a "grassroots" message board. If you were paying for it yourself, you'd never buy a new door (which on that car is probably $1000 or more).
USAA is a unique company. They don't insure just anyone and their business model is very different from most civilian insurers. They're a good company, but they are not a good example to use for how things are done in the industry. If you're insured with them, good for you. They are excellent.
I'm having my Friday evening beer so I should probably stop now before I say something I'll regret.
I'm with the majority. Used door is a perfectly acceptable answer to this question.
Because used parts hide stuff, like previously-repaired crash damage, rust, and incompatible parts. You can claim stuff all you want, but the OP does have the right to declare whether or not he will accept new OEM or used parts. I've been there, done that, drove the rental for 3 months, had to have my truck inspected and declared "junk", dealt with a branded title, fought the scum-suckers, and won, okay?
If the OP is okay with a used door (and really, it comes down to where the used parts are coming from, if they're really the exact same make/model/trim, and the extent of the damage), then that's okay. But if he wants new OEM, he can demand that and win, no matter the insurance company, case closed.
And either way the tech has to swap out windows (if tinted, VIN-matched, or otherwise special), door cards, locks, and whatnot anyways. Not to mention 95% of the time they have to re-spray it anyways, so there really isn't much of a reason to accept used.
Look, we can put $50 junkyard mis-matched crap on our beaters. This is a 10-year old BMW that was mint to start with and is the OP's family car. I may throw used parts on my 944 if it gets hit, but you better bet your beer that the Mazda5 is getting genuine Mazda parts, new, period.
In reply to ddavidv:
That response is just a bit harsh 
Depending on the state, he does have the "right" to specify a new door.
In Texas- "CHOICE OF REPAIR SHOP AND REPLACEMENT PARTS. You have the right BRPA 2005 to choose the repair shop and replacement parts for your vehicle. An insurance company may not specify the brand, type, kind, age, vendor, supplier, or condition of parts or products used to repair your automobile. "
I also have a "piss-poor" attitude towards insurance companies. Their number one priority is to save money. That's a good business model for profit, but it also means that your satisfaction of the repair is not high on thier list of concerns. I am currently in a legal case against an insurance company because of their claim denial. Even though the police report lists the other driver at fault, they still deny it. Why? Because their actuaries tell them it makes more sense to screw as many people as possible because it's cheaper. Will they loose 5 minutes after we walk into court? Hell yes. But if 99 out of 100 people walk away because it isn't worth thier time, then they win.
All that being said, if the insurance company is standing behind thier policy and trying to make it right, I'm willing to compromise on used parts. if the insurance company is fighting you tooth and nail, then I will wring every berkeleying dollar I can out of them.
Nothing wrong with a used door, PROVIDED you are using a "trusted to you" body shop.
There's always the issue of changing colors when painting a used door. That normally requires stripping and makes it more expensive than a new door.
In Texas you can demand new.
He hit you, you are using HIS insurance company. They have to make you whole. You have the right to demand it be as good as OEM. Also don't forget to file for (hmmm brain fart) the reduced value in your car due to it being damaged.
It's not that hard to prove or get paid for.
Interesting thread. I am no fan of insurance companies as their primary concern is making and saving money. Conversely I see nothing wrong with a good quality used door. I think the insured should have the option of choice, new or used as both sides have valid points.
Don't classic/collector car insurance companies have to use used parts as many old cars don't have new parts available? Any part even one in rough shape can be refurbished to be as good as or better than new by a good repair man.
In reply to Javelin AND ddavidv:
I'm not an insurance guy, bet I'd bet you are both incorrect.
It would not shock me a bit if SOME states have a law that gives the "victim" the right to demand new parts, but I truly doubt all states have such a law.
I got new parts and made a diminished value claim on an accident my wife was in that was the other person's fault.
I live in NC and can do that, though. Other states have different rules.
USAA is also a not for profit insurance company, which is why they are different from Geico.
If you do have to accept used parts, DEMAND to inspect them before they are put on the car. That way you know they're not putting a skim of bondo over the rust and calling it a day.
Seems like some strong opinions on the topic.
Depending on the laws of the state you may be able to push for new parts, but I wouldn't be surprised if the insurance co. deducted for "betterment" to keep their cost in check. Betterment can be fought, but how much is your time worth?
Regarding shop selection and used parts, many times if you use a shop on the insurance co list then the insurance company guarantees the work for as long as you own the car, not the individual shop. Not something I've had to test though to see how much they will stand behind it.
jstand wrote: Regarding shop selection and used parts, many times if you use a shop on the insurance co list then the insurance company guarantees the work for as long as you own the car, not the individual shop. Not something I've had to test though to see how much they will stand behind it.
In my experience, it was not at all. Until the lawyer stepped in. And this was immediately after repair, not years down the road. "Preferred" shops are scam.
Yes, it may take getting a lawyer involved, but at least you have the insurance company as well as the shop to go after.
If you don't go with a "preferred" shop, you let the insurance company off the hook, and assume all responsibility for determining if the shop is qualified.
Unless you have a shop you have sufficient experience with, I'd go with the "preferred" just to keep the insurance company on the hook.
You should still check out the shop and decide if you were paying for the repair yourself, would you choose them? If not, then move on to the next one and check them out.
Last time I had to have a door replaced (on my BMW 540), the insurance company (Geico) wrote the repair order for a new door. It was somewhere approaching 4 figures. Also, that door had a dead regulator (not from the accident) so I was going to have to replace that as well, so we were now closer to $1200. I bought a matching door (so no jam work needed) from a BMW yard for $250, and it had a working regulator in it. Used the money saved to put an M5 front end on it and have the whole car resprayed (quote was for only half the car).
Some of your guys attitude about insurance is laughable.
"I'm pissed about a contract I voluntarily entered and didn't understand, so yeah its their fault."
Wow.
it's not about whether you want or get a new or used door. That's up to you.
what it IS about is that his insurance should be paying for the COST of a new, OEM door and all associated install, paint, etc.
If you decide to put a JY door on the car for 50 bucks, the difference in value is yours in cash. At least that's how it works in my experience.
You'll need to log in to post.
