Midwest News

Ind. 'Diminished Value' Class-Action Case Could Set Dangerous Precedent, Insurers Argue

Indiana Supreme Court justices should carefully consider the impact that a class-action case regarding compensation for the diminished value of a vehicle could have on numerous insurance policies and premiums—and ultimately reject the lawsuit, according to an amicus brief filed this month by a coalition of insurance industry lobbyists.

Advertisement

In Christina Allgood v. Meridian Security Insurance Co., the Court of Appeals held that Meridian's auto insurance policy requires Meridian to pay not only the cost of repairs, but also an additional amount for the "diminished value" that damaged vehicles allegedly may suffer even after being completely and properly repaired.

However, insurers argue that Meridian's policy language explicitly limits its liability to either the vehicle's actual cash value or the amount necessary to repair or replace the vehicle's damaged parts with repair parts of like kind and quality, whichever is less.

The Des Plaines, Ill.-based Property Casualty Insurers Association of America, in conjunction with the Insurance Institute of Indiana and other industry trade groups, filed an amicus brief in support of Meridian because the Court of Appeals' decision "not only creates unnecessary, cumbersome new law in Indiana, but also contradicts the strong national trend rejecting 'diminished value' claims," according to the brief.

Diminished value is the difference between the market value of a car before it has been in a collision and its value after it has been repaired.

"Only 10 states recognize the concept of diminished value, and Indiana shouldn't take that route," said Robert Hurns, PCI counsel and legislative database manager, in a statement. "There is an overwhelming trend reflected in recent court decisions around the nation that diminished value is not recoverable under policies limiting insurer liability to the cost of repairs. In the past three years, six state supreme courts have rejected coverage for 'diminished value,' and the Indiana Supreme Court should do the same."

Meridian's clear policy language regarding insurer's liability in repairing damaged vehicles is also very similar to many other carriers' auto policies. Therefore, the court's decision is likely to have a far-reaching impact on insurers who offer auto coverage in Indiana and on the premiums they charge to policyholders, Hurns said.

"This case could set dangerous precedent by conceivably forcing insurers to pay diminished value damages for past claims even though they have not received premiums to account for such payments," Hurns said.

Comments? Click here to post a comment about this article

Subject Posted By Posted On
my dv experience Jeff
Sep 26, 2004, 10:24 pm
response to "KOB" Patrick Yurek
Sep 15, 2004, 9:08 am
RE: Diminished Value Patrick Yurek
Sep 15, 2004, 9:01 am
rchorak go back to school Warren
Sep 15, 2004, 8:01 am
RE: RE: RE: Indemnity Consumer
Sep 14, 2004, 9:50 pm
This shouldn't be a kangaroo court decision Smitty
Sep 14, 2004, 4:42 pm
RE: When is the value diminished KOB
Sep 14, 2004, 4:33 pm
RE: Indemnity Duce
Sep 14, 2004, 3:49 pm
RE: Indemnity Bob Bisailon
Sep 14, 2004, 3:27 pm
RE: RE: Indemnity Matt
Sep 14, 2004, 3:24 pm
RE: Indemnity Another Mark
Sep 14, 2004, 3:09 pm
Indemnity rchorak
Sep 14, 2004, 2:43 pm
Diminished Value Mark
Sep 14, 2004, 2:20 pm