Diminished Value of Real Estate

Here’s a big development in the area of diminished value law. A unanimous Georgia Supreme court held that property insurers have to pay diminished value damages to their policyholders when real estate is damaged. Georgia has been a leader to some degree in the area of diminished value claims. In Georgia, unlike most other states, an auto policyholder can make a claim against his own insurer for lost value of a vehicle after it has been in an accident. Most other states only allow a claim for lost value against the party who caused the accident. If the accident is a one car collision, or if the policyholder is the one at fault, these other states don’t permit a recovery of money. The reason this Georgia Supreme court decision is important, is that the reasoning behind the diminished value argument in Georgia has been extended to real estate by the Supreme Court of Georgia. As Georgia has been a leader in this area, it’s not too hard to imagine that other states may follow their lead. Furthermore, it reinforces that argument in other states that loss of value from damage to real estate is a legitimate claim. Here’s a link to an article that discusses this case. http://www.ajc.com/news/ruling-a-big-deal-1463884.html (right click your mouse and choose” open hyperlink, and if the article doesn’t open up right away, try refreshing the page)

Back to the Acura MDX diminution of value case. I finally got through to the adjuster. She stubbornly refused to raise her offer and asked if I had an appraisal by a certified appraiser. This is an important point. She did not know that a certified appraisal is not necessary for a lot of diminished value or property damage claims. If you have a sale or a trade-in, that is proof of value just as much as a certified appraisal. In court, an insurance company lawyer could probably attack the sale or trade-in in court for any number of reasons, but that doesn’t make it invalid. Similarly, an appraisal can be attacked. No proof is beyond some criticism. But for smaller to mid-sized claims, an appraisal is not needed. There are other forms of proof you can use such as dealer estimates, wholesale records, Blue book or NADA records, offers to buy or trade that are not completed, actual sales and trades. In any event she wasn’t persuaded, so you’ll hear from me about the outcome of the lawsuit.

This week’s case holds a lesson for everyone. It involves my client, an owner of a 2012 Land Rover with 2000 miles on it. He was traveling on a suburban road within the speed limit when another car going in the opposite direction tried to make a left had turn in front of him. Unfortunately, the other car was a late model Corvette and it was totaled. The Corvette took full responsibility. My client did what many of my clients do. He had it towed, fixed and then went to have an estimate done, to see how much he could get if he traded it in for a new one. The estimate came back with a loss of value of $15,000.00. His car was on carfax. Then my client contacted the insurance company directly to demand a settlement, and he sent them the estimate he got of $15,000.00. The insurance company responds by sending him their “appraisal” that says the diminished value claims are too speculative to pay out, and the appraiser goes on to recommend that no payment is made to my client. The insurance company gives this to my client, and despite the recommendation of their appraiser, they offer him just over $1,000. Of course, the insurance company appraiser never inspected the Range Rover and never even asked to see it. He just gave an opinion that auto diminished value claims should not be paid. Naturally, the client called me soon after that. This is not unusual. The at-fault insurance company wants to limit their payouts, so they have a list of appraisers who will provide them with a favorable report to justify minimal payouts. Many people don’t want to fight about it, so they’ll take whatever is offered. This is true in personal injury cases too, where insurance companies will call a victim soon after the accident, and offer some minimal payout and have the victim sign a release giving up any future claims. So, beware. Just because an insurance company says you’re not entitled to be paid, don’t take it as necessarily true. I’ll follow up on this case as it progresses, as it’s early in the process.

Here’s a new diminished value case that just came in and it’s troubling because there may be no good solution. The owner is a woman who has a 2012 Acura. She took it to a car wash, and got out so the attendant could drive it into the car wash. After the attendant got the front tire into the track that pushes the car through the car wash, he got out and the car lurched forward into the car in front, damaging her front bumper. He probably forgot to put in neutral. No one called the police and the car wash paid to repair the bumper, which totaled under $700. Unfortunately, the repairs were not done well so she has to take it to another place to do it to her liking. The problem is that the damage is so small, it would be tough to prove a lot of lost value, but if the repair shop reports it to carfax, then she’s going to pay a lot when it comes time to trade it in or sell it. The car fax alone probably diminishes the value of the car, even if the repairs are done right. And the claim for diminished auto value would be against the car wash, or their business insurance carrier, who have no experience in this area. They probably wouldn’t offer anything. So, she’s got a real problem, but I don’t see any good solution.