5. What about Internet based Evaluations of my loss in value?

First of all, the most important and easily overlooked aspect of performing a proper and thorough Diminished Value Assessment is the manner and thoroughness of the actual repairs performed. This is why Internet based evaluations without actual vehicle inspections are not considered to be accurate or recommended by respected industry professionals or likely to be admissible as evidence if needed. A comprehensive and accurate Diminished Value inspection will provide a two or three-dimensional approach whereas the site-unseen Internet valuations are merely one dimensional.
Secondly, these sight-unseen Internet valuations do not provide an unbiased valuation of the vehicle’s pre-loss condition which is one of the fundamental basics required to perform an accurate diminished value assessment. It would compare to your purchasing a vehicle sight un-seen.

These Internet based reports provide only an estimated valuation of the Inherent Loss in Value and provides no source to evaluate the manner, thoroughness or quality of the performed repairs and parts nor any further loss in value resulting from same.

Without physically inspecting the vehicle it would be impossible to evaluate the performance of both the insurer (Insurance Related Diminished Value) and/or repairer (Repair Related Diminished Value) in the repair of the vehicle, and one would likely not receive full compensation for their full remaining loss.

Thirdly, many of these Internet Diminished Valuation services utilize what is known as the “Georgia” or “17C Formula”. This formula was developed by insurers and originally adopted by the State Of Georgia as one means of attaining a value after Georgia adopted the premise that Diminished Value could be claimed by first party insured’s. However, as this formula was contested by consumer advocates the state agreed that the formula was not accurate and they promptly divested themselves from endorsing the formula. Many insurers continue to attempt to utilize this formula in their settlement offers despite the State Of Georgia’s change in position. While Internet based DV assessments may be less costly, you may not get the full scope of your damage and repair thus one may lose significantly more than one might save.

More importantly, there is no physical inspection of the repaired vehicle to determine if serious safety related issues may be present and remain in need of correction.

Consider the fact that during the manufacture of a vehicle there is an average of 600 visual inspections during the manufacturing process.  Wouldn’t it make sense that after re-construction from accident related damages that at least one visual inspection would be prudent?

Category: DV FAQ

← Faqs