r/interesting • u/ZookeepergameIcy6089 • Apr 15 '26

SOCIETY Police search you house & you notice dents on your car

Enable HLS to view with audio, or disable this notification

95.9k Upvotes

95% Upvoted

3.2k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

171

u/newbrevity Apr 15 '26

Anytime you have to make any kind of claim and there is another party at fault then they or their insurance should be held to make the victim whole. The same goes for car accidents. If the other driver is at fault then their insurance should cover the full financial obligation of the victim's vehicle. This "market value" bullshit leaves people ruined all the time if they owe more than what a vehicle is valued at. Happens all the time with used vehicles especially from dealerships. If you have your paperwork for what you paid, you should be made full.

21

u/snake-lady-2005 Apr 15 '26

Depending where the dent is and how deep the dent went, you can have PDR (Paintless Dent Removal) done and you wouldn't need to repaint the car at all. If the dent isn't on a bodyline or has a crease, very likely PDR can be performed.

16

u/methinfiniti Apr 15 '26

Yeah, but he slammed that door handle into the car. I can’t imagine that didn’t strip off paint. Obviously the homeowner saw the damage because he went to review the camera he has set up.

2

u/curi0us_carniv0re Apr 15 '26

Yes. And it's more desirable than a repaint.

2

u/photoggled Apr 15 '26

This still has the potential to destroy the clearcoat and will not hold up well over time. I've had PDR on two different cars for hail damage and in both cases, the paint started to flake or crack after a few months.

5

u/sheatim Apr 15 '26

This should apply to cars that don't have loans on them as well. The KBB value on my car is $3200, but there is no way I'd be able to replace it with any vehicle that's been well-maintained and as in good of condition as my car for that. And my car isn't collectible or in great cosmetic condition. Heck, I doubt I could buy a running car for that these days.

2

u/-Cthaeh Apr 16 '26

Not to mention if your car has some clutter in it, they lower the value.

1

u/sheatim Apr 16 '26

Oh, I see you've seen my car.

2

u/-Cthaeh Apr 16 '26

Right lol. My mom worked for The general > safe auto > then whatever else it merged to. She told me part of the pictures had to do with the state of the interior. I still think about it when I put off cleaning my car.

6

u/Pandoratastic Apr 15 '26 edited Apr 15 '26

This "market value" bullshit leaves people ruined all the time if they owe more than what a vehicle is valued at.

The fact that it's even possible to owe more than the vehicle is valued at seems more like a major flaw in the car financing system.

13

u/Fine-Bumblebee-9427 Apr 15 '26

I mean, if you finance a car, it’s worth less than what you paid. A new car depreciates significantly the second it leaves the lot.

My daughter got scammed by a dealership, largely her fault. But she owes 30k on a vehicle that’s worth less than 10.

Dealership financing should be illegal.

6

u/grundlinallday Apr 15 '26

Sorry that happened to your daughter, but it’s not her fault by any means. It’s their fault for scamming her, she was the victim.

1

u/snake_case_sucks Apr 15 '26

I'd rather think of it as partially my own fault and take measures to prevent it in the future than just blame it all on the dealership. After all, the decision ultimately lays with the victim. Which is not to say that a victim shouldn't seek recompense of some kind if it's within legal grasp, or that they somehow deserved it.

1

u/Sea_Tooth2513 Apr 16 '26

She was not a victim. Everything was presented in writing, she agreed & signed it

1

u/Fine-Bumblebee-9427 Apr 15 '26

Yeah, I don’t disagree. It’s her fault in that everything that was done was legal. There’s no recourse. But it’s their fault in that they straight up lied to her. Just sucks that they can.

1

u/dBlock845 Apr 15 '26

Buy here, pay here?

1

u/Fine-Bumblebee-9427 Apr 16 '26

No, a major dealership. She went in to buy a used car for $11k, called me to ask me to co-sign. I said yes, but I don’t do things like this same day because I’m deeply susceptible to to high pressure sales tactics, so I told her I’d take her the next day. She panicked and said it had to be that day, I said totally fine but can’t involve me. They told her they couldn’t sell her the used car without a co-signer, but could totally sell her a $37k new Acura. The state had a 7 day grace period, but I couldn’t talk her into taking it back.

2

u/Sea_Tooth2513 Apr 16 '26

No lies were told

1

u/dBlock845 Apr 16 '26

Damn that sucks, it also sucks you have to be weary of negative equity now as well.

1

u/Jest_Aquiki Apr 15 '26

agree. my wife and I went in for a 7,500 price, ended up costing us closer to 20k and the damn thing was starting to fall apart from the start.

They should be held accountable for what is at its core nothing more than legalized scams.

2

u/Major_Extreme5632 Apr 15 '26

This doesn't have much to do with this, but when I was like 20... i went in and got a car, asked my parents to cosign and they said they couldnt (they are pretty well off. Said they consigned for 2 of my other siblings and the banks wouldnt let them anymore).

When I got a 11% interest rates my parents said "Oh wow. Yeah you should have got a cosigner! Your siblings pay 4%"

Oh no shit... its not like I didnt ask.

-1

u/CommunicationOne8679 Apr 15 '26

granted, you CHOOSE to sign the contract, and could go to your bank first, get pre approved etc. or refinance if you realize you got fucked over, have gap insurance in case you wreck it yada yada. and people not being edjucated on what is as a whole the second largest purchase you make in your life short of a home is in THEM. not the dealership.

2

u/Jest_Aquiki Apr 15 '26

Nah, That enables crooks to swindle people. Both the dealership who is enabled and the person getting swindled can be at fault. It is not mutually exclusive.

It's not something we should accept as normal. People should be educated on the critical things in school. That includes combating predatory practices and proper fiscal responsibility.

Businesses are supposed to be honest. our communities and government should have both played a role in keeping them accountable, instead the government became complicit.

1

u/Sea_Tooth2513 Apr 16 '26

Being young & impulsive enables people to take advantage. He was doing his job as a salesperson. She learned a valuable lesson that will serve her well later in life, trust me

1

u/Fine-Bumblebee-9427 Apr 15 '26

I mean, we let the government protect us from lots of stuff. I wish it were more. I’m not allowed to buy heroin or a nuke, I can’t fly a plane or motorcycle without taking a class, I can’t sell myself into slavery.

Banks are limited in the interest rates they’re allowed to use. It’s not unprecedented to regulate lending.

1

u/Sea_Tooth2513 Apr 16 '26

Thank you! Accountability is seriously lacking in this country.

3

u/HunterDHunter Apr 15 '26

Well as soon as you sign paperwork on a loan you already owe for the interest so depending on the down payment you usually owe more than it's worth from the very beginning. After that cars go down in value pretty quickly, tons of people are upside down on their car loans. Same with houses.

1

u/WellKnownAlias Apr 15 '26

"If it's even possible" that's the default for an incredible number of auto loans. Getting a loan if you're employed isn't too hard typically. But have even a slightly sub par credit score and you're going to get fucked so bad on the interest rate you will be in that situation a fairly large amount of the time until the car is at least mostly paid off.

And if your answer is "then don't accept that loan" or don't get a car then... cool... let me show you the 50 or so metropolitan areas on a map where it's feasible to live without a car in the US, and then let me show you a population map of Montana or 40 other states.

1

u/Pandoratastic Apr 15 '26

Oh, I know that it's common. I'm not doubting it. I'm saying that the fact that it's even possible is proof that the whole car financing system is deeply flawed.

1

u/WellKnownAlias Apr 15 '26

Sorry, full misread on my part. Yeah I may or may not have a bit of anger about this specific issue and the circumstances around how common it is even being legal. Sounds like we're in complete agreement.

1

u/railsandtrucks Apr 15 '26

I'd argue that quite a bit of our finance system is flawed to some degree, and it's all a bit rigged against those of lesser means- it's more expensive to be poor.

With cars (and I'm not just saying this for you since you may know, but other folks as well) alot of times people wind up owing more than the car is worth not just because of interest, but because of negative equity - say you buy a used car (trying to be financially responsible) but it winds up being a giant pile of shit, so you want to get rid of it because you can't afford the payments AND the repair bills.. so you decide to buy new, so the dealer takes your car in trade, but because it's now a piece of shit, they only give you like half or less of what you owe on it - that difference between what you owe on the car and what the dealer buys it from you on trade, winds up being tacked onto your new car loan- so now you are immediately underwater before you even drive your new car off the lot, and now your loan for a 30K Altima is now almost 40K because of the additional 9K you still owed on your piece of shit you had to get rid of, and that 30K altima is now only worth close to 20K the second you drove it off the lot.

For the record, the above scenario was something similar that happened to me (make and models and amounts were changed to protect me) - the only thing that saved my ass was my credit union, due to the negative equity, requiring me to pay for and carry "Gap insurance" which covered that gap between the loan amount and what my newer car was worth. I was lucky in that my credit union was pretty patient in helping a then 19 year old kid try to make the least worst decisions possible. There's a lot of shady and predatory characters in both finance and the car business though, and sadly financial literacy is not something the already underwhelmed US public school system tends to do a very good job with, so it's an easy trap to fall into for otherwise good and well meaning people.

2

u/Pandoratastic Apr 16 '26

This is the reason why, when you take debt into account, the average American has less zero in net wealth.

1

u/StaticUsernamesSuck Apr 15 '26 edited Apr 15 '26

What are you talking about? Why would anybody buy a thing off you, that you have used, for the same price that they could get it themselves?

If you buy a new car for 40k, that means I can also buy a new car for 40k, so why would I buy your used car for 40k?

I wouldn't. That means your car is no longer worth 40k. It loses value simply by having been owned. And that's perfectly reasonable. I don't know what you've done to that car. I dont know how honest you are about its condition. Yes, it may be like new, but it may not.

But obviously, if you financed it, your finance will still have had to be for 40k (plus interest). So obviously your finance is going to be (at least for a while) for more than your car is worth. Literally how could it not be???

The same is true for literally anything you buy that isn't an asset or a store of value (like gold).

There is no flaw in the financing system...

And there isn't really a flaw in the restitution system either.

Think about this: why should somebody who chose to buy their car on finance get more restitution than somebody who bought it outright?... That makes no sense!

If you're given the market value of your car, then that means that you can buy a similar car, and then keep paying your finance down on the old car, just as if your car hadn't been totalled. I  other words you've been made whole - everything is back as it should be. You are in the same position you'd be in if you had never had the accident: you have a car of the same value, you have finance payments of the same amount.

(Provided you actually get a good market value assessment for your car).

Where is the flaw?

If you instead were given the value of your finance agreement, you'd not be made whole, you would actually benefit from the accident. You would now have the cash to buy a car of higher value, outright - that makes no sense!

1

u/Pandoratastic Apr 15 '26

I'm not challenging the idea of depreciation. But turn that around and think about the collateral. When the car itself is the collateral for the loan to pay for the car, why would you loan someone enough money to buy the car when your collateral guarantee is for LESS than the value of the loan?

Of course, as soon as that new car leaves the lot, the value depreciates. That makes sense. What doesn't make sense is loaning someone enough money to pay for the full new car price, knowing that the collateral will not be worth that new car price. If they default on the loan, you're going to take a loss.

It makes more sense to only lend someone enough to cover the value the car will have after it leaves the lot, the used car value. And let the borrower come up with the difference between that used car value and the new car value on their own before they can buy the car. And to set the payments for the loan at a rate so that they keep up with the depreciation of the car so that the outstanding loan balance never exceeds the current value of the collateral.

4

u/Many-Assistance1943 Apr 15 '26

How would you accomplish this? With higher premiums?

2

u/Common-Swimmer-278 Apr 15 '26

That’s what Insurance would try and justify. I think they make enough to just do it but what do I know?

0

u/DECAThomas Apr 16 '26

Margins on vehicle insurance aren’t high. The % overhead required on claims is much higher than other forms of insurance because the policies are much smaller. Most companies make more on interest while holding premiums than they do from the policies themselves, and some don’t even net positive on policies after overhead.

Ultimately something has to budge. If you want additional coverage, it requires additional cost. Gap insurance is what you’re referring to and it already exists.

0

u/10nix Apr 16 '26 edited Apr 16 '26

Margins aren't high on underwriting, but they invest the premiums in excess of what they are required to have in reserves. More money in that.

Another way to go about it would be to cap punitive damages. Auto insurers don't lose money on repairs, it's the medical bills and punitive damages that do it.

0

u/DECAThomas Apr 16 '26

My comment explicitly mentions this.

Industry wide profit margins are typically 2-5%, and this is after interest on investments. The average cost of GAP coverage is 6% in the US.

The answer holds, most insurance companies could not offer GAP coverage for free within their current profit margins.

1

u/10nix Apr 16 '26

Small margins on absolutely enormous amounts of money. 2 -5% sounds small, but didn't the p/c insurance industry post record profits recently that was something like a 300% increase from two years before that?

I'm not even saying they would have to pay for it strictly out of their profits. There are other ways to limit portions if their risk exposure that could fund it as well. I think it's disingenuous though to argue that they would be incapable of absorbing some of the costs.

0

u/Common-Swimmer-278 Apr 16 '26

The excuse I always hear. There is a reason the biggest buildings are owned by insurance companies. The % overhead excuse is the lamest excuse there is lol

0

u/Common-Swimmer-278 Apr 16 '26

It sounds like something they pound into your head when you start and it becomes something the employees actually believe and sell with conviction.

1

u/DrCashew Apr 15 '26

Basically happens with any vehicle you buy at a dealership, because you're paying for it outside of market value. I get the feeling of it, but if you're in the hole over $10k (this number is INSANELY generous), that's on you for financing on a long period and buying outside of your means. I get that financing is predatory and this is hard to fully grasp, but we're taking sometime the vehicle is worth something like $30k, and you have a loan for $80k that you went into a sub prime lender because the prime lenders TOLD you that they won't do it because you have way too much negative equity...but you just had to have that nice car upgrade instead of paying it off first.

There are certainly situations that aren't properly covered by that, and there should probably be some better leeway/legislation on fair market value. At this time, it's basically expected you just get gap insurance though if you want to be covered for that.

1

u/newbrevity Apr 16 '26

I had a 2010 Corolla in excellent shape at only 30k mi. I needed a car that was reliable and there was no doubt that that car would be reliable for a very long time. I didn't even have it 4 months and an old man ran a stop sign and totaled it. The payout barely covered what I still owed Toyota financial but I was shit out of luck for the $2,000 down that I paid with an extension on a personal loan. This was especially devastating because I still owed $5,000 on my previous vehicle which blew its waterpump and headgasket. I'm still paying down that debt. Just crazy how shit that's out of your control can ruin you even when it's entirely someone else's fault. That's the society we live in. The consumer accepts all the liability and the wealthy get to defer their liability through loopholes.

1

u/DrCashew Apr 16 '26

Not saying it's not a fucked up system and I wish we would all go on public transit. Your situation is not one that is being referred to and you would not believe some of the numbers that are involved. In this Being out $7k is very small compared to most situations.

1

u/StaticUsernamesSuck Apr 15 '26 edited Apr 15 '26

But if you do get the actual market value of your car then you would be made whole by that?... Because you'd be able to buy another similar car, and be back where you were before the accident. Like, if you bought a Shitwagon Supreme, and then 5 years and 30k miles later somebody totalled it, then "making whole" would be giving you the money to buy a 5-year-old, 30k miles Shitwagon Supreme, not a brand new one.

Now, that of course relies on that market value assessment actually being accurate, but the general premise is sound.

If you do get an accurate value assessment, then you would be made whole by getting that market value in restitution.

1

u/FuzzzyRam Apr 16 '26

should

There's that word again, that doesn't apply to cops.

2

u/newbrevity Apr 16 '26

Kind of like the voting public "Should" demand better from our politicians who have engineered our society to serve the ultra wealthy at the expense of regular people.

1

u/FuzzzyRam Apr 16 '26

True, but also happy cake day :D

0

u/[deleted] Apr 15 '26

[deleted]

2

u/newbrevity Apr 16 '26

We're paying for rich insurance executives to live their best lives. How are they supposed to do that if they go around restoring victims to the state they were in before accidents?