Rain rain, go away, come again another day.
Dear Ms. Gorman:
This office represents Jacob Crews with respect to an August 5, 2005 automobile collision caused by your insured Frank Smith. I have reviewed your correspondence of September 16, 2005 to Jacob’s father, Steve Crews, and am writing this letter in response.
It is my understanding, based on your letter, that Amica has offered Jacob $1160.25 (and he keeps the vehicle) or $1338.33 (and you take the vehicle) in full and final settlement of his claims against your insured. You also indicate in your letter that your offer factors in a 15% fault assessment to Jacob. It is not clear to me, based on your letter or the documents that I have reviewed, how you arrived at: (1) the $1160.25 valuation or (2) the fault allocation. Neither of your positions make any sense to me.
Your insured was issued a summons at the scene of the accident for failure to observe or obey a traffic control device. In contrast, Jacob was not issued a citation, as it seems clear from the accident report that he was not at fault. As the enclosed accident report makes clear (see Exhibit 1), your insured was traveling illegally in a right-turn only lane through a gore area. The lane in which he had been traveling for several hundred yards was marked with signage saying “Right Lane Must Turn Right.” Despite the signage, your insured proceeded in the lane past the designated right turn and collided with Jacob who was sat the same time turning onto northbound Colorado 83.
It appears that you believe that Jacob was 15% responsible for the accident because he did not anticipate that your insured would not obey the traffic laws. If this is in fact your belief, it is directly contrary to Colorado law. It is black letter law in Colorado that a person is not negligent for failing to anticipate that another person may violate applicable laws and regulations. See Walton v. Kolb, 500 P.2d 149 (Colo. App. 1972). As a result, any reduction to your offer made as a result of Jacob’s alleged negligence is unfounded and should be eliminated.
With respect to the value of Jacob’s car, your offer is not supported by the evidence. The Kelley Blue Book Value of Jacob’s vehicle is $1685 and the NADA value is eve higher at $2025. These valuations, of course, do not take into consideration the additional work that Jacob had done on the car within six months before the accident, which substantially increased the value of the car above the normal Blue Book or NADA value. As demonstrated on the attached spreadsheet (see Exhibit 2) prepared by Steve Crews, which I believe you have already been provided, in February 2005, Jacob had the clutch master cylinder and slave valve replaced for a cost of $350. In April 2005, he had the heater core replaced for $63.85, and most importantly, in July 2005, only one month before this accident, he replaced the engine with a 40,000 mile JDM engine for a cost of $1,049. Each of these items were above and beyond routine maintenance and would have extended the life of the car by 50,000 miles if not more.
Setting aside the other multiple repairs made on the car which were arguably routine type repairs, at a minimum, Jacob’s car was worth $3148.85. And if one uses the higher NADA value, his car was worth $3488.85. The repair estimate for the car as a result of the damages caused by your insured is $3221. Jacob would like to have his car repaired. It was his clear intention, evidenced by the numerous repairs made to the car in the six months prior to the collision, to drive his car well into the future.
Given the value information and the law in Colorado, Jacob is willing to settle his claim against your insured for no less than the $3221 that it will cost to repair the vehicle. He has not cashed - and has no intention of cashing - the check that he received from Amica on Saturday, October 1, 2005 in the amount of $1160.25. Considering the money that Jacob saved Amica by not demanding a rental car after the collision, his offer of $3221 is more than reasonable. If he cannot settle his claim for the $3221 that it will cost to repair the car, then he will have no choice but to file a claim against your insured in small claims court.
Please let me know as soon as possible, but in any event no later than Friday, October 14, 2005, if Amica is willing to pay Jacob $3221 in full and final settlement of his claims against your insured.
Thanks for your help in this matter. I look forward to hearing from you soon.