Post Reply to Back Room

This is not a vent board or any other kind of therapy. Before you hit the POST button, ask yourself if your contribution will add to the level of discussion going on.

Important notes on articles:

Handle:
Password:
Subject:

Message:

HTTP Link (optional):

Poster's Email (optional):

 


Post being replied to

California law tends to be distinctive, yes by ndtnguy

Knute is right that diminished value is a classic element of tort damages. But there may also be rules that cap damages in a way that limits your recovery, or the insurance company may be willing to tell you to make their day on that, because it's harder to prove than repair cost.

For example, in Tennessee, diminished value in this context is recoverable as a general matter, but your total recovery for property damage can't exceed the difference between the value of the vehicle immediately before the wreck and its value immediately after the wreck (i.e., before the repair). As a practical matter that hampers lost-value recoveries.

But what the rule on this in California I haven't a clue. You could tell me almost anything and I would believe it.