Autoblog: State Farm asks Toyota to pay for unintended acceleration insurance claims

No big surprise here. Its been obvious that they want more money to pay their CEO with from the moment they piled on in February. And if you think SF isn't charging the maximum amount they can for Toyotas, you have a nicer view of them than I do. If Toyota pays them or not, premiums will go up, if the market will allow it.

 

From the article:

So insurance companies use "reputation" and not accident data to figure out the rates?

Insurance rates are competitive and if State Farm doesn't want to insure Toyotas, gosh darn, someone else will. In my case, I won't have to ask for a State Farm quote . . . wait, wait.

I keep getting junk mail from State Farm agents asking for our business. Now I have the perfect retort . . . we only have Toyotas.

Bob Wilson

 

State Farm has every right to ask. Toyota has every right to refuse. Facts, provable data and evidence of mechanical failures are the only criteria on which I'd be willing to pay anything.

Is State Farm the only insurer with such stats? If none of the other insurers are asking for such payments then that kinda leaves SF twisting in the wind.

 

It's called, "REMEDIES". Before any law suit ... you have to ask to be compensated for your damages. If you can't prove it, the defendent is perfectly within their right to say ~ "Mr. Plaintiff - how 'bout you go pound sand somewhere else". Believe it or not, there ARE a minority of folks who actually go all the trouble of going to court only to have a defective pleading, because (s)he never even asked the person they're trying to blame, to be made whole.

That said, while at the Lexus dealership this morning, I overheard TWO customers being told why their aftermarket floor mats were being removed. (shaking head) Wow, there'd be way less irony if it weren't for people.

.

 

I saw this insurance thing coming from a mile away, I even started a thread about it a while ago. I'm scratching my head though, if recalls are made due to problems and accidents are made due to these problems, should the insurance company be responsible to fit the bill ? ...If so , I could certainly see insurance rates going up across the board . Get ready to shell out some extra dough to own our cars.

Speaking of floor mats,when I picked my Prius on delivery, there were 2 sets of mats in the front and passenger side...One carpeted and one all weather rubber,one on top of the other. I asked if any of these mats were part of the mat recall...They weren't, I was told !...When I went in for the software recall(Months later), a couple of days later I found the carpeted mat(which was under my all weather mat) in my trunk . I found out afterward that both mats cannot be placed in the car at the same time.

My conclusion : Incompetent Toyota people hand over your newly bought car to you in an unsafe manner which could of created the mat/pedal stick problem ,a greedy GM who loaded the car with 2 sets of mats, unnecessarily, just to boost more dollars in selling more accessories on a new car and poorly trained service managers and technicians that don't inform you, that they threw your mat in your trunk after the software service recall . Here's the crux, If they remove your mat and now you really have no use for it, shouldn't they offer you a refund for it ?

 

I can't imagine why anyone would buy SF insurance in the first place? They are way up there in price and in Florida they tend to cancel you or try to raise your premiums by 40% With so many companies out there I see no reason to buy insurance from a company that would try something like this.

 

Landsharks need no encouragement but this would make a class-action suit I would find entertaining if it was aimed at the right target. I know the vast majority of dealers work hard at a thin margin job but floor mats? Since Saylor, failure in this area is not an option.

Bob Wilson