Diminished value claims in Kansas

Claims against the at-fault driver

In Broadie v. Randall (1923), a new car's paint was deeply scratched and could not be fully restored. The Kansas Supreme Court approved measuring the loss by the car's market value immediately before and after the injury, allowed a dealer's testimony on the drop in value, and said that when a repair does not restore the original condition and value, the repair cost together with the remaining difference in value might in some cases be a fair measure.

The owner has to show the drop in value that remains after the repair.

Claims under your own policy

Kansas is one of the few states with a first-party decision in the owner's favor. In Venable v. Import Volkswagen (1974), the insurer chose to repair a collision-damaged car and the repairs did not restore it. The Kansas Supreme Court held the measure was the car's value just before the damage less its value just after the repairs, plus the reasonable cost of the repairs, and affirmed the jury's award for the lost value.

Policy wording has changed in many policies since then. The wording of your own policy controls.

Filing deadline

Kansas gives two years to bring an action for taking, detaining or injuring personal property (Kan. Stat. 60-513(a)(2)).

That is the deadline for filing suit. Talking with an insurer does not by itself extend it. A Kansas attorney can confirm how it applies to your dates.

How diminished value claims tend to go in Kansas

In Ohlmeier v. Jones (2015), the Kansas Court of Appeals affirmed a $4,185 diminished value judgment against an at-fault driver; the insurer's Rule 17c figure had been $1,273.20. The same decision held that Kansas's attorney-fee statute for smaller property-damage-only suits (Kan. Stat. 60-2006) does not cover diminished value.

Kansas law lists unfair claim settlement practices, when committed flagrantly or often enough to be a general business practice. They include failing to act reasonably promptly on claim communications and not attempting in good faith to settle promptly and fairly once liability has become reasonably clear (Kan. Stat. 40-2404(9)).

Many insurers answer a diminished value request with a formula rather than a market study. The best known is the 17c formula, which came out of the Georgia class actions over first-party claims that followed State Farm v. Mabry; its name comes from paragraph 17(c) of an injunction in one of them. It starts from a capped share of the car's value before the crash, then reduces it with damage and mileage modifiers. A law-firm survey notes it was built for that class action and has not been formally adopted for general use.

Adjusters commonly ask for proof that the repaired car is worth less, not only proof that it was damaged. Records that tend to matter: the final repair invoice and photos, the estimate showing any structural or frame work, the vehicle history report entry, and written market evidence such as dealer quotes or listings for the same car with and without an accident history.

Lost value is easiest to show once repairs are finished, because the value after repair is what gets compared with the value before the crash.

If you have a complaint about claim handling

The Kansas Department of Insurance takes complaints about how an insurer handled a claim. File with the Kansas Department of Insurance.

Next steps

• How Reclaim's diminished-value check works
• Estimate a figure with the diminished value calculator
• How to file a diminished value claim
• Diminished value claims in Colorado
• Diminished value claims in Oregon
• Diminished value rules in every state