I've read those threads and comments, and am weighing them against my own experience, having sold back a car that was totaled. Even with the evolution of how buyback reps are treating these, if the car can reasonably drive to the dealer, it's certainly worth taking it to the appointment. If they won't take it, and you decide not to fight the issue, you've lost maybe 10 days in getting your insurance payment.
No, if you want to double-dip, get your insurance estimate. If they want to total the car, also ask for the "owner-retain" amount--what they'll pay if you keep the car. Tell them NOT to do any repairs, and to give you the car back. Drive (or tow, as I did) the car to the buyback, sell the car back, get your money. Then tell the insurance you want your money.
In this state (Pennsylvania), before the insurer would let me have the vehicle back, I had to (a) pay off the loan with my own money and then (b) get the salvage title, because the vehicle was not street legal. In THIS state, for a vehicle to be registered, it has to pass a safety inspection...and a vehicle with a sprung chassis, deployed air bags, and a bent axle won't qualify.
What public or private policy goal would be served by forcing Volkswagen to pay an owner for a totally wrecked car the same amount as an owner of a roadworthy car? The public policy of the buyback is to get the car off the road. The accident already did that.
Because, if the car's driveable (and let's stipulate that, in this case, it would be), that's what the settlement requires. Whether it should require that is really an unrelated question.
And I, for one, would be OK with that. However, that logical, sane, rational idea doesn't seem to be possible. To the extent that the definition of "operable" contains two conditions: the engine starts and runs, and the vehicle can be driven under it's own power, at that point VW should follow the court order. Had I taken the full insurance payout and then applied for the restitution payment, I would have been short a fair amount as well. Bottom line is, when they set up the settlement and defined things, the question of, "what about damaged vehicles that still run but aren't street legal?" was apparently never considered.
Yes, the same incentive that one has to burn down their own house, and try to collect insurance money, to build a brand new one, rather than repair their current abode.
This is terrible advice. Don't take it. Keep the car, pay the salvage value, and fix it minimally to get a brake, light, and dmv inspection. Then obtain the title. I had a salvage title car and sold it back months ago with no issues. I have 2 more claims and they are being held up, but because there are duplicate claims against the same vin, not because they have a branded title.
I think this is terrible advice. First, you have no idea what shape the car is in, airbags deployed, engine damage, frame bent, etc. Also, most people don't have the ability/time to fix it themselves which will make the repairs much more expensive. It's also a long process to get the car back, get it fixed, get it inspected, and then apply and wait for the salvage title. Then you have to start the whole buyback over from scratch. It may be worth it, but it's hard to know that up front. IMHO, if the insurance payout + restitution money is close to the buyback amount, sell it to the insurance company and apply for the restitution money from VW.
No, that's not possible. When you turn in the car you have to turn over the title. If you turned over title to give to insurance for insurance payout then you can't turn in for buyback. If you turn in title for buyback you don't have title to give to insurance company for payout. It's one or the other.
Years ago, somebody backed along the entire side of my car. It was obviously damaged but drivable. I continued to drive it while we waited for insurance to figure out what they were going to do with it. A few days later I was rear-ended. Both insurance companies said it was totaled, and both paid in full. What they told us was that the insurance company couldn't benefit from another party. Based on that, I would expect both.
Illegal for certain in some states. Prohibited by contract by some policies. Double dipping the insurance is "obtaining property by false pretense" or "unjust enrichment".
(citation needed)