Question: I was in a motor-car accident on April 26, 2009. I was travelling in an easterly direction along Trafalgar Road towards New Kingston. On reaching Lord Nelson Way, I saw a motor vehicle in the turning lane waiting to go right across Trafalgar Road and into Lord Nelson Way. As I approached that vehicle, its driver drove out into the path of my vehicle and caused a collision. We reported the accident to the New Kingston police.

My insurers gave me the go-ahead to fix my car. Two and a half months have passed and the car remains unrepaired. The repairers said that they are waiting on parts which were delivered on June 19. The repairs have still not started as I found out that an incorrect item was supplied. Will I get paid for all my loss of use?

- broadusf@gmail.com

Answer: There are 67.3 million items listed in Google under the topic "insurance claims for loss of use". This is slightly less than one-third of the 209 million entries there are for pop-icon Michael Jackson. The items which are posted on the first topic are an index on a global scale of the frequency of loss-of-use claims. They probably also give an .indication of the many thousands of questions that consumers like you have on that subject.

The odds are that you are most unlikely to recover 60 days' loss of use. The two-month period assumes that the missing part was delivered to your repairers today, and that they honoured their two-week estimate. Two months is a very long time for a vehicle to remain in a repair shop.

The choice of the repairer was yours. Is the person who caused the accident responsible for two weeks' loss of use, four weeks' or eight weeks'? Where should the line be drawn as to what is fair and reasonable?

Insurers who settle loss-of-use claims on behalf of the 'at fault party' generally base their offers on what loss adjusters say. Loss adjusters, on the other hand, estimate, in conjunction with the repair shop, the numbers of days based on the amount of damage. Delays in obtaining replacement parts are ignored. So, too, are bottlenecks and delays, which are due to poor planning and management by the repairer.

The daily rate which is paid in loss-of-use claims is another knotty issue. What type of vehicle was the 'accident victim' (in this case you) driving at the time of the accident? If the car that suffered the damage was a BMW, is the driver entitled to receive compensation based upon the rate for a Toyota Corolla, a Suzuki Vitara, a Toyota Prado SUV, or another BMW similar to the one that was damaged?

What is the situation if you lost earnings because of inadequate transport? Is this a legitimate part of a loss-of-use claim? Insurers and their lawyers go through these particular claims with a fine-tooth comb. They are familiar with the tendency in some of our people to 'manufacture' evidence to support their case.

Minimise losses

Accident victims, the innocent parties, have a duty to minimise their losses.

You have to be able to show that you needed to incur any costs that you did to go about your normal life.

You shouldn't hire a car that was more expensive than you really and truly need.

I do not want to 'throw cold water' on your claim. May I suggest, therefore, that, have a word with a claim official of your insurer or broker.

Get their advice about what, if anything, you can do at this stage to minimise your losses you and what evidence you will need to prove your claim for loss of use.

It seems reasonable to conclude that unless you are very lucky, that you are likely to end up being out of pocket as a result of the accident. Sing thanks and praises nevertheless. The bigger picture is that happily, you were not injured.

Cedric E. Stephens provides independent information and free advice about the management of risks and insurance. Email: aegis@cwjamaica.com; or send SMS/text message to 812-7233.