Indiana Vehicle Appraisal & Insurance Claim Resources

Indiana automobile insurance policies commonly include an appraisal clause that provides a mechanism for resolving disputes over the amount of a loss. The availability of appraisal in a particular claim depends on the language of the applicable policy. No Indiana statute independently mandating an appraisal clause in automobile insurance policies has been independently verified.

Under a typical automobile insurance appraisal clause, when the insurer and the insured disagree on the amount of a loss, either party may demand appraisal. Each party selects a competent, independent appraiser. The two appraisers attempt to agree on the amount of the loss. If they cannot agree, they select an umpire. Any two of the three must agree for the appraisal award to be binding.

The Indiana Department of Insurance advises consumers to obtain the policy language involved in a settlement disagreement and to request an itemized explanation of the settlement. Questions about whether appraisal is available in a specific Indiana claim should be directed to a qualified attorney familiar with Indiana insurance law.

In Allgood v. Meridian Security Insurance Co. (Indiana Supreme Court, 2005), the court addressed first-party diminished value under the specific policy language before it. The policy limited the insurer's liability to the lesser of Actual Cash Value or the amount necessary to repair or replace the vehicle. The Indiana Supreme Court held that this policy language did not require additional payment for diminution in value after adequate repairs were made.

Allgood should not be read as establishing that Indiana universally prohibits first-party diminished value claims. The holding concerns the specific policy language before the court. Whether a particular Indiana policy requires payment of first-party diminished value depends on the specific policy language and applicable authority.

In Wiese-GMC, Inc. v. Wells (Indiana Court of Appeals, 1993), the court addressed tort damages for repairable personal property. Indiana tort damages for repairable personal property can include residual loss in fair-market value where repairs do not restore the property's pre-loss value. This principle supports the availability of third-party diminished value claims in Indiana tort contexts.

Third-party diminished value claims in Indiana are distinct from first-party contractual claims. The availability of third-party diminished value depends on the applicable tort law principles and the specific facts of the claim.

In Dunn v. Meridian Mutual Insurance Co. (Indiana Supreme Court, 2005), the court distinguished first-party collision coverage from uninsured/underinsured motorist (UIM) coverage. The court recognized diminution in value within the 'legally entitled to recover' framework of the UIM policy before it, where the insured was legally entitled to recover those tort damages from an uninsured motorist.

The Dunn decision is significant because it demonstrates that the three categories — first-party collision coverage, third-party tort claims, and UIM coverage — can produce different results for diminished value claims in Indiana. These categories should not be collapsed. The applicable coverage type and policy language are critical to any Indiana diminished value analysis.

When a vehicle is declared a total loss under an Indiana automobile insurance policy, the insurer must determine the Actual Cash Value (ACV) of the vehicle. ACV is generally understood as the fair market value of the vehicle immediately before the loss — the price a willing buyer would pay a willing seller — taking into account the vehicle's year, make, model, trim, mileage, condition, and options.

No specific Indiana state rule governing comparable-vehicle methodology for total-loss valuation has been independently verified for this page. Policyholders who receive a total-loss settlement should review the insurer's valuation documentation and may contact the Indiana Department of Insurance or a qualified attorney if they have questions about the settlement.