1973 Ford

I'd find a four-door parts car and go to it! Just from what I see, it looks like you need a grill assembly plus the associated parts (everything in front of the rad support), and possibly a RF fender and hood, if they have not suffered severe heat damage.

 

What???

I find it hard to believe that the mechanics liability insurance would not cover this.

 

Same here. It's time to sue the mechanic's insurance company, and have them PROVE that they are not liable for damages.

 

So sorry to see that fire damage. I have been going through my own drama with my '73 Galaxie 500 Country Sedan. Once I found and had installed the two exhaust manifolds that replaced the cracked ones, I still had fumes inside. I am still working on that problem. It seems that the ONLY rust/steel deterioration on the car is under the spare tire and maybe that is where some of the exhaust fumes have been getting in. So I bought a non-chrome plated downward extension and clamped it on such that it is 10" out from the body, since the tailpipe is right under the spare tire compartment, and put some heavy carpeting under the tire in lieu of sheet metal work that can happen later. Maybe this will work. As to performance, with 4799 lbs. empty weight and 172 SAE net HP, actually this mother moves out if you have enough room, such as on a freeway. Speedo goes right, gas gauge goes left. Carburetor adjustments are fussy, I wonder if I made it too lean? This car was a DSO in Wisconsin early in 1973 and only my tenth Ford Wagon since the first '56 Country Squire.

 

BTW, on that fire damaged wagon, you are nowhere near my $ on this project, and I thought I got a great deal! And I don't have any LTD trim...

 

Next step would be to take the garage owner to small claims court, not his insurance company. Z has no contract with the insurance company. His issue is with the garage owner who had care and custody of the vehicle.

 

I disagree. It's the same if someone hits your car on the street, they are responsible for the damages. Their insurance pays out, like it's supposed to.. .It was in the mechanic's shop, which should by most State laws, have liability insurance for such an occasion. If he does not, then he should sue the mechanic. My 2 cents.

 

So,

I talked with a buddy of mine who is in the insurance business, on the claims end, not the issuing end.
He says that this sounds like the insurance trying to weasel their way out of paying for the car. Any insurance policy on a garage, whether it is a business or a house, will have liability coverage. That liability insurance is what covers you if a thief breaks into your building, get hurt, and sues you for the damage. (yes, that does happen in the U.S.)
So, I need to get the claim number from my mechanic and make sure that his insurance know I will be filing a claim for my car.
I'll keep you all updated as things develop.

 

If an insurance company refuses to pay for a third party (liability) claim, then it's up to the policy holder to sue their own insurance company for breech of contract or malpractice (or whatever you call that).

If my car gets hit by a car owned by John Doe, and I go to John Doe's insurance company with a claim, and they refuse to pay, citing 'no coverage', do I take the insurance company to court? - No. I take John Doe to court. John Doe can then file a complaint with the state insurance commissioner or whatever.... I don't have any 'contract' with John Doe's insurance company, so any action I brought against them would be invalid.

 

Krash, the insured's insurance company MUST PROVE TO YOU, the victim, that their liability does NOT cover that damage! They can't just, by saying, that that insurance does not cover, they MUST SHOW in writing that it doesn't. And, yes, I'd take the insurance company to court if they refuse to show this. Proof is on them, NOT you, the victim.

 

That's not how it works, Patrick. I spent my career in auto insurance claims.

In the case of an insured's liability (the garage owner being responsible in this instance), the insurance company steps in and acts, in essence, as the insured's 'agent' in paying the claim to the victim. that's the nature of the insurance contract . The policy holder pays their premium, and the insurance company agrees to pay claims under policy as defined in the policy and declarations. If the insurance company decides a 'claim' is not covered by the policy terminology, they would have to send out a letter of explanation - to the policy holder. They might also send one to the third party victim as well, as a courtesy, but they wouldn't necessarily be required to.

I'm not entirely sure if that's what is going on here. Could be that the garage owner's 'policy' is just one covering the structure itself, and not a 'garage owners' policy covering what happens in the business. An insurance company is not going to cover a loss that they didn't insure for.

In any case, Z's action is against the garage business owner, and it's up to that owner to get his insurance company involved - if there is one.

 

I'll take your word for it, but that still don't make it right.

 

Nice find!

I really like the rumble seats. I would love to find a set of those for my 77.

 

looks good

 

I hate to be nosey, but what happened? To the car, I mean.