In case of a minor loss, at first a cost estimate seems to be a cheaper and more uncomplicated alternative but in turn there are concrete arguments to call in an expert: 

• In court a cost estimate has no proof-preserving function!
  
  
• A cost estimate does not include any assessment concerning
  the road safety of your vehicle.
  
  
• Usually there´s no designation of depreciation included in a
  cost estimate. Replacement value and residual value are not determined. Thus, a constructive total loss possible can´t be identified. This leads to problems in settling claims.
  Furthermore, if it really concerns a minor damage or not can
  only be identified by the expert (e.g., in case of a seemingly
  slight damage, structural parts such as longitudinal members
  and cross members can be broken, or in another case, an at
  first substantial appearing damage will only lead to minimal costs)
  
  
• Since an appraisal is only a forecast of the damage repair costs
  or rather expenses, repair costs are to be borne by the injuring
  party to the full extent, even if the actual repair costs exceed the previous forecast. In contrast to this, the estimate is a binding commitment to carry out the repair at a specified price.

<< back