Hello, recently my vehicle was damaged in a parking accident. Fortunately, the causer of the accident reported to me, admitted the accident and even informed his insurance about it. So so far so well, the damage is regulated by the opposing liability insurance 😉 In relation to the damage regulation I decided to have it fictitiously settled. For this I had an expert report made by a car expert, which Today the account came from the opposing insurance company. And with this account I am unfortunately not completely satisfied. From the damage sum stated in the report (about 1600 €) the opposing insurance company deducted again a good 300 €. As I could read on the Internet, something like this happens more often. Often the insurance companies try with reference to cheaper workshops, spare parts or by deducting the transfer costs the In my case, however, this is a little different, with me the concrete repair procedure is not accepted. The insurance has according to own statement the expert report subjected to a professional examination and considers some of the listed repair costs to be not comprehensible. Concretely: – A side window does not have to be removed, covers allegedly enough – Renewing of the decorative mouldings of the door frame is omitted accordingly – wages are equal due to the lower effort In accordance with the manufacturer’s guidelines, the paint specialist can only make a binding decision as to whether a coating of adjacent parts is required as part of the paint preparation process – surface painting of the door is no longer necessary. According to the manufacturer’s guidelines, the paint specialist can only make a binding decision as to whether a coating of adjacent parts is required as part of the paint preparation process. Does the insurance provide reasonable arguments or does it try to squeeze the amount of damage? Should I accept this? Or contact a lawyer? Or talk to the insurance company or my expert first? How would you proceed? Thank you for the help 😉