My question involves an injury that occurred in the state of: Oklahoma.
1. A few months ago, my vehicle was rear ended by a pickup at a local road, no injuries involved. I only have state minimum, so my insurance cannot help me.
2. After that, I have been negotiating with at-fault party's insurance company on the vehicle (10-year-old malibu, 160K miles, no prior accident history) settlement.
3. The insurance company offers a settlement around between NADA nice trade in and NADA dealer retail.
4. I countered with a rebuttal on their CCC report and comp information in the local market. I offered 20% over NADA retail. They initially dismiss my rebuttal, then raise the offer by 5% to the NADA retail value.
5. I countered them again, asking about 20% over NADA retail and no rental car reimbursement.
6. They declined and progress stalled.
7. My requirement is they could offer 10%-15% over NADA dealer retail and offer of the 1-2 week of rental car reimbursement. I also want to use small claims as a way to get a better settlement rather than go through small claims or even civil court procedure (I do not want to prolong this fight).
8. The lawyers I talked to are either not interested or they will take a cut higher than the "bump" I demanded.
My questions are (1) Should I sue the at-fault party only or add insurance company as the second plaintiff? (2). If I sue in the small claim and consider this small difference (the difference is 1.5-2K at most but still less than max amount allowed in the small claims), would insurance company settle with me before the court or they will move the case to civil court and fight the case in small claims? (I do not have time and energies to deal with them for a long time). (3). What is the best strategy you may recommend?