[OR] Contesting $17k Subrogation – Found 20-day delay, 51% total loss error, and $4,600 medical discrepancy. ​

​I am being sued in Oregon for $17,061.71 following a 3-car chain reaction (04/19/24). I am 100% accepting liability for the accident, but I have audited the 41-page carrier file and am contesting approximately $7,000 of the demand based on a documented Failure to Mitigate Damages and massive internal accounting discrepancies.

​The Evidence from the File:
​1. The 20-Day Reporting/Storage Gap ($2,650 error):
​The Fact: The accident occurred on 04/19. However, the carrier’s Copart/CCC invoices confirm they did not "Call In" or report the claim to the auction yard until 05/08.

​The Cost: This 19-day administrative delay resulted in $2,500 in storage fees ($85/day) and a $150 Lien Fee.
​The Defense: Under Oregon’s duty to mitigate, I am responsible for "reasonable" storage (typically 3–5 days). I am contesting the ~$2,100 in fees caused solely by the carrier’s reporting lag.

​2. The Discretionary Total Loss Error ($7,934 vs. $15,626):

​The Fact: The Supplement of Record (Workfile 15a9bc0d) estimated repairs at $7,934.62. The vehicle's Actual Cash Value (ACV) was $15,626.00.
​The Math: This is a 51% repair-to-value ratio. The industry and Oregon standard for a mandatory total loss is typically 80%.

​The Defense: The carrier elected to total a repairable vehicle. By choosing the more expensive path, they triggered salvage fees and extended rentals. I am responsible for the damage, not the premium costs of their discretionary business choices.

​3. The $4,600 Medical Discrepancy:

​The Fact: The Plaintiff’s Legal Complaint (Second Claim for Relief) explicitly cites PIP medical payments of $177.68. However, the $17,061.71 Subrogation Ledger includes a medical charge of $4,820.00.
​The Conflict: The Tigard Police Report (Ref # [Insert Case #]) notes "no apparent injuries" and "no airbag deployment."
​The Defense: Under ORS 742.524, PIP is only recoverable if "reasonable and necessary." I am contesting the $4,642 discrepancy between their court filing and their global demand until an itemized bill is produced.

​4. Rental Bloat:
​The Fact: Billed for 20 days of rental ($710). The carrier’s own repair estimate stated the job would only take 3 days.
​The Defense: They billed for a 20-day wait for a repair that never happened because they chose to total the car.

I am not trying to dodge the debt. I am looking to settle for the mitigated value of the claim rather than the $17,000 "unmitigated" demand.

​Question: Has anyone in Oregon successfully challenged a subrogation demand where the carrier’s internal paperwork proves they sat on the claim for 20 days? How do I best present this "51% ratio" argument to an arbitrator?

​i am specifically looking for insight on the following:

​Case Law on Administrative Lag: Does anyone have Oregon-specific case law or insurance department bulletins regarding "reasonable timeframes" for moving a vehicle from a storage-accruing lot? Is 20 days defensible for a carrier?

​Discovery of Medical Records: Since the Complaint cites $177 but the Demand asks for $4,800, what is the best way to request the itemized "Reasonable and Necessary" breakdown without a full-blown lawsuit/deposition?

​Arbitration Strategy: If this goes to mandatory arbitration in Oregon, how much weight do arbitrators typically give to the CCC Market Value Report dates vs. the actual billing dates?

​Bad Faith / Improper Totalling: Is there any leverage in the fact that they totaled the car at 51% of its value, effectively increasing my liability by thousands of dollars compared to a standard 3-day repair?