An auto insurer did not breach the insurance policy by repairing plaintiff’s nearly brand new pickup after it sustained frame and other serious damage in an accident caused by others. The policy clearly stated that AAA could, in its discretion, either pay for the damage or repair the car. It permissibly chose the repair option even though as a result, the pickup lost $17,100 in resale value. Vague conclusory allegations that the repairs did not fully restore the pickup to its pre-accident condition were insufficient to withstand demurrer. Plaintiff had to point out specific problems that remained unrepaired. AAA did not breach the implied duty of good faith, either, in choosing the repair option. Since the contract expressly gave it that choice, the implied covenant could not be interpreted to take it away. Limitations of coverage are not contrary to public policy.
Since the policy clearly allows it to do so, an insurer breaches neither its policy nor the duty of good faith in repairing rather than paying the value of a nearly new vehicle seriously damaged in an auto accident, even though the repaired vehicle’s market value is substantially lower than the vehicle’s pre-accident value.