Smashed my Z

H2O_Doc

I still don't see fraud inherent here. In its simplest sense, fraud is a misrepresentation of a matter of fact. For the sake of argument in what we have been discussing, that would include claiming that your air intake was damaged when you got rear ended, when, in fact, there was no damage.

Now, if your air intake was damaged, you have the right to be compensated for that intake, let's say to the amount of $600. Unless explicitly spelled out by the legal code or the terms of you insurance policy, what happens to that $600 is not the concern of the insurance company or the state and it is perfectly legal (unless otherwise stipulated) AND ETHICAL to do as you see fit. If you want to pocket it, or get another (different than stock) intake that is your business.

Insurance companies sometimes don't like these sorts of things and they are, in fact, related to fraud. What they don't want to do is create a situation where you have an incentive to either look at every trivial detail that could plausibly be connected to an accident to get a free or discounted upgrade, or to create a situation where you are encouraged to commit outright fraud by claiming damages that didn't occur.

My getting a new Stillen cold air intake after an accident that broke the stock unit isn't fraud unless I said that I would only replace the parts exactly as described in the insurance estimate. It's my car and it's my business what goes on it and insurers shouldn't compel me to install anything in particular; they should provide me fair compensation for my loss and leave it at that. And, that is sometimes all they do in some jurisdictions. Again it does vary and the details matter.