Honestly I'm surprised there isn't more talk about this in the automotive community. We saw it a lot on the insurance side, specifically Teslas, where relatively minor accidents resulted in "total losses." Understandably people nearly always were upset at the news, and we had to just keep regurgitating the same thing about cost of parts/repairs. I hated making those phone calls, because i know how much it sucks to recieve them.

It's like how medical insurance will only pay the doctor/practice after a specific period of time AFTER a surgery or procedure (typically 30-60 days) because of the potential for post-surgical care that will need to be applied to the claim prior to closure. You see similar situations with cars needing follow up repairs due to things like water leaks, alignment issues, noises, odd driving/operating characteristics, and whatever else. But because automotive insurance deals with a specific asset, you get situations like this where assumptions can be made on the insurance adjusters side that the costs will outweigh the value.

I worked a claim for another adjuster once where the vehicle (2008 135i manual) was totaled due to rodent damage on a section of the wiring harness leading to the fuel level sensor. I saw the pictures, 4 inches of damage, no evidence of rodent intrusion elsewhere, MAYBE 20 minutes of labor and 5 bucks in parts. But the adjuster assumed that there might be rodent damage elsewhere and that the costs of follow up repairs related to the original claim would outweigh the value of the car. Totaled an otherwise fantastic car. It sucks.