|
I was t-boned on 2/28/2008 by an 83 year old man who decided it would
be fun to do a u-turn in the middle of a 4 lane major road.
When I scrambled to get out of the passengers door, because mine is
smashed in, the man said
"I'm so sorry I didn't see you there was ice on my windshield"
I stood there shocked and replied
"REALLY! There was ice on my windshield this morning too but you know
what I did...I waited at home for 15 min. spraying my windows with the
hose, using the defrost and scraping the ice off before I got on the
road and endangered all of the other drivers. You know why I made
myself 15 min. late for work... because you are not supposed to drive
a car if you can't see out of it!"
The officer arrived on scene and determined that he was at fault. The
man gave the officer his license, registration and insurance but it
was not until more than 24 hours later that I found out he didn't have
insurance at all. They had started a policy and than once they got
their cards they called and canceled it on 4/27/2007.
This man has been driving without insurance for 10months! It is not
like his policy accidentally lapsed right before the accident he knew
he didn't have insurance for almost a whole year and just kept
driving.
He received tickets for the accident; I'm not sure what they were for
it has not been released to public records yet. I did not get any
tickets.
I am not hurt badly just a little sore in my neck, back, shoulder and
wrist. I told the officer I was hurting and I told my insurance
company also but I have not had time to go to the Dr. yet.
My car has a little over $3000 worth of damages and it will cost $1820
for the rental car while it is being repaired, extra $25 a day because
I am only 22. I have lost $216, to date, worth of work since the
accident so my totals exceed the $5000 max for small claims court.
Can I sue him for the actual price to fix my car? Or do I have to only
sue him for the fair market value of the Jeep? 1989 Jeep Cherokee. It
would be around $1200 but I have been looking and I can not find a car
in equal condition to my jeep for that price. I just put a lot of
money into the jeep and there was nothing mechanically wrong with it
she was a sturdy reliable car. I want to be able to fix the Jeep.
I don't think I should have to deal with a crappy undependable car
just because this man was not paying attention and driving a car in an
unsafe condition without insurance.
I know it is insurance company policy that if the damages exceed more
that 80% of the value of the car that they "total" it and give you a
check for the fair market value, but remember I am not dealing with an
insurance company I am dealing with an uninsured idiot.
I know you guys are going to say "...well if he didn't have insurance
to begin than he probably doesn't have enough money to pay you
anyways..."
I researched him online and found that he does indeed own his home and
he also owns a piece of land here in town. So there would be something
to put a lien against.
My Jeep is still driving today but the firewall is bent and the
alignment is messed up from his truck hitting me hard enough to jump a
curb and put me in a parking lot. And I have to crawl across to the
passenger's door to get out and I can not secure my truck because the
drivers window is gone.
I spoke to them last Friday and they told me to get an estimate or
find a replacement car and they would pay for it but when I found a
car they wanted to make payments and I said no. Than they stopped
answering their phone on Monday afternoon.
I wrote hem a letter yesterday and I was going to send it certified
mail today but I don't have the money to hire an attorney so I'm not
sure if it is worded correctly. Can some one please take a look at it
and tell me what I can and should do?
I live in Escambia county Florida and that is where the accident
occurred.
Here is the letter I am going to send him:
Date: 3/6/2008
To: Mr. ***** Stall*****
Re: Property Damage Repair
Dear Mr. Stall*****:
Auto Repair Estimate: $3,796.09
Rental Car during Repairs: $1,820.38
Lost Wages: $216.00
Total amount of Payment: $5,832.47
If full payment of the above amount or a payment negotiation or a
payment arrangement is not made within 7 days of the date of this
letter, a suit in claims court may be filed against you forthwith and
without further notice for the amount indicated above plus any
additional loss incurred. Instead of personal claims court, this
matter may be referred to my attorney.
I have been instructed to bring legal action against you if necessary,
which may result in liens against your property or other assets.
You can avoid the unnecessary inconvenience and added expenses of a
lawsuit by contacting me about payment for the damages incurred from
the accident on 2/28/2008 within 7 days of the date of this letter.
You can reach me at 850-***-**** to discuss how you would like to
resolve this issue.
Sincerely,
Abigail A******
* indicates deleted field for privacy
|
| |
| |
On Fri, 07 Mar 2008 07:02:41 -0500, Flashy Grand Am
<amazonaby@hotmail.com> wrote:
I was t-boned on 2/28/2008 by an 83 year old man who decided it would
be fun to do a u-turn in the middle of a 4 lane major road.
[Other driver proved to be uninsured.]
Usually, your insurance will include uninsured motorist coverage.
Daniel Reitman
|
| |
| |
On Mar 7, 7:02 am, Flashy Grand Am <amazon...@hotmail.com> wrote:
[OP's car was hit by a negligent driver. She was in it and received
minor injuries. She has a large car repair bill and has made a
settlement demand to the other driver.]
I know you guys are going to say "...well if he didn't have insurance
to begin than he probably doesn't have enough money to pay you
anyways..."
I researched him online and found that he does indeed own his home and
he also owns a piece of land here in town. So there would be something
to put a lien against.
Don't count on a lien against his home. In Florida, a person's
homestead is exempt from sale to satisfy a civil judgment. That's why
the Nicole Brown's family couldn't seize OJ Simpson's Florida mansion
to pay some of their judgment against him.
|
| |
| |
On Mar 7, 5:02 am, Flashy Grand Am <amazon...@hotmail.com> wrote:
I was t-boned on 2/28/2008 by an 83 year old man who decided it would
be fun to do a u-turn in the middle of a 4 lane major road.
I wrote hem a letter yesterday and I was going to send it certified
mail today but I don't have the money to hire an attorney so I'm not
sure if it is worded correctly. Can some one please take a look at it
and tell me what I can and should do?
Many attorneys will give you a free 30-minute consultation to see if
it is worth yours and theirs time to use a lawyer. If this is an
attorney
just for this accident, they wont really consider taking the case
unless they clear at least $10k, that would be a total recovery of
$30k or more. However, you [wouldnt] be surprised how fast costs
and damages add up to reach this figure.
A lawyer would not like you writing your own demand letter because it
could mess up one of theirs. And they might encourage a medical
checkup even if nothing was obvious at the time.
|
| |
| |
On Mar 7, 7:02=A0am, Flashy Grand Am <amazon...@hotmail.com> was hit by
an uninsured driver.
1. Here in Massachusetts, it's much better if you see a doctor within
48 hours of receiving the injury.
2. Have you checked if your insurance has uninsured driver coverage?
In some states that's a mandatory part, at least for your medicals.
If you have medical insurance, you check the box "This was an auto
accident" and they might handle that part.
3. Be careful with settlement letters. Make sure to include verbiage
that this is a compromise because you would like to settle this
quickly - it's not exhaustive. Note explicitly that the offer will
automatically expire on [date] which is 7 days from the date of the
letter or so.
4. It can't hurt if you find a comparable car for sale. Not a car of
the same make and model that has a blown engine, body rot, and the
transmission is in the back seat, but comparable condition.
Unfortunately, that's the way the law seems to work, that you don't
get to be made whole, rather the civil penalty for the tortfeasor is
based on an artificial "fair market" value. (It's demonstrably false
- you wouldn't spend $3000 if you thought the end result was a car
worth $500; you wouldn't spend $10,000 on veterinary bills for a dog
that's worth $1.98/pound.)
5. I don't know, but I imagine courts do not look kindly on folks who
can afford insurance and willfully let it lapse. What's the small
claims limit in your state?
--
- David Chesler <chesler@post.harvard.edu>
Free Cory Maye
|
| |
| |
I was t-boned on 2/28/2008 by an 83 year old man who decided it would
be fun to do a u-turn in the middle of a 4 lane major road.
When I scrambled to get out of the passengers door, because mine is
smashed in, the man said
"I'm so sorry I didn't see you there was ice on my windshield"
I stood there shocked and replied
Arguing with a person who just hit you is a really good way to get
shot. Or stabbed. Or raped. Yelling might make you feel good,
but inducing road rage in the other guy won't.
The officer arrived on scene and determined that he was at fault. The
man gave the officer his license, registration and insurance but it
was not until more than 24 hours later that I found out he didn't have
insurance at all. They had started a policy and than once they got
their cards they called and canceled it on 4/27/2007.
This man has been driving without insurance for 10months! It is not
like his policy accidentally lapsed right before the accident he knew
he didn't have insurance for almost a whole year and just kept
driving.
Do *YOU* have insurance? If so, call your insurance company,
let them handle it, and DON'T contact this guy again yourself.
I know it is insurance company policy that if the damages exceed more
that 80% of the value of the car that they "total" it and give you a
check for the fair market value, but remember I am not dealing with an
insurance company I am dealing with an uninsured idiot.
I know you guys are going to say "...well if he didn't have insurance
to begin than he probably doesn't have enough money to pay you
anyways..."
You should be dealing with *YOUR* insurance company. If you have
uninsured motorist coverage (in some states, it's mandatory), you
will be covered even if this guy doesn't have a dime and the car
he was driving turns out to be stolen.
I wrote hem a letter yesterday and I was going to send it certified
mail today but I don't have the money to hire an attorney so I'm not
sure if it is worded correctly. Can some one please take a look at it
and tell me what I can and should do?
Let your insurance company handle it. They can afford lawyers.
That's what you pay them for.
|
| |
| |
<OP was involved in an auto accident with an uninsured driver who was
at fault, and is looking for advice on how to proceed.>
First thing, if you are injured, go see a doctor. Don't put that off.
Next - the value of your vehicle. By law, the at-fault party
(tortfeasor) has a duty to make you whole. That is, to put you back
in the same position you were in before the accident happened. If
your vehicle has a market value of $1200 pre-accident, that is what
you are legally entitled to. They don't have to make you better than
you are - in this case, pay $3,800 to repair a car worth $1,200.
You'd be profiting $2600 in that case - you can't legally demand a
profit.
As far as the rental car goes? The fact that you must pay a surcharge
because you're underage isn't recoverable. You can work that other
ways - ie, a friend/family member who is over 25 rents a car, and
lends you theirs - I've had insureds and claimants go that route when
I was handling auto claims. And the fact that your car is totaled
mitigates the rental charges completely. They don't have to pay for a
rental car while your car is in the shop, because they don't have to
pay to repair it - they simply need to pay you the loss of your
vehicle. You may be entitled to a small amount of rental while you
settle your total loss, but it sounds like your car is currently -
albeit not easily - drivable. They're also not responsible for any
insurance you might take out on a rental vehicle, and since I'm
assuming your personal policy on the Jeep does not include Collision
and Other Than Collision/Comprehensive coverage, you would likely have
to pay that as well to the rental agency.
The lost wages are also questionable. They would be part of a bodily
injury claim, not a physical damage claim. Which brings me again back
to the 'see a doctor' response. You may have a legitimate bodily
injury claim.
Check with your own agent and see if you have Uninsured Motorist
coverage on your policy - that would be the first place to put a
bodily injury claim. After that, it would definitely be a suit
against the person who hit you.
(Also, please note - Florida is a pure comparative negligence state.
That means that if a judge finds you are in any way responsible for
the loss, even as little as 1%, your insurance company will have to
pay that percentage of the other person's damages.) You need to make
sure your insurance company is on notice of this claim, if you haven't
already done so.
That all being said, you can demand anything you want from him, and if
he pays it, fantastic. However, if you end up having to go to court,
understand that what you are legally entitled to is far less than your
actual demand.
Good luck!
|
| |
| |
Flashy Grand Am,
My car has a little over $3000 worth of damages and it will cost $1820
for the rental car while it is being repaired, extra $25 a day because
I am only 22. I have lost $216, to date, worth of work since the
accident so my totals exceed the $5000 max for small claims court.
Can I sue him for the actual price to fix my car? Or do I have to only
sue him for the fair market value of the Jeep?
First off, contact your own insurance. Don't you have Comp &
Collision? Or just liability?
Assuming you only have liability...
Yes, you can sue him. If the amount exceeds the small claims limit,
you can sue him in Superior Court, but the costs and time will be greater.
You can sue him for actual damages or, if actual damages exceed the
value of the car, then the value of the car. Plus all the ancillary
costs. Don't forget those.
Since the man owns property, you've got a good chance at getting
payment out of him.
Good luck.
Lighthope
Pearls of Wisdom - If 90% of all the scientists who ever lived are alive
today, doesn't that mean that 90% of the mad scientists are alive as well?
--== TIGERS' QUEST - http://www.tigersquest.com
--== THE DOCTOR WHO AUDIO DRAMAS - http://www.dwad.net
--== A CHRISTMAS SPECIAL - http://christmas.dwad.net
|
| |
| |
On Mar 7, 7:02=A0am, Flashy Grand Am <amazon...@hotmail.com> wrote:
I was t-boned on 2/28/2008 by an 83 year old man who decided it would
be fun to do a u-turn in the middle of a 4 lane major road.
When I scrambled to get out of the passengers door, because mine is
smashed in, the man said
"I'm so sorry I didn't see you there was ice on my windshield"
I stood there shocked and replied
"REALLY! There was ice on my windshield this morning too but you know
what I did...I waited at home for 15 min. spraying my windows with the
hose, using the defrost and scraping the ice off before I got on the
road and endangered all of the other drivers. You know why I made
myself 15 min. late for work... because you are not supposed to drive
a car if you can't see out of it!"
The officer arrived on scene and determined that he was at fault. The
man gave the officer his license, registration and insurance but it
was not until more than 24 hours later that I found out he didn't have
insurance at all. They had started a policy and than once they got
their cards they called and canceled it on 4/27/2007.
You have a very detailed story... but one crucial detail is missing...
what type of insurance do YOU have? Hopefully you have collision/
comprehensive coverage... which pays you EVEN IF no one else is as
fault. (The other driver has not yet been definitively proven to be
at fault, in spite of what the officer said... the final determination
would be made in court or... more likely... when the involved parties
settle out of court. The officer made his determination in a few
minutes based on what you and the other driver said. This
determination could be contradicted later.)
If you have collision/comprehensive coverage file a claim against your
policy, accept the fact that your rates may go up, and let your
insurer handle it. (BTW, you are almost certainly supposed to report
the accident to the insurer even if you don't wish to file a claim.)
If you lack such insurance, yep, you have to sue him and you have to
sue him for the FULL amount of damages, including medical coverage.
(But... not including the price of a new car, because you were driving
a used car when you wrecked.) The fact that his insurance lapsed
makes it a little easier to sue him.
Assuming his insurance truly has expired, you won't be fighting an
insurance company's lawyers... who tend to be pretty good. But it
still won't be fun.
I am guessing what happened is that the old man is losing his grip on
life's little details... and if you sue him, you will probably be
dealing with his children/siblings/spouse/ex-partners and their
lawyer(s). It could be pretty nasty. Since there are several
thousand dollars at stake, I reccomend getting your own lawyer.
|
| |
| |
Sat, 08 Mar 2008 07:58:45 -0500 from Jobeth66 <amy.daley@gmail.com>:
The fact that you must pay a surcharge because you're underage
isn't recoverable. You can work that other ways - ie, a
friend/family member who is over 25 rents a car, and lends you
theirs - I've had insureds and claimants go that route when I was
handling auto claims.
I *strongly* disagree.
(a) Your cost of a rental car is part of the chargeable cost of the
accident. If you have a higher cost because you're under 25, that's
not your fault and that surcharge is *not* excluded. Now, you can't
rent a Rolls Royce, but you can rent an ordinary car comparable to
what you were driving before, and it costs what it costs.
(b) Jobeth has a, well, novel idea that the victim of an auto
accident should somehow be required to borrow a car from someone
else, who then has the hassle of renting a car. I have never heard
such a theory before, and if Jobeth did this when "handling auto
claims" then I am only happy that her experience is in the past.
--
If you e-mail me from a fake address, your fingers will drop off.
I am not a lawyer; this is not legal advice. When you read anything
legal on the net, always verify it on your own, in light of your
particular circumstances. You may also need to consult a lawyer.
Stan Brown, Oak Road Systems, Tompkins County, New York, USA
http://OakRoadSystems.com
|
| |
| |
| On Mar 7, 7:02 am, Flashy Grand Am <amazon...@hotmail.com> wrote:
|| [OP's car was hit by a negligent driver. She was in it and received
| minor injuries. She has a large car repair bill and has made a
| settlement demand to the other driver.]
|| > I know you guys are going to say "...well if he didn't have insurance
| > to begin than he probably doesn't have enough money to pay you
| > anyways..."
| >
| > I researched him online and found that he does indeed own his home and
| > he also owns a piece of land here in town. So there would be something
| > to put a lien against.
|| Don't count on a lien against his home. In Florida, a person's
| homestead is exempt from sale to satisfy a civil judgment. That's why
| the Nicole Brown's family couldn't seize OJ Simpson's Florida mansion
| to pay some of their judgment against him.
Don't know about Florida but to my limited understanding (in Louisiana and
Texas) the lean stays on the property. When the property is sold the lean
has to be satisfied.
|
| |
| |
On Mar 9, 1:06 pm, Stan Brown <the_stan_br...@fastmail.fm> wrote:
Sat, 08 Mar 2008 07:58:45 -0500 from Jobeth66 <amy.da...@gmail.com>:
I *strongly* disagree.
(a) Your cost of a rental car is part of the chargeable cost of the
accident. If you have a higher cost because you're under 25, that's
not your fault and that surcharge is *not* excluded. Now, you can't
rent a Rolls Royce, but you can rent an ordinary car comparable to
what you were driving before, and it costs what it costs.
Actually, no. What's part of the chargeable cost of the accident is a
reasonable cost for substitute transportation. Some states require
that it be of like kind & quality to what was being driven, some
states are silent on that. Most carriers allow for similar vehicles -
but if she has a 1989 Jeep, all she can reasonably expect is $20-25/
day. The carrier isn't going to pay for rental surcharges or
insurance surcharges. There are places you can rent without an age
surcharge, you have to search them out, but they do exist. The
carrier owes to make you whole. If you can't rent a vehicle, there
are other methods of transportation - like, buses and taxis. There
are rental agencies that won't rent to you without a valid credit card
or a significant cash deposit (like, $500). If you can't afford that,
or don't have a credit card - does that somehow in your world become
the carrier's (or tortfeasor's) problem as well? If the car she was
driving had an installed GPS or multi-disk CD player or entertainment
unit (DVD/Gaming system) , guess what? The carrier isn't going to
guarantee that the temporary substitute has those things, either.
(b) Jobeth has a, well, novel idea that the victim of an auto
accident should somehow be required to borrow a car from someone
else, who then has the hassle of renting a car. I have never heard
such a theory before, and if Jobeth did this when "handling auto
claims" then I am only happy that her experience is in the past.
It's a suggestion I always made to a young driver, whether insured or
claimant, because it alleviates the need for a surcharge, if they
can't find a surcharge-free rental agency. I've also had people rent
vehicles from friends & family members. They're not required to do
anything - but if all I'm offering (or all they're covered under their
policy for) is $25/day, and the surcharge is going to exceed that, why
the heck *wouldn't* you give them suggestions to make it cheaper and
easier for them?
Believe me, my solutions were not unique in the industry. I no longer
handle personal lines or auto claims, but the basics don't change.
I've been in the field for almost 20 years, handle claims for Fortune
500 clients, have earned several industry designations and I'm
required to complete 48 hours of CE in insurance related study every 4
years to maintain my license. I've also participated in monthly ADR
panels.
I'll put my knowledge and experience up against anyone's. And I HAVE
handled personal auto in Florida. Have you?
|
| |
| |
n Mar 7, 8:02 am, Flashy Grand Am <amazon...@hotmail.com> wrote:
I was t-boned on 2/28/2008 by an 83 year old man who decided it would
be fun to do a u-turn in the middle of a 4 lane major road.
Now don't be sarcastic. Even if the facts are in your favor,
expressing that kind of attitude at trial could backfire into sympathy
for the poor old geezer who ran into you.
Were you injured? If so, get medical attention immediately. Then
walk, don't run, to a personal injury attorney and get him on board to
represent you. The earlier you do that, the better for you.
If you were not injured, and all you have is a property damage claim,
chances are it is not big enough to be worth an attorney's time. You
will have to either look to your own insurance, or sue this guy on
your own in small claims court, to get recovery.
was not until more than 24 hours later that I found out he didn't have
insurance at all. They had started a policy and than once they got
their cards they called and canceled it on 4/27/2007.
Bummer. Of course, the advice several other posters have given you
on this thread, to promptly notify your own insurance company and let
them take care of it, is probably the best thing to do first of all.
Once the dust settles from whatever they are able to do, you will know
whether your problem has been solved or whether you need to do
anything else, such as sue this guy, to get compensation for your
loss.
This man has been driving without insurance for 10months! It is not
like his policy accidentally lapsed right before the accident he knew
he didn't have insurance for almost a whole year and just kept
driving.
Unfortunately, this guy's lapse, even if intentional, is not something
that can likely come out at trial of your claim. In MD at least, the
fact the other party carries or doesn't carry liability insurance is
not admissible in evidence in your suit for damages you claim he
caused -- even though it is mandatory to carry insurance here. The
rationale is, his ability to pay (or the source of payment) is
completely irrelevant to the only 2 issues at trial, which are (1) did
he do anything negligent that caused your damage, and (2) how much
your claim is worth, based on the applicable legal standards.
He received tickets for the accident; I'm not sure what they were for
it has not been released to public records yet. I did not get any
tickets.
You may not be able to use the fact that he was ticketed in evidence
either. You are required to put on your own evidence to prove,
independently of the ticket, that what he did was negligent. You will
have to show why U-turns are not permitted at that location and/or why
defendant was negligent for making one when he couldn't see other
traffic out his car windows because he negligently failed to clean his
car windows of ice before driving. However, if he actually goes to
traffic court and pleads guilty to the violation charge, you can use
that plea against him as an admission and put that fact in evidence at
your civil trial for damages. The law on this does vary from state to
state so YMMV.
I am not hurt badly just a little sore in my neck, back, shoulder and
wrist. I told the officer I was hurting and I told my insurance
company also but I have not had time to go to the Dr. yet.
So you _were_ injured. Get off your duff and get to a doctor NOW.
The longer you wait, the worse. Then get yourself a lawyer. If you
don't, you will almost certainly wind up selling your claim far short
of its true value.
My car has a little over $3000 worth of damages and it will cost $1820
for the rental car while it is being repaired, extra $25 a day because
I am only 22. I have lost $216, to date, worth of work since the
accident so my totals exceed the $5000 max for small claims court.
If you lost work because you were injured, that is compensable as part
of your personal injury claim along with your medical bills, and your
pain and suffering. But if you missed work just to get your car
fixed, that is _not_ compensable.
Can I sue him for the actual price to fix my car? Or do I have to only
sue him for the fair market value of the Jeep? 1989 Jeep Cherokee. It
would be around $1200
In most states, then, that would cap the amount you are allowed to
claim on the property damage side of your claim.
but I have been looking and I can not find a car
in equal condition to my jeep for that price. I just put a lot of
money into the jeep and there was nothing mechanically wrong with it
she was a sturdy reliable car. I want to be able to fix the Jeep.
Your situation is a common one. In fact, _most_ people whose cars
are totalled wind up having to pay a lot more to find a suitable
replacement car because a car of similar age and value but unknown
history is not really what they want - they want something newer,
safer, etc. Nothing wrong with that, and no one is telling you that
you're not allowed to do that. However, the law will not make the
defendant pay for it, since the maximum value of your loss is the
total loss value of the property that was damaged, even if it is
technically repairable.
I don't think I should have to deal with a crappy undependable car
just because this man was not paying attention and driving a car in an
unsafe condition without insurance.
As noted, it's your choice what kind of car you get to replace the
Jeep, or whether you choose to fix the Jeep even though the repair
cost exceeds its value. But the law will not make the defendant pay
for that choice of yours.
However, what in practice often happens is, the "pain and suffering"
damages you get on your injury claim settlement can help pay for the
new car. Which is why IMO you would be stupid not to pursue your,
quite legitimate, injury claim even though you seem bent on belittling
it and declining to pursue it. To be perfectly blunt, you CANNOT get
enough money from your property damage claim alone, to put you in the
place you want to be. So choose accordingly.
I know it is insurance company policy that if the damages exceed more
that 80% of the value of the car that they "total" it and give you a
check for the fair market value, but remember I am not dealing with an
insurance company I am dealing with an uninsured idiot.
The reason the insurance companies do that is because of what the law
says, not the other way around. The law says that if the repair cost
exceeds the total loss value, the max you can get is the total loss
value.
I know you guys are going to say "...well if he didn't have insurance
to begin than he probably doesn't have enough money to pay you
anyways..."
Maybe or maybe not. But since you also have an injury claim, you
should be presenting that claim to your own insurer through the
attorney you are going to go out and hire, today or tomorrow.
If your own insurance includes collision coverage, or some other form
of coverage that would pay for the damage to your Jeep, you should go
that route first. If they pay your claim, they may choose to
"subrogate" (step into your shoes) to pursue the damage claim against
the uninsured geezer, but that should be no concern of yours, and it
is their decision whether to do so or not. But don't settle the
personal injury part of your claim witho
|
| |
| |
On Sat, 08 Mar 2008 07:57:22 -0500, A Michigan Attorney
<miattorney@gmail.com> wrote:
On Mar 7, 7:02 am, Flashy Grand Am <amazon...@hotmail.com> wrote:
[OP's car was hit by a negligent driver. She was in it and received
minor injuries. She has a large car repair bill and has made a
settlement demand to the other driver.]
Don't count on a lien against his home. In Florida, a person's
homestead is exempt from sale to satisfy a civil judgment. That's why
the Nicole Brown's family couldn't seize OJ Simpson's Florida mansion
to pay some of their judgment against him.
In a case like that, if the house burned down, could the insurance
company's check be attached, and some of the money siezed, and only
enough to buy a modest house given to the respondent so that he would
have a place to live, but not a fancy place??
If you are inclined to email me
for some reason, remove NOPSAM :-)
|
| |
| |
In article <2dpct31p3jgvt81oe85mcudmupefut4002@4ax.com>,
mm <NOPSAMmm2005@bigfoot.com> wrote:
On Sat, 08 Mar 2008 07:57:22 -0500, A Michigan Attorney
<miattorney@gmail.com> wrote:
Don't count on a lien against his home. In Florida, a person's
homestead is exempt from sale to satisfy a civil judgment. That's why
the Nicole Brown's family couldn't seize OJ Simpson's Florida mansion
to pay some of their judgment against him.
In a case like that, if the house burned down, could the insurance
company's check be attached, and some of the money siezed, and only
enough to buy a modest house given to the respondent so that he would
have a place to live, but not a fancy place??
In that situation, I would think that the entire check (up to the
amount of the judgment) could be seized, because money isn't
homestead.
Seth
|
| |
| |
On Mon, 10 Mar 2008 07:48:28 -0400, Jobeth66 <amy.daley@gmail.com>
wrote:
On Mar 9, 1:06 pm, Stan Brown <the_stan_br...@fastmail.fm> wrote:
Actually, no. What's part of the chargeable cost of the accident is a
reasonable cost for substitute transportation. Some states require
that it be of like kind & quality to what was being driven, some
states are silent on that. Most carriers allow for similar vehicles -
but if she has a 1989 Jeep, all she can reasonably expect is $20-25/
day. The carrier isn't going to pay for rental surcharges or
insurance surcharges.
Some surcharges no, but I don't believe you about this one. The OP
can do without extras, but he can't make himself older than he is.
There are places you can rent without an age
surcharge, you have to search them out, but they do exist. The
How come you didn't mention this the first time you posted?
carrier owes to make you whole. If you can't rent a vehicle, there
are other methods of transportation - like, buses and taxis. There
That's what he's not obliged to do. Unless taxis are available and
would cost less than a rental.
are rental agencies that won't rent to you without a valid credit card
or a significant cash deposit (like, $500). If you can't afford that,
or don't have a credit card -
He's probably gotten 40 offers for credit cards this year.
does that somehow in your world become
the carrier's (or tortfeasor's) problem as well? If the car she was
driving had an installed GPS or multi-disk CD player or entertainment
unit (DVD/Gaming system) , guess what? The carrier isn't going to
guarantee that the temporary substitute has those things, either.
No it won't, but all these things are different and of a different
nature from an age surcharge.
(b) Jobeth has a, well, novel idea that the victim of an auto
accident should somehow be required to borrow a car from someone
else, who then has the hassle of renting a car. I have never heard
such a theory before, and if Jobeth did this when "handling auto
claims" then I am only happy that her experience is in the past.
It's a suggestion I always made to a young driver, whether insured or
claimant, because it alleviates the need for a surcharge, if they
can't find a surcharge-free rental agency. I've also had people rent
vehicles from friends & family members.
In violation of the insurance contract on those vehicles? Do you
realize that if those people have an accident driving this "rental"
car, they'll have a choice between filing no claim, or lying on an
affidavit about who was driving, or lying on an affidavit about the
rental relationship, and if the rental relationship comes to light,
the friend or family member will have his insurance cancelled, and I
don't think the insurance co. will pay the claim.
They're not required to do
anything - but if all I'm offering (or all they're covered under their
policy for) is $25/day,
That's true for someone's own policy, A's policy, which is entitled to
set a limit, to which A has agreed, on how much A will be reimbursed
for a rental car. And the other person B, who is at fault in this
accident, may also have a limit on how he B will be reimbursed for car
rental under his own policy, to which B has agreed. But A has not
agreed to such a limit on B's insurance. A is, as you said,
entitled to be made whole, and he's entitled to rent a car** and be
reimbursed for it by B. That arrangement is not covered by any 25
dollar a day limit.
**1820 dollars, about 30 days or more I thihk, seems like a long time
to me to get a car fixed. OP, are they waiting for parts? Maybe they
can make the car drivable and the OP can drive his own car until the
parts that are ordered come in, and rent a car again for the days it
takes when the car is in the shop a second time, but that's a separate
issue.
and the surcharge is going to exceed that, why
the heck *wouldn't* you give them suggestions to make it cheaper and
easier for them?
One reason is that private owners of cars who rent them without the
express written permission of their insurance companies are not
covered by insurance when the rental driver is driving them.
Believe me, my solutions were not unique in the industry. I no longer
handle personal lines or auto claims, but the basics don't change.
I've been in the field for almost 20 years, handle claims for Fortune
500 clients, have earned several industry designations and I'm
required to complete 48 hours of CE in insurance related study every 4
years to maintain my license. I've also participated in monthly ADR
panels.
I'll put my knowledge and experience up against anyone's. And I HAVE
handled personal auto in Florida. Have you?
It took 15 minutes for the OP to get the ice off his car. I don't
think he's in Florida.
If you are inclined to email me
for some reason, remove NOPSAM :-)
|
| |
| |
On Wed, 12 Mar 2008 07:01:21 -0400, sethb@panix.com (Seth) wrote:
In article <2dpct31p3jgvt81oe85mcudmupefut4002@4ax.com>,
mm <NOPSAMmm2005@bigfoot.com> wrote:
In a case like that, if the house burned down, could the insurance
company's check be attached, and some of the money siezed, and only
enough to buy a modest house given to the respondent so that he would
have a place to live, but not a fancy place??
In that situation, I would think that the entire check (up to the
amount of the judgment) could be seized, because money isn't
homestead.
That would depend on the statute. There may be a state in which the
homestead exemption is continued in casualty insurance so long as the
debtor declares an intent to use the same to establish a new
homestead. I don't know if there is; Oregon certainly does not and
Washington appears not to.
Daniel Reitman
|
| |
| |
On Mar 11, 6:58 am, mm <NOPSAMmm2...@bigfoot.com> wrote:
Don't count on a lien against his home. In Florida, a person's
homestead is exempt from sale to satisfy a civil judgment. That's why
the Nicole Brown's family couldn't seize OJ Simpson's Florida mansion
to pay some of their judgment against him.
In a case like that, if the house burned down, could the insurance
company's check be attached, and some of the money siezed, and only
enough to buy a modest house given to the respondent so that he would
have a place to live, but not a fancy place??
I don't know. I suspect not. But if so, the debtor could easily
avoid that trap by purchasing another home and having the insurance
check written to the seller or builder. Technicalities tend to be
double-edged swords.
|
| |
| |
On Fri, 14 Mar 2008 06:03:23 -0400, A Michigan Attorney
<miattorney@gmail.com> wrote:
On Mar 11, 6:58 am, mm <NOPSAMmm2...@bigfoot.com> wrote:
Don't count on a lien against his home. In Florida, a person's
homestead is exempt from sale to satisfy a civil judgment. That's why
the Nicole Brown's family couldn't seize OJ Simpson's Florida mansion
to pay some of their judgment against him.
I don't know. I suspect not. But if so, the debtor could easily
avoid that trap by purchasing another home and having the insurance
check written to the seller or builder. Technicalities tend to be
double-edged swords.
In that case, what if the debtor won some other sort of judgment, for
a different business deal or a big pain and suffering judgment in a
traffic accident. Could he get the insurance company or other payer
to write a check straight to a house seller or builder, to keep that
money away from his creditor? While he sold his cheap small house,
and maybe let the creditor get that money.
Or say he had sold or placed on consignement a million dollars worth
of jewels or whatever his normal business dealt with, but not received
payment before the judgement against him. Would he be able to get
that payer, if he cooperated for some reason, to pay directly to the
seller or builder.
If you are inclined to email me
for some reason, remove NOPSAM :-)
|
| |
| |
|
