|
Hi,
I had a car accident in California almost 1 year ago where I was the
driver at fault, I lost control and collided head on with an oncoming
car, writing off both cars. No body was injured and we all walked from
the accident, thankfully.
I was driving a hire car, which when initially hired I was offered
additional insurance to cover for full damage to both cars, which I
took for precaution. After the accident I was told by the car rental
co. that they were self insured and I had no coverage, it was all
explained in legal fine print on the back of the contract, something
that the simpleton wouldn't understand.
After this I was also to pay an approximate figure of $5000 US for the
towing, stowage, downtime and excess on the car I had hired, I paid the
money so I could leave the country ASAP with out complication.
When I began my travel I purchased travel insurance through an Insurer
in Australia, again in fine print I was not covered whilst operating a
car, I spoke to a rep on the phone before I left Australia to confirm
details of my insurance and was given verbal confirmation that I am
covered in the case of a car accident but after the event happened they
denied any such claim.
Recently I received a summons of myself to appear in a Californian
court on a hearing where the car rental company is being sued on my
behalf and for their own negligence for a personal liability claim of
$106000 US for the passenger in the car, I expect another claim for a
similar amount for the driver plus another for the cost of the cars
destroyed.
What situation am I in being an Australian, can I be litigated within
Australia for this? If so how does the process work? Would it be worth
their while for international litigation and also if I was to fight
back. Can they make claim on my assets?
Grounds that I can fight back on is that they hired a car to me knowing
that I was an Australian and have very different road rules ( Their
negligence that made me a liability to myself and others ), the car
that I was driving was a replacement as the first car was defective (
it had to be returned because the wheel came loose on the freeway ) and
that they mislead me with the insurance when I initially hired the car.
Anyone who could help with a bit of light on this situation would be
most appreciated and I thank you greatly in advance.
Thank you.
|
| |
| |
On 5 Feb 2005 22:19:18 -0800 akureyi wrote:
Hi,
I had a car accident in California almost 1 year ago where I was the
driver at fault, I lost control and collided head on with an oncoming
car, writing off both cars. No body was injured and we all walked from
the accident, thankfully.
Stay in australia for the next 7 years or so.
No USA court can force you to appear.
I doubt if there's any such thing as extradition on a matter like this.
Since it's purely a civil case, not criminal, let the insurance companies
battle it out.
Screw 'em. Stay home.
|
| |
| |
thanks, but there is a possibility that they can come after my assets
here in australia, that is what I am trying avoid. In the little that I
understand about law and especially the american legal system there is
a possibility that I can be sued even though I live in Australia. I
know getting professional legal advice is the best option but I would
like to know as much as I can before I make that consultation.
|
| |
| |
akureyi wrote:
Hi,
I had a car accident in California almost 1 year ago where I was the
driver at fault, I lost control and collided head on with an oncoming
car, writing off both cars. No body was injured and we all walked from
the accident, thankfully.
I was driving a hire car, which when initially hired I was offered
additional insurance to cover for full damage to both cars, which I
took for precaution. After the accident I was told by the car rental
co. that they were self insured and I had no coverage,
Complete bull#@($ and fraud. If you took the additional coverage, then
the Rental Company, self insured or not, is completely responsible.
Sounds like the comitted insurance fraud, collecting $$ while not
being registered or authorized by the State as a legitimite insurance
company.
Contact the State of California Insurance commissioner immediately.
it was all
explained in legal fine print on the back of the contract, something
that the simpleton wouldn't understand.
After this I was also to pay an approximate figure of $5000 US for the
towing, stowage, downtime and excess on the car I had hired, I paid
the money so I could leave the country ASAP with out complication.
You were ripped off, and should file a complaint with the California
insurance commissioner to get your $5k back.
When I began my travel I purchased travel insurance through an Insurer
in Australia, again in fine print I was not covered whilst operating a
car, I spoke to a rep on the phone before I left Australia to confirm
details of my insurance and was given verbal confirmation that I am
covered in the case of a car accident but after the event happened
they denied any such claim.
You must have "victim" etched on your forehead.
Recently I received a summons of myself to appear in a Californian
court on a hearing where the car rental company is being sued on my
behalf and for their own negligence for a personal liability claim of
$106000 US for the passenger in the car, I expect another claim for a
similar amount for the driver plus another for the cost of the cars
destroyed.
What situation am I in being an Australian, can I be litigated within
Australia for this?
Not likely for the small amounts involved. The injured parties are going
after the
Rental Car company for the judgement.
If so how does the process work? Would it be worth
their while for international litigation and also if I was to fight
back. Can they make claim on my assets?
International claims are tough to prosecute, even tougher to collect.
Grounds that I can fight back on is that they hired a car to me
knowing that I was an Australian and have very different road rules (
Their negligence that made me a liability to myself and others ),
Bull#@($, now you sound like an idiot.
the
car that I was driving was a replacement as the first car was
defective ( it had to be returned because the wheel came loose on the
freeway )
Before or after your HEAD on collision?
and that they mislead me with the insurance when I
initially hired the car.
That's the key. Again, file an immediate complaint with the California
Insurance commisioner for their fraud.
Anyone who could help with a bit of light on this situation would be
most appreciated and I thank you greatly in advance.
Thank you.
--
"Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as when they do it from
religious conviction."
- Blaise Pascal (1623-1662)
|
| |
| |
On 5 Feb 2005 23:01:56 -0800 akureyi wrote:
thanks, but there is a possibility that they can come after my assets
here in australia, that is what I am trying avoid. In the little that I
understand about law and especially the american legal system there is
a possibility that I can be sued even though I live in Australia. I
know getting professional legal advice is the best option but I would
like to know as much as I can before I make that consultation.
Anyone in the world can be sued in the USA.
The problem is, the laws of the USA do NOT extend into other countries.
If they come take hold of your assets, you can now take them to australian
court.
Write a letter to the judge explaining that due to the fact you are a
resident of australia, you are not in a position to travel to and fro as the
courts would like. Unless the court is willing to flip the bill for the
tickets and pay for your time.
Include in the letter, an explanation as to what happened.
Also mention the facts about the insurance company's handling of the matter.
If you can, include a copy of any items signed, and copies of any checks
written to cover the expenses involved.
Quit worrying about what the American courts can do. They can only enforce
the laws within it's own boundaries.
|
| |
| |
just fyi, richard is not an attorney and has a reputation here for
having absolutely no idea what he is talking about when it comes
to law. i'd highly recommend taking any of his advice with a grain
of salt and waiting to see if someone who actually has some
experience with this can provide some insight.
thanks, but there is a possibility that they can come after my assets
here in australia, that is what I am trying avoid. In the little that I
understand about law and especially the american legal system there is
a possibility that I can be sued even though I live in Australia. I
know getting professional legal advice is the best option but I would
like to know as much as I can before I make that consultation.
|
| |
| |
I had a car accident in California almost 1 year ago where I was
the
driver at fault, I lost control and collided head on with an
oncoming
car, writing off both cars. No body was injured and we all
walked from
the accident, thankfully.
I was driving a hire car, which when initially hired I was
offered
additional insurance to cover for full damage to both cars,
which I
took for precaution. After the accident I was told by the car
rental
co. that they were self insured and I had no coverage, it was
all
explained in legal fine print on the back of the contract,
something
that the simpleton wouldn't understand.
After this I was also to pay an approximate figure of $5000 US
for the
towing, stowage, downtime and excess on the car I had hired, I
paid the
money so I could leave the country ASAP with out complication.
When I began my travel I purchased travel insurance through an
Insurer
in Australia, again in fine print I was not covered whilst
operating a
car, I spoke to a rep on the phone before I left Australia to
confirm
details of my insurance and was given verbal confirmation that I
am
covered in the case of a car accident but after the event
happened they
denied any such claim.
Recently I received a summons of myself to appear in a
Californian
court on a hearing where the car rental company is being sued on
my
behalf and for their own negligence for a personal liability
claim of
$106000 US for the passenger in the car, I expect another claim
for a
similar amount for the driver plus another for the cost of the
cars
destroyed.
What situation am I in being an Australian, can I be litigated
within
Australia for this? If so how does the process work? Would it be
worth
their while for international litigation and also if I was to
fight
back. Can they make claim on my assets?
Grounds that I can fight back on is that they hired a car to me
knowing
that I was an Australian and have very different road rules (
Their
negligence that made me a liability to myself and others ), the
car
that I was driving was a replacement as the first car was
defective (
it had to be returned because the wheel came loose on the
freeway ) and
that they mislead me with the insurance when I initially hired
the car.
Anyone who could help with a bit of light on this situation
would be
most appreciated and I thank you greatly in advance.
You need to defend the action in the U.S. The California state
court will issue a default judgment against you if you don't.
That California judgment can be converted into an Austrailian
judgment by application to an Austrailian court. It's easy. Then
the creditor will use that judgment to attach your assets in
Australia.
You don't have any direct defense to the lawsuit, because you say
you were at fault. Your defense is a counterclaim against the
rental car company for indemnity. If you paid for the full
coverage insurance, they owe you full indemnity. I don't
understand what you said about the fine print. If you paid for
full coverage, the fine print about self-insured doesn't change
that. You will need a California attorney anyway, so let that
person sort out the fine print.
This defense shouldn't be too expensive. Your attorney may be
able to get an early-on determination that the rental car company
owes you indemnity, including legal defense. Then you become a
spectator and won't be spending much money.
Forget that stuff about the rental car company being negligent in
renting to an Australian. That's not valid.
Hiring a California attorney is easy. Do it by phone. You can
call the bar association referral service in the county where the
court is, and get phone numbers of attorneys who have signed up
for referrals in personal injury defense. Don't delay.
Never listen to Richard.
McGyver
|
| |
| |
Rob wrote:
just fyi, richard is not an attorney and has a reputation here for
having absolutely no idea what he is talking about when it comes
to law. i'd highly recommend taking any of his advice with a grain
of salt and waiting to see if someone who actually has some
experience with this can provide some insight.
Richard "Booolis the Idiot" is a certified whack-job. Anyone following
his "advice" deserves the pain and suffering that will ensue .
|
| |
| |
McGyver wrote:
the
offered
which I
rental
all
something
am
Californian
my
cars
fight
Their
car
would be
You need to defend the action in the U.S. The California state
court will issue a default judgment against you if you don't.
That California judgment can be converted into an Austrailian
judgment by application to an Austrailian court. It's easy. Then
the creditor will use that judgment to attach your assets in
Australia.
You don't have any direct defense to the lawsuit, because you say
you were at fault. Your defense is a counterclaim against the
rental car company for indemnity. If you paid for the full
coverage insurance, they owe you full indemnity. I don't
understand what you said about the fine print. If you paid for
full coverage, the fine print about self-insured doesn't change
that. You will need a California attorney anyway, so let that
person sort out the fine print.
This defense shouldn't be too expensive. Your attorney may be
able to get an early-on determination that the rental car company
owes you indemnity, including legal defense. Then you become a
spectator and won't be spending much money.
Forget that stuff about the rental car company being negligent in
renting to an Australian. That's not valid.
Ever met an Australian?
Hiring a California attorney is easy. Do it by phone. You can
call the bar association referral service in the county where the
court is, and get phone numbers of attorneys who have signed up
for referrals in personal injury defense. Don't delay.
Never listen to Richard.
Except when he is right ... which is never.
McGyver
--
"Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as when they do it from
religious conviction."
- Blaise Pascal (1623-1662)
|
| |
| |
Richard wrote:
On 5 Feb 2005 23:01:56 -0800 akureyi wrote:
Anyone in the world can be sued in the USA.
Except of course the criminal scum of the current Repuglikan administration.
The problem is, the laws of the USA do NOT extend into other
countries.
Bwahahahhaaaaaaaaaa! Tell it to Iraq ... Afghanistan ... Somalia ... Panama
.... Grenada ... Vietnam ....
If they come take hold of your assets, you can now take
them to australian court.
Write a letter to the judge explaining that due to the fact you are a
resident of australia, you are not in a position to travel to and fro
as the courts would like. Unless the court is willing to flip the
bill for the tickets and pay for your time.
First class or chartered private jet of course.
Include in the letter, an explanation as to what happened.
That he did indeed have a head on collision with the plaintiff and caused
their damages?
Also mention the facts about the insurance company's handling of the
matter.
What "insurance company"?
If you can, include a copy of any items signed, and copies of
any checks written to cover the expenses involved.
And don't forget a copy of the latest Harry Potter novel.
Quit worrying about what the American courts can do. They can only
enforce the laws within it's own boundaries.
If only that were true, Buuuulis you stammering jackass, if only that were
true.
--
"Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as when they do it from
religious conviction."
- Blaise Pascal (1623-1662)
|
| |
| |
On Sun, 06 Feb 2005 15:38:12 GMT Rob wrote:
just fyi, richard is not an attorney and has a reputation here for
having absolutely no idea what he is talking about when it comes
to law. i'd highly recommend taking any of his advice with a grain
of salt and waiting to see if someone who actually has some
experience with this can provide some insight.
Many who reply to this group are also not attorneys.
As this is a worldwide forum, there are no prerequisites that only licensed
attorneys, with proof, can give a response.
This is a discussion group based on any and all legal matters in the world.
Is a licensed attorney in the USA qualified to give legal advive to an
Australian resident?
I don't think so.
Is an attorney licensed to practice only in the state of Florida qualified
to give a California resident legal advice based upon California state law?
I don't think so.
USA laws end at the borders. California laws end at the borders of
california.
They can not be enforced on an australian resident. PERIOD!\
|
| |
| |
On Sun, 6 Feb 2005 17:31:56 -0700 StinkFoot wrote:
Richard wrote:
Except of course the criminal scum of the current Repuglikan
administration.
Or previous administrations such as Nixon's.
The problem is, the laws of the USA do NOT extend into other
countries.
Bwahahahhaaaaaaaaaa! Tell it to Iraq ... Afghanistan ... Somalia ...
Panama
... Grenada ... Vietnam ....
All military actions sanctioned by the USA Congress and approved of by those
soveriegn nations.
With maybe the exception of Iraq.
If they come take hold of your assets, you can now take
them to australian court.
Write a letter to the judge explaining that due to the fact you are a
resident of australia, you are not in a position to travel to and fro
as the courts would like. Unless the court is willing to flip the
bill for the tickets and pay for your time.
First class or chartered private jet of course.
Chartered 747.
Include in the letter, an explanation as to what happened.
That he did indeed have a head on collision with the plaintiff and
caused
their damages?
Yep. What is the court gonna do about it? It's a civil matter.
Also mention the facts about the insurance company's handling of the
matter.
What "insurance company"?
The rental agency said they were self insured, so that would the rental car
agency.
If you can, include a copy of any items signed, and copies of
any checks written to cover the expenses involved.
And don't forget a copy of the latest Harry Potter novel.
And a tourist video of the great down under.
Quit worrying about what the American courts can do. They can only
enforce the laws within it's own boundaries.
If only that were true, Buuuulis you stammering jackass, if only that
were
true.
California would have you believe they are a sovereign nation and can do as
they damn well please.
A california court can not even hope to subpoena a resident of a foreign
country.
The paper it was written on is totally useless.
It's a civil matter. The courts have very limited powers.
|
| |
| |
On Sun, 6 Feb 2005 17:26:39 -0700 StinkFoot wrote:
Ever met an Australian?
Several. Why?
I also went to school with a gal from New Zealand. So what?
|
| |
| |
On Sun, 6 Feb 2005 08:32:15 -0800 McGyver wrote:
You need to defend the action in the U.S. The California state
court will issue a default judgment against you if you don't.
That California judgment can be converted into an Austrailian
judgment by application to an Austrailian court. It's easy. Then
the creditor will use that judgment to attach your assets in
Australia.
I'd like to see that proof in writing sir.
In order for the california civil court to have jurisdiction in australia,
there would have to be an agreement of some sort between the two nations.
Not california and australia.
If the matter were being heard in a US federal civil court, then yeah maybe.
Even if such a court order was issued, would he not then have the right in
australia to defend himself against it?
You don't have any direct defense to the lawsuit, because you say
you were at fault. Your defense is a counterclaim against the
rental car company for indemnity. If you paid for the full
coverage insurance, they owe you full indemnity. I don't
understand what you said about the fine print. If you paid for
full coverage, the fine print about self-insured doesn't change
that. You will need a California attorney anyway, so let that
person sort out the fine print.
He may have a defense. The agency claimed "self insured".
I doubt that the state would allow a car rental agency to be "self insured".
That would be something to look into.
This defense shouldn't be too expensive. Your attorney may be
able to get an early-on determination that the rental car company
owes you indemnity, including legal defense. Then you become a
spectator and won't be spending much money.
As I understand it, the two insurance companies are dickin around and one is
blaming the other.
He's already paid his insurance company what was asked.
It just sounds like the rental agency is balkling out on having to pay up.
Forget that stuff about the rental car company being negligent in
renting to an Australian. That's not valid.
And never rent from that agency again.
Hiring a California attorney is easy. Do it by phone. You can
call the bar association referral service in the county where the
court is, and get phone numbers of attorneys who have signed up
for referrals in personal injury defense. Don't delay.
Never listen to Richard.
McGyver
|
| |
| |
On Sun, 06 Feb 2005 15:38:12 GMT Rob wrote:
Many who reply to this group are also not attorneys.
As this is a worldwide forum, there are no prerequisites that only
licensed
attorneys, with proof, can give a response.
This is a discussion group based on any and all legal matters in the
world.
Is a licensed attorney in the USA qualified to give legal advive to an
Australian resident?
I don't think so.
Is an attorney licensed to practice only in the state of Florida qualified
to give a California resident legal advice based upon California state
law?
I don't think so.
USA laws end at the borders. California laws end at the borders of
california.
They can not be enforced on an australian resident. PERIOD!\
None of which changes the fact you are completely ignorant of how US law
works, nevermind international.
You seem to think law works based on common sense when common sense is
irrelevant when in comes to
even some of the most simple legal issues, nevermind the complex ones you
attempt to apply it to. You
are doing a disservice to anyone who comes here looking for legal advice
with your ignorant responses.
|
| |
| |
"Rob" <rob@nospam.com> wrote in message news:ERqNd.14244$uc.5330@trnddc08...
just fyi, richard is not an attorney and has a reputation here for
having absolutely no idea what he is talking about when it comes
to law. i'd highly recommend taking any of his advice with a grain
of salt and waiting to see if someone who actually has some
experience with this can provide some insight.
I'll second this.
Also, though I can't (and won't) give legal advice to non-clients, you are
almost certainly subject to personal jurisdiction in the United States by
virtue of having entered into, and accepted the benefit of, a contract in
the relevant jurisdiction. Judgments that are final and on the merits can
be enforced in foreign courts. I have no idea what Australia's requirements
are in that regard.
Consult an attorney in Australia. He or she almost certainly knows
associate counsel in the US and can provide an informed answer.
I _am_ a licensed attorney in the US, and the only advice I'll give you is
this: don't seek answers to critical legal questions in newsgroups on the
internet.
Good luck.
|
| |
| |
On Sun, 6 Feb 2005 08:32:15 -0800 McGyver wrote:
I'd like to see that proof in writing sir.
In order for the california civil court to have jurisdiction in australia,
there would have to be an agreement of some sort between the two nations.
Not california and australia.
Good lord, but you're a piece of work!
As I'm sure you know, McGyver, like myself, is a licensed attorney. And, as
licensed attorneys, we went to law school where, among many other things, we
learned about a little thing called "personal jurisdiction." Do a google
search on "personal jurisdiction" and "minimum contacts" and then come back
and apologize to McGyver. I'll even give you a hint: International Shoe v.
Washington.
If the matter were being heard in a US federal civil court, then yeah
maybe.
Even if such a court order was issued, would he not then have the right in
australia to defend himself against it?
Possibly, possibly not. My recollection is that Australia is a signatory to
the Hague Convention on Enforcement of Foreign Judgments.
If you paid for the full
He may have a defense. The agency claimed "self insured".
I doubt that the state would allow a car rental agency to be "self
insured".
That would be something to look into.
On the contrary, many businesses self insure.
As I understand it, the two insurance companies are dickin around and one
is
blaming the other.
Wherein lies the problem: you don't understand it. Once again, Richard, why
you choose to argue from your own exagerated idea of common sense against a
licensed attorney is beyond my comprehension. Here, if the OP follows your
advice, he stands an excellent chance of winding up in a huge amount of
trouble. You're not "discussing law," you're giving someone legal advice
and, once again, you've proven yourself uniquely unqualified to do so.
I concur with McGyver:
Consult an attorney.
Never listen to Richard.
He's already paid his insurance company what was asked.
It just sounds like the rental agency is balkling out on having to pay up.
And never rent from that agency again.
|
| |
| |
On 5 Feb 2005 22:19:18 -0800, "akureyi" <akureyi@hotmail.com>
Hi,
Be glad it wasn't a Canadian or you'd probably be dead.
|
| |
| |
I worked in a car rental agency for a short while and our insurance was
supposed cover any accidents that the driver was involved in especially if
it was their fault. That is what we told the customers to purchase the
extra insurance. Many people who rent cars do so because they have no car,
so why would they have auto insurance. I do know that one time my office
had a customer who had an accident and the company did not want to pay out
because it raised their rates and the office would have to pay for it, they
did everything they could to get out of accepting liability. this is common
practice. if you purchased all the "extra insurance" then you should have
been covered.
Good lord, but you're a piece of work!
As I'm sure you know, McGyver, like myself, is a licensed attorney. And,
as licensed attorneys, we went to law school where, among many other
things, we learned about a little thing called "personal jurisdiction."
Do a google search on "personal jurisdiction" and "minimum contacts" and
then come back and apologize to McGyver. I'll even give you a hint:
International Shoe v. Washington.
Possibly, possibly not. My recollection is that Australia is a signatory
to the Hague Convention on Enforcement of Foreign Judgments.
On the contrary, many businesses self insure.
Wherein lies the problem: you don't understand it. Once again, Richard,
why you choose to argue from your own exagerated idea of common sense
against a licensed attorney is beyond my comprehension. Here, if the OP
follows your advice, he stands an excellent chance of winding up in a huge
amount of trouble. You're not "discussing law," you're giving someone
legal advice and, once again, you've proven yourself uniquely unqualified
to do so.
I concur with McGyver:
Consult an attorney.
Never listen to Richard.
|
| |
| |
|
