Turn left with the green arrow. Get hit by a guy going straight, but running a red light. Who is at fault?
I have helped more then a few people on foh about this so here we go again.
My job is essentially explaining to people what they are entitled to after an accident because agents don't really explain the coverage just what it costs. I specialize in medical but know the vehicle side as well.
So if you have general questions about insurance coverage or help on what to do after an accident lay it on me. Every state is different so include that in the question.
Look at your declarations page, unless you know exactly what all those coverages are for you are getting fucked somehow.
Turn left with the green arrow. Get hit by a guy going straight, but running a red light. Who is at fault?
Strangely enough I believe, and have been told, that turning left in front of someone, no matter the circumstances, automatically makes you at fault for failure to yield. I didn't believe it at first, but it makes some sense.
Green arrows are protected though.
No, their legal as long as you yield. So if you see him coming, regardless of his right of way, you always have to yield to him. Like I said though, I'm not sure that is the way it is. But it sounds like it just might be true.
If he was already in the intersection when you turned, that might be the case.
Edit: There is a exception, but its not red light running. Its if you are in the intersection while the light is yellow then turns red, you have the ultimate way of way at that point. At least in Arizona.
Last edited by kaosu; 12-09-2012 at 05:31 AM.
I was at a dead stop in traffic and got rear-ended by a semi trailer. Totaled my car, 6 months of physical therapy for me. Should I have sued? They paid all my medical bills obviously and were pretty generous with the payout with my car (or maybe it was wrecked so bad they couldn't tell how big a pos it was before) so I didn't even really look in to any kind of lawsuit at the time.
Could I have made myself rich?
Ya, yield doesn't come into the equation if the person is running a red light when they smack you (although granted you should always check regardless, especially if it's the time of night when people are leaving bars or the roads are rally icy). That's automatic "they are at fault" pretty much.
Problem is its up to you to prove he ran the light unless he admits to doing so.
There is no general rule in insurance claims just policy limits. So if you had 100K+ in medical bills and they have 100K in coverage you aren't getting shit from them. That is where under insured motorist(UIM) comes in. In order to sue some one directly they either have to have no insurance or exhaust their limits so you can take them to small claims court and try to get the maximum from them there(which no one ever does)
I got sued a while ago though. I slid through an intersection in the window of like 06 and bumped a lady at like 15mph. Broke my headlight, messed up her bumper, wasn't a huge deal. She seemed nice enough when we talked, police didn't issue any tickets. Like 10 months later I got a summons from a county sheriff to appear in court because apparently she was bringing something against me (she alleged like 2 broken ankles and 20k in medical bills or some shit, despite there not even being an ambulance). My insurance company took over everything from there when I called them, and apparently she had already sued them for similar and lost, so she brought it against me personally? Her "lawyer" was calling my home phone number (I was out at school) and harassing my mom like 4 times a day and shit. Guy was pure ambulance chaser, had shitty billboard adds all over town and stuff. Anyway, I talked with my insurance people a bunch and they decided to actually go to court, so then had me come home for two days from school to testify, but they bitched out on it and called me the morning of the court date to say they settled the case. Then they canceled my policy a month later because of the judgement against me.
Anyway, livejournal bullshit aside, that is the reason I was even considering the lawsuit. Since this lady had no actual injuries of any kind, that I could tell anyway, was able to wring some amount of money out of it, what could me with a torn trapezius and 6 months of therapy get?
I don't know if this varies by state or not, but here in California at least it is your responsibility to do everything reasonably possible to avoid an accident or it could (probably will) end up being your fault. Like if someone pulls out in front of you, you can't just say fuck it and barrel in to them. Or if a pedestrian darts across the road, you can't mow them down, much as I've wanted to do that around here. Basically, if you can swerve, slam on the brakes, etc. to avoid the accident, if you don't you can end up being the one found responsible for the accident, regardless of what the other person did. Insurance companies (at least in California anyway) also do percentages of fault, so if nothing else they might say it was 50/50 and you're basically screwed anyway.
So in the case of the left turn arrow above, if you saw the car coming and knew it wasn't going to stop because it was already moving through the intersection, you could have (in theory) avoided the accident by not turning in front of it. Like others have mentioned though, a lot of it comes down to word vs. word so having witnesses is about the best you can do in a situation like that. Of course, if you actually say something like, "I saw him coming but I had an arrow so I turned" you're basically admitting fault no matter what the witnesses say.
Anyone know anything about "Diminished value" after an accident? I was pursuing it at one point for the accident I had about a year ago. Some dopey girl bashed into me while texting. I got it fixed but if I ever go to sell it's not going to be worth as much as if it had never been in an accident.
The lawyer I spoke to said judges typically wont give you anything unless you actually sell the car and get a solid number for variance. So am I just SOL at this point a year later?
Here's pictures if it matters: http://forums.vwvortex.com/showthrea...Image-heavy%29
Flo from Progressive vs. Erin Esurance: Who would win in a fight?
So my dick is kind of going off in one direction and my balls are kind of going in the other direction, and my boxer-briefs are a bit snug right between the two because of the way I am sitting.. as an adjuster, is this something you can help me with?
In most cases they are just looking for a settlement. Companies tend to be VERY litigation adverse unless they feel like they have an opportunity to make good case law, so they are more then willing to toss some dollars the person's way if it makes them go away.Anyway, livejournal bullshit aside, that is the reason I was even considering the lawsuit. Since this lady had no actual injuries of any kind, that I could tell anyway, was able to wring some amount of money out of it, what could me with a torn trapezius and 6 months of therapy get?
Last edited by Hatorade; 12-10-2012 at 02:50 AM.
Last edited by Hatorade; 12-10-2012 at 02:52 AM.
I'm a recall coordinator. My job is to apply the formula.
Take the number of vehicles in the field, (A), and multiply it by the probable rate of failure, (B), then multiply the result by the average out-of- court settlement, (C). A times B times C equals X...
If X is less than the cost of a recall, we don't do one.
Are there a lot of these kinds of accidents?
Oh, you wouldn't believe.
... Which car company do you work for?
A major one.
It's in the script, though.
But on the other hand, doing it this way makes good sense. If you don't like the math it just means juries aren't giving enough money in those types of cases, so the settlements aren't high enough.
Adjusters job is to gather info and pay what we owe, don't give a fuck who you are or what you do, we just look at the policies.
If you live in texas and have short term disability through your job. Drop your 2500.00 personal injury protection(pip) and get 10k med pay likely more coverage for cheaper because insurance companies can subrogate(get the money from at fault party) medpay.
PIP haS lost wages reimbursement(usually 85% of gross up to 250.00 a week), medpay does not. If you have good health insurance find a way to wave pip/medpay all together.
Last edited by Hatorade; 12-11-2012 at 05:25 PM.
Yea I have no pip or medpay. And I'm not a personal injury lawyer but I know the game. Whatever it was, progressive treated me with kid gloves.
anywho the judge told me 'a left must yield, with or with out a light regardless of the situation' gavel bang, I am sentenced guilty and for court costs, have a nice day.
edit: state is Florida if you couldn't have figured from it haha.
I also did some workers comp work in Loosiana + some longshore + jones act stuff if anyone needs a second opinion.
I live in MA.
If I was driving down the street at 2AM and a deer ran into the side of my car, was there anything I could have or should have done? It got up and ran away btw. It ruined all the side panels on my car and took out my mirror.
A lot of people claim I could have invoked that it was an act of God, but I guess in certain parts of MA you cannot do that with deer. Basically it came down to paying $500 in deductibles to fix everything, or just take it and leave it. I took it and left it.
Pic attached for reference.
I guess I'm confused. $500, or drive around in a dented up piece of shit with a mirror hanging off the side, and you chose driving around in a dented up piece of shit with a mirror hanging off the side? Isn't that what you carry comprehensive for?
Last edited by Cutlery; 12-26-2012 at 03:13 PM.
Well then I guess the obvious follow up question is, why waste the $$ on comp?
How fucking big was the deer? Sure it wasn't a moose or elk or something?
Only reason I ask is that most deer are only a couple hundred pounds, and it would take a pretty big animal to do the damage you describe merely from it's own speed perpendicular to your car's movement, not to mention prancing away immediately after.
There is no "act of god" clause or anything of that sort. Every possible type of damage to your car either falls under comprehensive or collision, and none of it waives/excuses your deductible. The only way to ever get your car fixed without being out your deductible is to file the claim against another parties insurance if someone else is at fault. If you use your own insurance, you are paying your deductible. The only exception I know is some glass-only claims, some companies offer no deductible by default on window/windshield damage, if that is all that got damaged.
You're actually almost always better off hitting that deer/animal, than trying to swerve and miss it. You put your car in a ditch, hit a guard rail, or hit any stationary object and you have to file a collision claim which is considered an at-fault, chargeable accident by almost every insurance company on Earth. You hit an animal and it's a comprehensive claim(similar to storm damage or vandalism) and it doesn't count against you.
Natural reaction is to swerve to try to miss something that jumps out in front of you, but do not do it.
But just to reiterate, I've never seen an insurance policy that ever specifically mentioned "acts of god" as a covered peril. Maybe it was something that was common 50 years ago, but not anymore. Policies spell out specific perils(things that cause damage) that are covered, and that is what your policy covers. I'm sure "act of god", if it was ever used, is just way too general and vague, it would cause all sorts of problems, lawsuits, etc. since god is something that could be interpreted in a ton of different ways. Insurance companies like dealing in absolutes, they want to be as specific as possible.
Last edited by joeboo; 12-26-2012 at 04:28 PM.
Joeboo beat me too it and spot on, especially the part about better to hit the deer then try and swerve.
I'm under the impression the insurance was willing to pay, minus the $500 deductible, and he chose to do nothing since he didn't even want to pay the deductible out of pocket to have it fixed(wasn't worth $500 to him)
That being said, as long as you own your car outright(no lien holder) you could have just taken the insurance check for the damages -$500 and pocketed it. Perfectly acceptable thing to do. Consider it payment now for money you aren't going to get out of it when you sell it later, or file your next claim for damages.
How long ago was it? My company pays non-depreciated claims as long as it is within 1 year of the incident date.
Here in OR, hitting a live animal is Comprehensive but if you were to hit a dead animal on the road already it would be collision. That's how I saw 3 claims play out anyway.
Yup, gotta find that sweet spot of deductible vs premium. I carry $250 deductibles. Just going down to $100 was like an extra $100 premium per year, and since i have a claim on average of maybe once every 5 years since i started driving, I'd rather save more money with the lower monthly premium. I wouldn't come out ahead with the low deductible unless i had a claim every year and a half.
Blindly taking the highest deductible or the lowest/no deductible option without doing allthe math would be foolish
I carry $500 on comprehensive (never need it) and $200 on collision. You can certainly pay for $0 deductibles but why?
The only people we have insured that have $0 deductibles are a few people who live out in the country on gravel roads, lots of windshield chips/cracks. They turn in glass claims at least once a year. Honestly though, if you turn in too many claims, even not-at-fault claims, you're going to either get canceled, or if you are lucky the company might give you the option of raising your deductible rather than cancelling you. Generally, if we have someone turn in 3 or 4 claims in a 12-18 month period, regardless of how small they are, we're probably going to cancel them(or make them go toa $1000 deductible so they stop filing ticky-tack claims)
Insurance exists to protect you from a catastrophic loss that you can't afford to take care of on your own, it doesn't exist to fix every minor thing wrong with your car/house.
Long time lurker at FoH, and this thread is kinda right up my alley. I ended up rear ending a guy a few months back because he brake checked me, I was about a car and a half, maybe away from him, but couldn't stop in time. In the police report, he admitted to the officer that he braked with no real purpose because felt that I was driving too closely. Now, I'm uninsured, and his insurance company wants me to pay them all the damages to his vehicle. I'm feeling like they shouldn't have honored his claim, because he kinda provoked the accident and it should've been a no fault thing. I talked to his insurance company and I guess they never even had a copy of the police report for some reason. They're going to get back to me, but what do you think the chances of them just walking away from the whole thing are?
I can't find any information by googling it. For reference the accident happened in New Hampshire.
The chances of them walking away are zero. It has been turned into a claim, so something has to be done about it. The rep doesn't just get to decide to toss it in the garbage, he has to close it (as in, determine what is to be done) somehow, and his boss more than likely has to review it and approve the way he closed it. Since the damage to the insured's vehicle is going to have to be paid, a decision has to be made, so the claim WILL be closed at some point.
Now, them not getting the police report is definitely something that needs to be corrected, and it is up to the claims rep to get it. As far as who is at fault, I have no clue what NH laws are like, but here you'd probably be at least 50% at fault (likely a lot more) because regardless of what the guy in front of you does, you're supposed to be able to stop in time. He's clearly an idiot for admitting the brake check to the cops though, so who knows, that might help more than I realize. It being his insurance though, and you being uninsured (wtf?) chances are they are going to come after you for the majority of it even if he is an idiot and admits to everything. You don't even have your own company to help combat them, so chances are they will (correctly) determine a lot/most of the responsibility is yours.
It all depends, but my thinking is that you're fairly fucked. Sorry
Did the police officer issue any tickets? If you received a ticket, you're probably boned and are going to be treated like you were completely at fault(and a court would probably uphold that even if you tried to fight it, if you received a ticket)
Hate to say it, but 95% of the time, the person in the rear in a rear-ending incident is found at fault, regardless of the circumstances. About the only time I've seen the rear person excused from fault is in the case of extreme inclimate weather(sleeting, or a foot of snow or something), and even then there's still partial fault, maybe just not total fault.
I'll go with Vvoid's assessment, you're somewhere in the range of fairly to totally fucked
A couple of years ago my kid was hit by a car, he was walking. He spent a couple of months in the hospital, the insurance part still confuses me to this day. They used the drivers insurance until it was maxed out on his hospital bills. Then it switched to my auto insurance to cover the medical bills, even though he was a pedestrian. Then when that was maxed out they used my health insurance. Why did they use my auto insurance when he was a pedestrian? (I did carry him on both my health and auto policy)
and a 2nd question. Would (did) my insurance company go after the driver to recover any of the medical expenses?
It depends a bit on your state specific laws, but a lot of states cover auto-related injuries off of your optional medical coverage(med pay), or even state required PIP(personal injury protection). Your liability or uninsured/underinsured only applies if you are in the car in general, but those med pay/PIP coverages are a lot broader. We've had people covered by those who were working underneath their car and it fell on them, rolled over their foot, and all sorts of crazy stuff when they weren't actually in the car. I would assume the med pay/PIP coverage probably wasn't anywhere near the amount of your full liability limits (might be something like 5K or 10K when your liability is 100K or whatever). Again it depends on state laws, but I dont think insurance companies generally seek to recover PIP/Med pay payments.
It's hard to say if your insurance company would have gone after the other driver personally once his insurance limits were exhausted. Some of it might depend on what his actual limits were, and what they realistically thought they could get out of the guy. If you work a minimum wage job and have no assets, they probably won't bother coming after you, regardless of what your insurance paid. If you have a 6-figure job and a lot of assets, you better have some very high liability limits, because they'll come after you if your insurance isn't enough coverage. Insurance companies aren't dumb. They aren't going to waste the legal cost of suing someone if they know they don't have any way to realistically pay the damages assessed against them, they aren't in it for moral victories or anything of that sort. They're only going to be suing someone personally if they obviouslly have enough money to possibly pay what they think they will be awarded.
We try to stress to people all the time who we know have a lot of income & assets that they really need high liability limits, or even an umbrella to protect them. You don't want to be sitting there with hundreds of thousands, or millions of dollars in assets and only $25,000 liability on your vehicle. Hell, at that point even $100,000 isnt enough to protect you. In most states you can get a million dollar umbrella policy for a couple hundred bucks a year, it's stupid not to if you have a good income and are pretty well off. It's a pittance for protection from a lawyer coming after you for everything you have if you hurt someone really bad.
Last edited by joeboo; 12-28-2012 at 04:01 PM.
Sorry meant to add 500.00 to the comp comment, 100-250 is the way to go. And reminder we need the state you are in, makes a big difference.
Do you have uninsured motorist? That will come after the health insurance/son is better.
Damn straight about never swerving unless it's life threatening. I had a oncoming car in a snowy day drift fully into my lane going about 20mph. I swerved to avoid and ended up hitting a dumpster. $3.5k in repair for the axel, wheel, and bumper/panel damage. The fucker kept on driving and I couldn't get his damn license number running in the snow. It was treated as a single car collision. My insurance agent told me next time, just get hit with him in my lane. It would have cost me $3k cheaper in the total amount they had to raise my rates.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)