"you ever sue the person at fault in a car accident?" Mon Feb-23-15 07:50 AM by Crash Bandacoot
no injuries. if so, how did it go? what did you sue for? wasn't going to sue this lady but bills/inconvenience are accumulating and my car took a huge hit value wise. also missed a day of work. besides the fact that she was completely belligerent and instantaneously blamed me. her insurance company investigated and claimed liability. is this a no brainer to sue?
2. "a coworker was able to get some sort of loan adjustment" In response to Reply # 0
on his brand new car when it was hit.... wasn't really a loan adjustment...but the insurance company paid him out a dollar amount based on the reduced value of the car after the accident. I forget the term though.....
I dunno... suing is cool if you know you stand to get a decent payout....AFTER legal fees.....but that karma though.....
I'd say milk the insurance company for as much as possible before suing the person....
Woman ran a red light, hit me as I was proceeding through my green light, and bounced off me and hit the guy coming the opposite way who'd been waiting to turn left.
No injuries for me. Both cars she hit totaled. I assume hers was as well. Guy in the other car refused to talk to anyone, went to the ER.
She had minimum limits, which in PA is $5k for property damage, $15/30k for bodily injury.
With only $5k to go for two totaled cars, I got about half of what my car was worth blue book value. Definitely irritating, but I'm not litigious and ha no wish to sue someone who was likely not particularly wealthy.... what am I going to do, garnish her wages? This is the way the law is supposed to work... it's crappy, but it's the law. And I'm generally a believer in not screwing other people just b/c I can.
The only problem was no one else involved felt that way; the other guy sued her for $50k, and his wife sued her for loss of consort for another $50k (the guy was 83, so the loss of consort thing was hilarious to me. I hope when I'm 83 my wife will be able to claim loss of consort.) So since her policy only had $15k available for this guy, her company enjoined me in her defense, with the claim that I was partially at fault b/c I was speeding through the intersection (which I wasn't) and THAT was why she hit the other guy. It was an egregious situation to find myself in, multiple trips down town to give depositions, etc. My company was ready to roll over to the tune of $13k to but I went up the claims ladder and said HELL NO YOU DON'T. So her (insurer's) attorney finally released me from the claim the day it was supposed to go to trial; I got the call about 20 minutes before I was supposed to be getting on the train to go downtown for it.
I've actually been in the insurance business for a decade now and in general I think people make and milk illegitimate claims are awful, and attorneys who take cases like this knowing there was no injury are awful. But that also comes with an understanding that sometimes the system itself is awful, so I try not to judge too much unless I know the circumstances better. For your situation I'd caution you to be careful, as insurance fraud is illegal and if you get busted (I mean, you're admitting here via a traceable IP address an account that you're not injured and are considering suing based on a claim of injury despite that) you could be in trouble.
Good luck with the financial situation, hope it works out for you.
7. "thanks for your thoughts but, insurance fraud?" In response to Reply # 6 Mon Feb-23-15 12:39 PM by Crash Bandacoot
i'm not sure where you're getting that from. besides, it's not my thing to go around suing people just because, but in *this* case, she blindly/belligerently blamed the accident on me, later to find out, it was her fault. meanwhile, $6,000 worth of repairs to my car and the moment this shit goes on a carfax report, it's a goner. i'm assed out.
it's not right and i'm willing to bet you that if i was at fault, she would go for everything that she could get. i could have gotten really wild with it and claimed that i was injured but, i did no such thing.
8. "perhaps I misunderstood your intentions" In response to Reply # 7 Mon Feb-23-15 01:45 PM by lonesome_d
>i'm not sure where you're getting that from.
if you're not injured, and her insurer has fulfilled its property damage liability obligations by paying for the repairs to your vehicle, for what damages are you considering suing? I don't see that there's a whole lot you can claim.
Most people, in this scenario, claim injury (especially soft tissue injury which is hard to prove/disprove). I was under the impression that this was your most likely course of action, as her insurer has already fulfilled its other obligations to you. And despite the fact that fabricating an injury where none truly exists actually works in most cases where people aren't looking for significant gains (plenty of insurers feel it's easier to pay off a 'nuisance claim' than it is to fight it or, even better, prosecute it as fraud), it's still fraud to misrepresent oneself as injured when one is not injured.
>besides, it's >not my >thing to go around suing people just because, but in *this* >case, >she blindly/belligerently blamed the accident on me, later to >find >out, it was her fault.
Unfortunately, you can't really sue someone just for being an asshole. Most people, when at fault in an accident, will be belligerent assholes and blame the person they hit. Most people are assholes in general when behind a steering wheel.
>meanwhile, $6,000 worth of repairs to >my >car and the moment this shit goes on a carfax report, it's a >goner. i'm assed out.
Not much you can do about that; if you have an at-fault accident that damages your car, your insurance pays cost to repair or ACV for both your car (if you carry physical damage) and the car(s) you hit, to your policy limits for property damage coverage. No coverage exists for decrease in resale value*, whether first- or third-party, and I've never heard of anyone suing another for that. You could try it, though; I'd be interested in hearing how it goes if you do.
*Actually, I believe this coverage can be gotten on collector-car policies, but I'm assuming that's not what we're talking about here.
>it's not right and i'm willing to bet you that if i was at >fault, >she would go for everything that she could get.
I agree that it's not right for someone to be an asshole, or that her negligence should cause you difficulties, but I still don't really see grounds for a suit. And yeah she probably would sue if the positions are reversed - plenty of people would. But is that a good reason to sue her? And again, what will you claim as grounds for suit, if you're not injured?
A thought - If you can show that the work missed was due to the accident, there's a possibility that you could get her insurer to pay you for your lost wages. But that's the only other thing I can think of that would be available for you to claim, short of being injured. But that's something to address with her insurer's adjustor, not sue over.
You mention your PIP above, and how that would come into play is going to depend a bit on what state you're in, but regardless is only applicable if you're claiming injury. If you do wind up claiming an injury, and her Bodily Injury limits are low and tap out, you could then bring a claim against your own policy's Underinsured Motorists coverage, but that's probably getting ahead of the situation.
>i could have >gotten really wild with it and claimed that i was injured >but, >i did no such thing.
And this is why Bin and Fishgrease above both stress the importance, if you intend to sue regardless, of setting up a reasonable scenario that involves you being injured.