Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us
Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network
HomeAnnouncements
Discussion Groups
By Brand
BMWChevroletDodgeFordGMHondaLexusMercedes-BenzNissanPeugeotToyotaVolkswagenOther Brands
By Topic
4x4 CarsRVsDrivingMaintenance & RepairCar AudioCollectible Cars
Country Specific
Australian ForumsUK Forums
ArticlesAuto InsuranceBuyingCars & TechnologyMaintenanceMiscellaneousSafety
DMV Resources
Related Topics
MotorcyclesBoatsMore Topics ...

Car Forum / Driving, Maintenance, Tuning / Driving / January 2008

Tip: Looking for answers? Try searching our database.

Underinsured motorist at fault in accident- any suggestions to come     out

Thread view: 
Enable EMail Alerts  Start New Thread
Thread rating: 
Vinoth - 14 Jan 2008 02:48 GMT
Hi all,

I met with the accident in Texas.I was at fault in the accident.

I hit the pickup truck in the rear end corner .The driver hit bushes
on side of road.No1 injured in the accident

So, far the insurance claim had come up to  35000$.The other persons
insurance company is paying them and sent the estimate to my company.

I am covered by my company for a liability of only 15000$.

Claims does not sound to be reasonable from the visible damages I had
seen.

I am not sure how to handle this.

Should I approach an attorney for solving this?

What are the chances of other insurance suing me for the remaining
amount?

...As a final option, I am thinking of filing a bankruptcy.If I do so,
wat major problems will I face?

Any guidance would be great.

Thanks and Regards,
Vinoth
Alexander Rogge - 14 Jan 2008 04:26 GMT
> I hit the pickup truck in the rear end corner .The driver hit bushes
> on side of road.
> So, far the insurance claim had come up to  35000$.

Most pick-up trucks aren't worth $35,000.  You need a different value
estimator.

> Should I approach an attorney for solving this?

Your insurance should be doing that for you.  You shouldn't be billed
for more than the sale price of the truck.  It sounds like you are being
swindled.

> ....As a final option, I am thinking of filing a bankruptcy.If I do so,
> wat major problems will I face?

You would be in bankruptcy, which is a big problem.
C. E. White - 14 Jan 2008 16:19 GMT
>> I hit the pickup truck in the rear end corner .The driver hit
>> bushes
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
> Most pick-up trucks aren't worth $35,000.  You need a different
> value estimator.

Why do you think that? Have you priced a full sized diesel pick-up
truck lately? Without more information (truck model, age, options,
damage, etc.) it is impossible to say that what the replacement cost
might be. I also suspect there might be injury charges included. No
matter how minor the accident some people develop ailments that they
attribute to the accident. My son was in a extremely minor incident
(his foot slipped off the brake and he rolled forward and touched a
car in front at a light). There was absolutely no property damage, not
even a scratch on a bumper, yet the driver of the car he touched is
claming a neck injury and suing for damages.

>> Should I approach an attorney for solving this?
>
> Your insurance should be doing that for you.  You shouldn't be
> billed for more than the sale price of the truck.  It sounds like
> you are being swindled.

Could be. However, an insurance company is not necessarily looking out
for your best interest. They only care about their best interest.
Another example. My other son was in a parking lot accident that I
felt was mostly the other drivers fault. My son was turning into a
parking space and a car tried to pass him on the right as he was
parking, resulting in damage to the side of my Son's car and the front
of the other vehicle. The police investigated and noted my son did not
use his turn signal. The police ignored witnesses who described the
accident. I contacted the insurance company and was assured that my
son was not at fault and that they would not pay any claim by the
other party. Unfortunately they also explained that under North
Carolina law the other party would not have to pay either, since it
was obvious both parties were at least partially liable. I was not
ahppy, but let it go. A few months later, when I got my insurance
bill, I was shocked to see a large increase. When I queried the
company, I was told that the rates had increased becasue they had paid
out after an accident (my Son's parking lot accident). It turns out
the other party in the accident had hired a lawyer and was threatening
to sue and my insurance company just paid the claim rather than fight.
They never told me that they were going to do this. I understand that
this is their right. However, if I had known they were going to treat
the claim this way, I would have hired my own lawyer and sued the
other party under the same basis.

>> ....As a final option, I am thinking of filing a bankruptcy.If I do
>> so,
>> wat major problems will I face?
>
> You would be in bankruptcy, which is a big problem.

If you have no money, and no insurance, the other party is unlikely to
sue, particularly if they are running a scam. Not much profit in suing
poor people with bad insurance.

I think it is silly of you to have such low liability limits. $15K
would barely cover the cost of a modern stripper (Corolla S, Focus,
Honda Fit, etc.).

Ed
Matthew T. Russotto - 15 Jan 2008 21:28 GMT
>attribute to the accident. My son was in a extremely minor incident
>(his foot slipped off the brake and he rolled forward and touched a
>car in front at a light). There was absolutely no property damage, not
>even a scratch on a bumper, yet the driver of the car he touched is
>claming a neck injury and suing for damages.

The only ailment that driver has, if the situation is as you say, is
extreme greed exacerbated by the smell of money.
Signature

 There's no such thing as a free lunch, but certain accounting practices can
 result in a fully-depreciated one.

Scott in SoCal - 16 Jan 2008 05:09 GMT
>>attribute to the accident. My son was in a extremely minor incident
>>(his foot slipped off the brake and he rolled forward and touched a
[quoted text clipped - 4 lines]
>The only ailment that driver has, if the situation is as you say, is
>extreme greed exacerbated by the smell of money.

Ersatz conclusion. How can you possibly make that determination based
solely on *one* side of the story?
Signature

"You can all kiss my @ss!"
 - Carl Rogers, Message-ID: <IE1ej.2353$se5.298@nlpi069.nbdc.sbc.com>

C. E. White - 16 Jan 2008 12:24 GMT
>>The only ailment that driver has, if the situation is as you say, is
>>extreme greed exacerbated by the smell of money.
>
> Ersatz conclusion. How can you possibly make that determination
> based
> solely on *one* side of the story?

Matthew did qualify his statement with "if the situation is as you
say." From where I sit, I think it is probably an accurate conclusion.
Both car were at a light, my son's foot slipped off the brake and his
Accord rolled a couple of feet forward into the back of the Mercedes.
There was no physical damage of any kind, not even a scratch (the
Police report lists the speed at impact as 2 mph). Ironically after
the "accident" was over, my son drove to McDonalds. In the drive thru
lane he was behind the same car.

The insurance company doesn't have any incentive to fight this sort of
petty fraud assuming the driver of the Mercedes isn't too greedy. If
they can make it go away for a few thousand dollars, then that will be
the cheapest way for them. They'll just jack up my sons rates and call
it even.

Ed
Scott in SoCal - 16 Jan 2008 15:43 GMT
>>>The only ailment that driver has, if the situation is as you say, is
>>>extreme greed exacerbated by the smell of money.
[quoted text clipped - 5 lines]
>Matthew did qualify his statement with "if the situation is as you
>say." From where I sit, I think it is probably an accurate conclusion.

Funny, I have exactly as much information as you do, and yet I reached
the exact opposite conclusion. It all depends on the assumptions you
make.
Signature

"You can all kiss my @ss!"
 - Carl Rogers, Message-ID: <IE1ej.2353$se5.298@nlpi069.nbdc.sbc.com>

Matthew T. Russotto - 17 Jan 2008 16:47 GMT
>>>attribute to the accident. My son was in a extremely minor incident
>>>(his foot slipped off the brake and he rolled forward and touched a
[quoted text clipped - 6 lines]
>
>Ersatz conclusion.

What are you, GPSMan?

>How can you possibly make that determination based
>solely on *one* side of the story?

Hence the caveat "if the situation is as you say".  
Signature

 There's no such thing as a free lunch, but certain accounting practices can
 result in a fully-depreciated one.

Scott in SoCal - 18 Jan 2008 01:57 GMT
>>>>attribute to the accident. My son was in a extremely minor incident
>>>>(his foot slipped off the brake and he rolled forward and touched a
[quoted text clipped - 8 lines]
>
>What are you, GPSMan?

Them's fightin' words!!
Signature

"You can all kiss my @ss!"
 - Carl Rogers, Message-ID: <IE1ej.2353$se5.298@nlpi069.nbdc.sbc.com>

necromancer - 14 Jan 2008 15:43 GMT
Vinoth:
> Hi all,
>
> I met with the accident in Texas.I was at fault in the accident.

First off, I am not a lawyer, so any advice you recieve from this post
is worth what you paid for it.

> I hit the pickup truck in the rear end corner .The driver hit bushes
> on side of road.No1 injured in the accident
>
> So, far the insurance claim had come up to  35000$.The other persons
> insurance company is paying them and sent the estimate to my company.

Those must be some expensive bushes. Or was the truck painted with gold?
There's something fishy about that claim and I suspect some bill padding
was done.

> I am covered by my company for a liability of only 15000$.
>
> Claims does not sound to be reasonable from the visible damages I had
> seen.

I agree.

> I am not sure how to handle this.
>
> Should I approach an attorney for solving this?

If it would make you feel better, then by all means do so. Talking to
the lawyer would only cost you his fees and he can provide you with
better advice than anyone here can.

> What are the chances of other insurance suing me for the remaining
> amount?
>
> ...As a final option, I am thinking of filing a bankruptcy.If I do so,
> wat major problems will I face?

See what your insurance company and the other one do first. They may
just write it off and be done with it.

> Any guidance would be great.

Signature

"Mc Gruff the Crime Dog has been missing for about two weeks, now.
He was last seen sniffing around Michael Vick's House..."
                                 --Jay Leno

Harry K - 14 Jan 2008 16:52 GMT
On Jan 14, 7:43 am, necromancer
>  Vinoth:
>
[quoted text clipped - 21 lines]
>
> I agree.

I suspect an examination of the claim will have medical claims
included.

As to the insurance.  I didn't know you could even get insurance with
such a piddling coverage.  My first policy back in 54 I paid extra to
boost the minimum to 100,000 which was high for those days.  I was
driving a junker 38 chev at the time working for minimum wage.

Harry K
Scott in SoCal - 15 Jan 2008 02:25 GMT
>As to the insurance.  I didn't know you could even get insurance with
>such a piddling coverage.  

The state minimum in Florida is a ridiculous $10,000.
Signature

"You can all kiss my @ss!"
 - Carl Rogers, Message-ID: <IE1ej.2353$se5.298@nlpi069.nbdc.sbc.com>

Harry K - 15 Jan 2008 03:11 GMT
> On Mon, 14 Jan 2008 08:52:51 -0800 (PST), Harry K
>
[quoted text clipped - 6 lines]
> "You can all kiss my @ss!"
>   - Carl Rogers, Message-ID: <IE1ej.2353$se5....@nlpi069.nbdc.sbc.com>

Why have a mandatory insurance at all?  Or is it even mandatory?

Harry K
MLOM - 15 Jan 2008 03:19 GMT
> > On Mon, 14 Jan 2008 08:52:51 -0800 (PST), Harry K
>
[quoted text clipped - 10 lines]
>
> Harry K

It is in many states.  Here in MO a conviction for no insurance
carries a harsher fine than first-time DUI.
Matthew T. Russotto - 15 Jan 2008 21:44 GMT
>It is in many states.  Here in MO a conviction for no insurance
>carries a harsher fine than first-time DUI.

The insurance companies have a better lobby even than MADD.
Signature

 There's no such thing as a free lunch, but certain accounting practices can
 result in a fully-depreciated one.

necromancer - 15 Jan 2008 03:14 GMT
Scott in SoCal:

> >As to the insurance.  I didn't know you could even get insurance with
> >such a piddling coverage.  
>
> The state minimum in Florida is a ridiculous $10,000.

That's FloriDUH, for you. This is the state that allows morotcyclists to
ride helmetless so long as they carry at least US$10,000 in medical
coverage. That ought to cover the ambulance ride to the hospital and
maybe cover 1 or 2 minutes in the ER.....

Signature

--
Presidential numerology:
Name:         Ronald   Wilson   Reagan
Letter Count:    6        6       6
Numbers Together:   666

Harry K - 15 Jan 2008 15:44 GMT
On Jan 14, 7:14 pm, necromancer
>  Scott in SoCal:
>
[quoted text clipped - 14 lines]
> Letter Count:    6        6       6
> Numbers Together:   666

IIANM that is better than here (WA).  You can go helmetless period.
No extra requirements.

Harry K
Garth Almgren - 15 Jan 2008 16:41 GMT
> On Jan 14, 7:14 pm, necromancer
>>  Scott in SoCal:
[quoted text clipped - 16 lines]
> IIANM that is better than here (WA).  You can go helmetless period.
> No extra requirements.

I hope you meant that you *can't* go helmetless in WA?
http://www.bikersrights.com/states/washington/washington.html

Signature

~/Garth |"I believe that it is better to tell the truth than a lie.
Almgren | I believe it is better to be free than to be a slave.
******* | And I believe it is better to know than to be ignorant."
                      --H.L. Mencken (1880-1956)

Harry K - 16 Jan 2008 02:52 GMT
> > On Jan 14, 7:14 pm, necromancer
> >>  Scott in SoCal:
[quoted text clipped - 26 lines]
>
> - Show quoted text -

No, I _meant_ helmets arent mandatory in WA.  I see that one of my
long known facts is incorrect.  Dayum but I hate larning new thangs at
my age.

Harry K
Garth Almgren - 16 Jan 2008 03:48 GMT
>>> On Jan 14, 7:14 pm, necromancer
>>>>  Scott in SoCal:
[quoted text clipped - 16 lines]
> long known facts is incorrect.  Dayum but I hate larning new thangs at
> my age.

Well, I'm not familiar with the whole history, but it reads like we had
a helmet law that was repealed for a while and then reinstated around 1990.

Signature

~/Garth |"I believe that it is better to tell the truth than a lie.
Almgren | I believe it is better to be free than to be a slave.
******* | And I believe it is better to know than to be ignorant."
                      --H.L. Mencken (1880-1956)

Alexander Rogge - 14 Jan 2008 16:55 GMT
>> I hit the pickup truck in the rear end corner .The driver hit bushes
>> on side of road.No1 injured in the accident
[quoted text clipped - 4 lines]
> There's something fishy about that claim and I suspect some bill padding
> was done.

I've been in a $35,000 truck, and it could crush a small car, and then
tow it out of the ditch.  These diesel pick-up trucks can be purchased
for under $35,000.  I couldn't do much to damage it, except maybe to
park it in front of a moving train.
Scott in SoCal - 14 Jan 2008 16:02 GMT
>Hi all,
>
[quoted text clipped - 7 lines]
>
>Any guidance would be great.

This one is really easy.

Imagine the roles were reversed: you have a nice new $50,000 luxury
pickup truck, and some jackass rams into it and causes $35,000 worth
of damage. Do you think it's OK if the guy who hit you only pays you
$15,000 and leaves you holding the bag for the remaining $20,000? What
would you think of his morals if he were to declare bankruptcy to
avoid paying you the remaining $20,000 he owes you?

Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.
Signature

"You can all kiss my @ss!"
 - Carl Rogers, Message-ID: <IE1ej.2353$se5.298@nlpi069.nbdc.sbc.com>

 
Sign In
Join
My Latest Posts
My Monitored Threads
My Blog
My Photo Gallery
My Profile
My Homepage

Start New Thread
Enable EMail Alerts
Rate this Thread



©2008 Advenet LLC   Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.