Increased cost of repairs does nothing to retaliate against the other driver either. He does not even know what's going on with your repairs, nor does he care. That's what he bought insurance for, to not be bothered in case he caused an accident.
An alignment possibly if there was any adjustment to the suspension mounting points, frame, impact to wheel -- etc... But rebalancing has no effect on alignment and would likely -- no almost certainly -- not be affected in an accident (except on any wheels that are replaced or on wheels where tires were replaced.)
Really, its moot though, you got to my main point right up front ... anything to up the bill.
Flaaveo: Let me tell you who wins in this excessive work you are trying to demand be completed. (or so it sounds) The body shop and the insurance company. The more things a shop messes with on your car, the more chances there are for something to go wrong -- it does sound like you got a sweet decal kit though, so I guess it's a win,win,win situation.
TO ALL MY NEW FANS!!!! Look. I am getting my car back as it was BEFORE the accident. Thats all. So far it has taken 5 days,now add a weekend,7 days to fix. Add possibly another 3-4 days to reassemble and put the final touches on and CLEAN IT, spotless...that makes about 10-14 days. I was PUSHED sideways over 2 lanes...I MAY be out of alignment,IF so, I get an alignment, because it was in alignment before the b--ch hit me. IF they rebalance the tires to acheive this, so be it. I want MY little blue Aveo back ASAP. BUT I want it back in great condition, not ok condition. And my insurance gives me the right to get it back 'in the condition it was before the accident', which was near showroom condition. So..if it takes them 5 days to clean and wax it to MY happiness,then it takes 5 days. If it takes 1 afternoon, it takes 1 afternoon. Everyone calm down. I haven't even started to 'thank' this bi--h for her ruining my life and my car. My lawyer will thank her and her male companion for that in the months to come! And a simple, 'I'm sorry' from her or him would go a long long way...but instead she said I hit her and I ruined her door. Yet the police report showed how SHE hit me with HER front bumper! Amazing what 1 lie will get you. 2 is even worse. Everyone is welcome to their opinion as to what makes YOU happy. MY car WAS as close to perfect as possible, except for the crappy tires, before the accident. So I am entitled under the law to get my car back in the condition it was in before the accident. IF your Aveo is a piece of c--p after 9 months, then you get that condition back,not better.Mine was near showroom new, and has many added features and options that don't even come on USA Aveos it turns out. So..I pay insurance for 26 years + to State Farm with never an accident EVER, think of it as me getting SOME of my money back. I have hit a nerve with several people. Perhaps past accident causing people? That got stuck with paying for their mistake? I was just updating you on my accident,and that I will get it back this week sometime. When anyone causes an accident...it CAN cause many problems,like uneven tire wear,the need for an alignment,the A/C system is clogged with dust from the body shop...it has to be cleaned with GM A/C cleaner now to prevent me from getting hit with dust everytime I turn on the A/C. That is HER fault, because it wouldn't be in a bodyshop IF she had not smashed my car. so she or he has to pay to fix it ALL. So when you are on the road..and you CAUSE an accident. Think of all the extras YOU have to pay for, it isn't just new doors and paint. It is everything attached to it,and attached to those pieces etc,etc,etc,. I'm not even going into the lost income and the trouble THAT is causing. The lawsuit will handle that. In the long run. Till then I have to live on credit cards and pay interest on all that money borrowed to LIVE! So..be careful and try not to be in an accident, and don't cause one. I haven't even begun to make her beg for the day she ever met me by smashing my little car. Thats why we in the USA have Personal injury lawyers...and reputible body shops,that include this one that State Farm wanted me to go to,..even though I went there of my own accord anyway. They were chosen as one of their perferred repair shops. Fair and do good work and give a LIFETIME repair warranty. So if it starts to rust or if something happens 4 months down the road, and it is linked to the accident, THEY can sue the bi--h for the money and THEY dont have to pay for it. Yes I have a 'vendeta' for this woman and her man. But I leave that in the good hands of the law...and my car in the bodyshops hands. You take care of your Aveo your way...I take care of mine my way. When you are unable to work for 14 days,are in constant pain,have NO money...lets see how many of you are in a 'Snow White' forgiving mood:). I for one , want her to P A Y. Fair..but PAY! :mad:
I have a lot to say to you about how your negative attitude comes across to those on this board, but it's probably best left un-said. Good luck and good bye as I intend to skip any future posts by you.
Man, you don't need a lawyer. You need a psychiatrist.
Look, she is the cause of the accident, that has been proven by the accident report. Her ins co will pay. If you get a lawyer, her ins co will handle it and pay, not her. You keep saying you want her to pay, but as long as she has sufficient ins, she won't pay a penny. And she will most likely laugh in your face when she sees what it's doing to you. Don't give her that chance, move on man.
And I thought there was only her in the car, so why do you have a vendetta against her man? Wasn't he just the owner? Why are you upset with him?
And go to paragraph school too. Your posts are difficult to decipher.
into potential clients with that kind of an attitude, I do just that...I run...
Even tho I make my living as a PI lawyer, I do not enjoy those who come in with a chip on their shoulder, telling what the world, and the at-fault driver, owes them for what they did to them in the wreck...
Rarely does the at-fault driver cause them damage INTENTIONALLY, that is why we call it negligence, so, even tho the law says that you have the right to be compensated for damages, when you wear that attitude on your sleeve, I send them elsewhere...let the OTHER attorney deal with that personality problem, I have better things to do...
For the betterment of this topic, let's move on from that.................................
I know the insurance is paying for this. BUT this man or woman is going to pay higher insurance payments for the accident for the next 2,3,5 years? THAT means she/they pay. That is fine by me. And in small claims court with them as defendants, THEY are being personally sued. NOT their insurance. Got it? THEY will pay IF I win. IF I dont...then I don't. Calm down everyone. Geez. Maybe she didnt see me because of the handicap plaque hanging from her rear view mirror,yet she jumped out of that truck like a spring chicken...so maybe she is breaking yet another law?! SHE didnt practice safe driving did she?? See this is why I never speak up on forums. There is always 2-4 people that just cant let things float by. They have to be right! I get it. BUT she/he is going to pay in higher insurance costs for up to 5 years. THAT makes me feel great! And petty as it is...I dont care :P The second thing out of her mouth after she hit me was..'Oh God,MY insurance will go up AGAIN!!!!. So she is no stranger to causing accidents...right??? So SHE is a danger on the road...right??? Why else would it go up..AGAIN? Why else were there over 5 more slam marks on this NEW truck from 5 other cars/trucks? Sounds like a very careful driver, right?? Hmmm?? So..everyone calm down. MY lawyers are handling it..they can sue HER and HIM and STATE FARM,I dont care. I am out of work..don't I deserve compensation? My newish car was creamed,don't I deserve it repaired back to pre accident condition?? I did nothing wrong!!! Dont you people get it? So after my lawyers are done with their State Farm policy, we go after HER/HIM PERSONALLY,and then they pay out of their pockets. So..they DO pay. Now that I have said it...I wont post any more, I will just scan the updates for MPG,new items for our Aveos, and things like that. Because of the few idiots that always have to ruin a forum. When YOU are in an accident,I dont want to hear you get upset,I want you to be out of work and SMILE, be in constant pain and DON'T think about it. When your car is nearly crushed in half, don't worry or get a 'chip on your shoulder'. Ok? Can you do that? Can you?? I doubt it. IF you don't understand what I just said...it is called sarcasm. Yet I am not allowed MY feelings?. I am not able to work, I don't have my car, I am out over $2,000 already...but I don't deserve to get it back..right? Go live in that little bubble with the nut who is afraid of the radio,and tv, everything is fine.....
look, i really don't want to get you worked up, because, gosh who knows what might happen. :shades:
FYI: believe it or not, because you were in an accident, even though it wasn't your fault, your "incident count" or whatever the insurance companies call the metric bumped by one. it's potentially a strike against you if you have future claims.
No, your lawyers are not going to go after her personally after her insurance pays. Her insurance is not going to pay unless you sign a release in exchange for the money it offers. That release will be her defense against any suit you try to bring against her. Your lawsuit will be dismissed. If you do reject the insurance company offer and file a lawsuit against her, it could take a year or two or longer to even get to court. And in the mean time, her insurance will not have paid you a dime (except for your car repair and car rental.) No wage loss, no medical bills, no pain and suffering. And you could lose in court too, winning a small judgement or even none at all if the judge or jury thinks you are trying to cheat somehow or if they don't like you. If your claim is (arguably) worth much more than her policy limits and your lawyer determines she has assets to satisfy a judgment much larger than her policy limits, then, and only then might he consider a lawsuit against her personally. And that asset investigation is going to cost YOU money. It could be many hundreds of dollars or even more. And if it turns out she does not have adequate assets, you are going to be out that money. You need to calm down.
Has anyone here ever filed a Diminished Value Claim after being in an accident? I asked my attorney about this and he said this is usually done for luxury cars, but I haven't seen this in any of the research I've done. IMHO, my car IS (or at this point, "was"...) a luxury car, since it only has 5,550 miles on it and is a fully loaded, 2007 Toyota Camry. It has incurred $16,000 worth of damage, so obviously, I would like to get some kind of payment for the vehicle, since I'm sure it will be close to impossible to sell or trade in. :confuse:
your car has suffered about a 40% loss of value even if it is perfectly repaired. if the other driver's company won't pay, sue him if it is your own company you want to collect from, you may be out of luck. many states do not allow 1st party diminished value claims
Thanks joe131...I would be trying to collect from the other party's insurance company, since the accident was their fault. FYI, I was sitting stopped in traffic and was rear ended, then the car behind them, rear ended them, causing me to get pushed into a third vehicle in front of me, which was also stopped. What a "wonderful" Monday morning that was!
Nope. Not unless you did something to make the damage worse somehow to the car in front of you. You are fault free the way you described it. Sounds like you may need to claim against both drivers behind you. They'll have to work out the % of damages to pay. But if the stories and evidence do not back you up, there could be an argument about it as to who is responsible for which damage.
They are doing a 4 wheel alignment and rebalancing the tires,just in case,..anything to up the bill
That told me everything I need to know. I thought you both had State Farm???? If so you are basically in the long run going to increase the cost of your own policy when they figure there losses at the end of they year.
Well perhaps I am mistaken with current practice. A number of years ago we had a relative who was in a left turn lane waiting for the light to turn green (with a stack of other cars). A guy came into the lane and rammed the last car, pushing everyone forward. As I understood the results of the insurance settlements, the rear damage of her car was charged to/against the car immediately behind her....and she was responsible for the damage on the front of her car and damage done to the car immediately ahead of her.
If they charge all of the damage of all of the cars back to the person who started the whole pileup....that would be great.
The settlement offers, in a fault based state, are based on who was negligent. If your state is no fault insurance state, so far as damage to the vehicles, then it may be that each person's own insurance company will pay for the damages to each car insured by it, and no others at all. States vary widely on insurance laws. I was speaking about a fault based state. The best use comparative fault to determine who pays how much of whose damages. It is the most fair way, but sometimes conflicting drivers' statements or witness statements end up causing an unfair result. Good luck.
If they charge all of the damage of all of the cars back to the person who started the whole pileup....that would be great
That's exactly what happened to my wife. She was sitting at a red light and rear ended by a drunk driver who was est. at going 45 MPH. There were 3 cars in front of her who also sustained damage due to the chain reaction. The ins co for the drunk driver ended up paying for the whole shabang. He also was ticketed for faulty brakes.
No, the other insurance company has already paid for the damage to the truck in front of me. I wasn't sitting very close behind him so his damage was minimal--just a few scratches on his bumper.
for what it is worth, who is at fault, while not cast in stone, is often at the discretion of the police officer, altho anything can be disputed in court...the best example is the multi-car 4 car chain reaction...
If the 3 cars in front are sitting still, and a 4th car rear ends #3 so hard to push him into #2 and then push #2 into #1, then #4 is totally at fault for "following too close"...(that is the charge for a rear end collision in GA, following too close)...
Oddly, if all 4 cars are in motion, then #4, #3 and #2 may all be cited for "following too close" because if the following distance was adequate, they would never hit the vehicle in front of them after a rear end collision...I don't make the rules, I just tell you what I see...
But, we can bend that rule, too...if a tractor-trailer rear ends a car and sends it flying into the car in front, causing the same chain, the force of the truck, if it creamed the car it hit, may be the only one cited, since even with adequate following distance, the force of a truck impact may overcome the average proper following distance...
Which brings up ANOTHER reason for medpay and adequate U/M...if you are vehicle #1, and vehicle #4 is just a Buick, but not a large semi, the injuries may exceed the policy limits of Vehicle #4 (GA minimum, 25/50 for bodily injury liability), and you may need your own U/M for pain and suffering and medpay for your injuries, as the at-fault driver may have insufficient insurance to cover 3 other cars with injured drivers and passengers...YOU KNOW I WOULD WORK A "BOB" LESSON IN THIS SOMEHOW, DIDN'T YOU???
The police are not in the job to determine who is at fault in an accident. They are there to provide assistance and decide whether to charge people with traffic violations.
The insurance companies and/or the courts are the ones who determine who should pay for damages. They do this by trying to figure out who was negligent, not by who may or may not have received a traffic ticket.
The police report is just a piece of paper that may be read and possibly used as evidence by the insurance companies and/or court.
It's 2 A.M. in the middle of February with a foot of snow and ice on a very foggy road in a Blizzard.
An old stick shift little car is stopped at the Red light when the sleepy trucker slams into the car's rear.
Flames ignite everything including the cargo which consisted of very valuable fur coats and accessories. Loss to the truck, trailer and cargo totals one million dollars.
The little stick shift car is burned to a crisp. Value less than $1,000.
The court awards $900 to the owner of the little car and $100,000 to the trucking company. Why? because the trucker was 90% at fault. Why was the little car 10% at fault? Because the driver had his foot on the gas pedal instead of the Brake so his brake lights were off, making it more difficult for the trucker to see the stopped car in front of him until it was too late.
But I'm sure we all know that the police report, properly written, will be THE most important piece of evidence to determine fault. You make it it sound like the police report is just one more persons opinion and may or may not be used as evidence.
ticketed, they, by default, decide who caused the accident...disputable???...of course...but it starts out with the presumption that the police have decided who is negligent, therefore, who caused the wreck...
That is just your presumption, not the court's or insurance adjuster's. The police officer collects information and decides whether anyone should get a ticket. He does not determine negligence or even decide if a driver has to pay the ticket. Negligence is a legal term used when deciding civil damages cases, not when deciding who gets a traffic ticket.
You're missing the point. The police write up the accident report based on physical evidence and eyewitness testimony. If tickets are issued, then so be it. But the police report, and I reiterate properly written, will in fact determine negligence.
NO, you are missing the point (but yours is a common misconception, at least). The police have no interest in addressing the legal concept of negligence. It is not their job and they have no reason to offer their opinion on it. They assist at the scene, record information and determine if anyone should get a ticket. That's it. Even when a cop is called to the stand to testify at trial, he does not give his opinion on negligence. It is not his job, not his function. He may testify as to his observations and information gathering, but his opinion as to who is negligent is not important since it is not his decision to make. Negligence is important when determining who pays what damages to whom in a legal dispute. That is done by settling, as with an insurance adjuster, or by litigating in front of a judge or jury or arbitrator. The decision on negligence is made there, not at the scene of the accident.
The police report from my accident states that the 3rd car (behind me) stopped in time, but the 4th car hit the 3rd car causing a chain reaction, however, in my opinion, that was not the case. The 3rd car hit me, and then about 10 seconds later, I felt the impact of the 4th car. Of course, the 4th car got the ticket for following too closely. In addition, the police report also states that at the time of the accident, the 3rd car was traveling 3 mph, and the 4th car was traveling at 10 mph. Last I checked, 3mph is not considered "stopped"? So there is a discrepancy in the report. IMHO, the car behind me didn't stop in time--I just dont see how car #4 hitting car #3 could push me 12 feet forward into the truck in front of me and cause $16,000 worth of damage (then again, I wasn't the best in physics!). I guess this is something that the insurance companies for the drivers of the 3rd and 4th cars have to figure out!
the vast majority of auto accidents have their liability assumed by the "at-fault" insurance from the written police report, the de facto reality is that the negligence of the at-fault driver is often determined by the police report...
If it is challenged in a court of law, then the court WILL literally decide who is negligent, but, whenever an ins company says they will pay the claim, they are accepting the liability that their driver was negligent by the police report...
When an officer issues a ticket that charges you with "failure to yield" or "running a stop sign" or "improper lane change", you are being charged with causing the wreck due to the charge as listed on the ticket...since most insurance companies will pay on that basis, the negligence of the driver is inferred by the report written by the officer...
However, if someone disputes the charge, or has witnesses or other evidence to disprove the charge, then the officer's determination of fault/negligence can be proven wrong and the driver will NOT be liable...
But as long as the report cannot be disputed, the officer's determination of fault from the evidence is the de facto assignment of negligence, at least in the practical world...
I think you drastically underestimate the greed of large controlling corporations. I would suggest that the "vast" majority of carriers would pretty much constitute the Farm and maybe one other (unless you are strictly speaking numbers and not policies in force -- which would just be crazy) And I can assure you none of the big dogs will take an accident report as the final word unless all other options have been exhausted.
I don't state this to contradict, only to enlighten you next time someone is cited for an improper lane change while merging into you. You need to know that an accident report will likely not save you from any of these greater entities.
In fact, many large carriers are so bogged down with claims that they will order reports through a TPA -- delaying the process by 2 weeks on top of the already likely 10 day wait. Typically, the negligence in these accidents is decided long before an accident report is scanned into some electronic file never to be seen again -- guess it keeps the TPA in business and builds a little revenue for the municipality.
The police will give "opinions" -- often flawed, graphical representations -- often inaccurate, damage descriptions -- lacking in any significane, and an abbreviated version of the parties statements -- this is of utmost importance. The police will also issue citations based on local traffic ordinances.
Case in point. I have illegally parked my '06 small Chevy -- whatever, an Aveo lets say -- with full vinyl kit on a red curb behind your vehicle -- while I get a slurpee and dollar dog. You back legally from a clearly marked position into the side of my Aveo, causing say -- 10k in damages. You call the police, because in this imaginary parking lot, the police will actually come to private property -- or maybe you say you need EMS. The police come, find me, and cite me for illegal parking. You get no such citation, you get ushered away and I get scolded by the police (while they check out my vinyl.)
Per your example, case closed -- the parked and unoccupied vehicle was illegally parked and thus negligent -- heck, they were cited. Now does that seem right? Maybe because I'm a lazy prick who parked there, but really, no -- you are at fault and will pay to fix my smallish and economical Chevy. I guarantee it.
I think you both may be right. For a minor accident where there is no conflicting evidence an insurance company would likely rely on a police report. For a major accident with injuries the company would most likely look at the cost of a pay out vs. the cost of litigation. They then take the cheapest way out.
Truth, fault and police reports can be trumped by economics.
2019 Kia Soul+, 2015 Mustang GT, 2013 Ford F-150, 2000 Chrysler Sebring convertible
OMG, I should read more carefully. I just realized we were discussing a pimped out AVEO Good grief... Maybe instead of putting money into decals, pinstripes and such, that would have helped if applied towards more steel, airbags and safety equipment...
I believe that Bob (oddly monikered marsha7) is a lawyer.
Sky23213... it's not a real Aveo, just a hypothetical one.
MODERATOR /ADMINISTRATOR Find me at kirstie_h@edmunds.com - or send a private message by clicking on my name. 2015 Kia Soul, 2021 Subaru Forester (kirstie_h), 2024 GMC Sierra 1500 (mr. kirstie_h) Review your vehicle
Most auto accident claims are settled by insurance companies' adjusters or lawyers. The most important item relied on by the company is nearly always their insured driver's statement of facts concerning the accident. Because of the contractual fiduciary relationship, both the company and insured are bound to be truthful, trusting and cooperative with each other. The decision on whether to pay and to whom and how much is sometimes made without a police report, either because one was not made, was not readily available, or was not considered necessary by the company. Often, the police report does not significantly deviate from the insured's statement. That makes decisions easier. When there are discrepancies, more in depth investigation and evaluation is done before a decision is made. Most companies will also try to get recorded statements from the other driver and sometimes witnesses too if fault is unclear. If they deem it necessary, a private investigator or photographer may be hired by the company. The police report could be helpful in that it might contain measurements, diagrams, weather information, speed limits, names of witnesses, obvious injuries, insurance information, records of who said what to whom, point of impact relative to the road and many other bits of information. It may also be used to remind witnesses about things or be helpful in corroborating some of the claims made by the various witnesses. The police report is just one piece of evidence that may be used in determining who was negligent and to what degree.
Hello everyone, I would just like to ask how long it usually takes for the insurance company to pay off a vehicle once the claim's been settled. We received the letter from our insurance 1st week of April with the settlement amount and also mailed out the forms to release the vehicle to the insurance company and to the DMV. We're just wondering because up to now we're still getting bills from our bank with whom we have a loan for our vehicle and we're still paying for our SUV every month and the statement says nothing's been paid yet to our lienholder. Thank you all and have a blessed day!
Industry guide says "a reasonable time". That has been understood to be within 30 calendar days.
Advise the Claim Manager he, by his departments slow service, is obligated to reimburse you for the monthly payments occuring after the settlement date. You are not to subsidize their tardyness by continuing to make monthly payments. They have fumbled the ball.
"reasonable time" designation, but, more often, if the car is totalled and the amount is determined, most companies pay out within a week, often less, as closing the PD claim is important to them...
What really stinks is when they pay out with a draft instead of a check...they consider the matter "closed" because they sent you the paper for deposit in your bank...but while a check will clear within 2-5 days, when it (electronically) is received by the originating bank, a draft must wait for the insurance company to actually release the funds when the check returns to the originator, it is not automatic like a check...
Sometimes, when dealing with attorneys, they will issue a draft, and not release the funds until the adjustor verifies receiving their signed release back in the mail...since some attys are slow in mailing back the release, one way to snap us to attention is to withhold funds until the release is returned, signed and notarized...
While I send my releases back immediately (so I can close MY FILE), some attys will hold onto them, why I do not know...:):):):):)...
Also remember, if you settled for, say, $5,000 on your total, but you still owe $6,000 to the lender, the insurance check will be sent directly to your lender, and you will still have payments until you pay the remaining balance of $1,000...........
Many folks on this topic are surprised to learn that a totalled car is paid off at what the car is worth, not how much remains on the outstanding loan...they are shocked to learn they still owe money after their car is totalled...
Which reminds me of my second favorite topic, next to Medpay, which is GAP insurance, which ranks above my thrid favorite topic, umbrella insurance...
But since GAP has its own topic, surprisingly called "GAP Insurance", no need to belabor it here....
Aw, and I was having such a good time.............:):):):):)
What is your experience on third party auto diminished value claims, you know, where the other driver caused the crash that damaged your car? What kind of evidence is persuasive? What kind is laughed at? What kind of % losses have you seen paid for by insurance companies? What value do they figure the loss from?
I moved this message over from a different forum on the advice/suggestion of a Forum Host.
I am (was) the owner of an 06 DTS which was recently TOTALED in a multi-car pileup. I'm fine, the car served and protected me well. However, in dealing with insurance issues for settlement there are various ways the 06 and now the 07 "trim levels" i.e. Luxury Base, I, II, III, IV are being valued or appraised for the DTS. Edmunds appropriately lists the values of the 06 in its used cars under the different levels. However, KBB and NADA appear to only recognize one "base" trim level and consider the upper levels only via add-on/options to the base. However, I noticed the Honda Accord is shown (correctly) as the LX, EX, SE, VP, etc. Or, the Lincoln Town car is shown (correctly) as the Signature, Signature Limited, Designer, and Signature L trims. I assume most other cars are shown correctly as well. Have any other DTS or Cadillac owners run into this, or are they aware of this? It makes getting "fair market value" impossible in this instance. I'd appreciate other ideas, comments, opinions, etc. I've sent each enotes with no corrections following. Thanks in advance. I will be getting an 07 to replace my 06 - I loved the car and its improvements. My last Caddy was a 98 D'Elegance.
KBB and NADA may work perfectly fine for determining fair market value so long as the appropriate amounts are added for all the equipment. Maybe for the DTS it is the best way to do it. Why do you say it makes determination of FMV impossible?
Comments
Really, its moot though, you got to my main point right up front ... anything to up the bill.
Flaaveo: Let me tell you who wins in this excessive work you are trying to demand be completed. (or so it sounds) The body shop and the insurance company. The more things a shop messes with on your car, the more chances there are for something to go wrong -- it does sound like you got a sweet decal kit though, so I guess it's a win,win,win situation.
Everyone is welcome to their opinion as to what makes YOU happy. MY car WAS as close to perfect as possible, except for the crappy tires, before the accident. So I am entitled under the law to get my car back in the condition it was in before the accident. IF your Aveo is a piece of c--p after 9 months, then you get that condition back,not better.Mine was near showroom new, and has many added features and options that don't even come on USA Aveos it turns out. So..I pay insurance for 26 years + to State Farm with never an accident EVER, think of it as me getting SOME of my money back. I have hit a nerve with several people. Perhaps past accident causing people? That got stuck with paying for their mistake? I was just updating you on my accident,and that I will get it back this week sometime. When anyone causes an accident...it CAN cause many problems,like uneven tire wear,the need for an alignment,the A/C system is clogged with dust from the body shop...it has to be cleaned with GM A/C cleaner now to prevent me from getting hit with dust everytime I turn on the A/C. That is HER fault, because it wouldn't be in a bodyshop IF she had not smashed my car. so she or he has to pay to fix it ALL. So when you are on the road..and you CAUSE an accident. Think of all the extras YOU have to pay for, it isn't just new doors and paint. It is everything attached to it,and attached to those pieces etc,etc,etc,. I'm not even going into the lost income and the trouble THAT is causing. The lawsuit will handle that. In the long run. Till then I have to live on credit cards and pay interest on all that money borrowed to LIVE! So..be careful and try not to be in an accident, and don't cause one. I haven't even begun to make her beg for the day she ever met me by smashing my little car. Thats why we in the USA have Personal injury lawyers...and reputible body shops,that include this one that State Farm wanted me to go to,..even though I went there of my own accord anyway. They were chosen as one of their perferred repair shops. Fair and do good work and give a LIFETIME repair warranty. So if it starts to rust or if something happens 4 months down the road, and it is linked to the accident, THEY can sue the bi--h for the money and THEY dont have to pay for it.
Yes I have a 'vendeta' for this woman and her man. But I leave that in the good hands of the law...and my car in the bodyshops hands. You take care of your Aveo your way...I take care of mine my way. When you are unable to work for 14 days,are in constant pain,have NO money...lets see how many of you are in a 'Snow White' forgiving mood:). I for one , want her to P A Y. Fair..but PAY! :mad:
Look, she is the cause of the accident, that has been proven by the accident report. Her ins co will pay. If you get a lawyer, her ins co will handle it and pay, not her. You keep saying you want her to pay, but as long as she has sufficient ins, she won't pay a penny. And she will most likely laugh in your face when she sees what it's doing to you. Don't give her that chance, move on man.
And I thought there was only her in the car, so why do you have a vendetta against her man? Wasn't he just the owner? Why are you upset with him?
And go to paragraph school too. Your posts are difficult to decipher.
Even tho I make my living as a PI lawyer, I do not enjoy those who come in with a chip on their shoulder, telling what the world, and the at-fault driver, owes them for what they did to them in the wreck...
Rarely does the at-fault driver cause them damage INTENTIONALLY, that is why we call it negligence, so, even tho the law says that you have the right to be compensated for damages, when you wear that attitude on your sleeve, I send them elsewhere...let the OTHER attorney deal with that personality problem, I have better things to do...
For the betterment of this topic, let's move on from that.................................
The second thing out of her mouth after she hit me was..'Oh God,MY insurance will go up AGAIN!!!!. So she is no stranger to causing accidents...right??? So SHE is a danger on the road...right??? Why else would it go up..AGAIN? Why else were there over 5 more slam marks on this NEW truck from 5 other cars/trucks? Sounds like a very careful driver, right?? Hmmm?? So..everyone calm down. MY lawyers are handling it..they can sue HER and HIM and STATE FARM,I dont care. I am out of work..don't I deserve compensation? My newish car was creamed,don't I deserve it repaired back to pre accident condition?? I did nothing wrong!!! Dont you people get it? So after my lawyers are done with their State Farm policy, we go after HER/HIM PERSONALLY,and then they pay out of their pockets. So..they DO pay. Now that I have said it...I wont post any more, I will just scan the updates for MPG,new items for our Aveos, and things like that. Because of the few idiots that always have to ruin a forum. When YOU are in an accident,I dont want to hear you get upset,I want you to be out of work and SMILE, be in constant pain and DON'T think about it. When your car is nearly crushed in half, don't worry or get a 'chip on your shoulder'. Ok? Can you do that? Can you?? I doubt it. IF you don't understand what I just said...it is called sarcasm. Yet I am not allowed MY feelings?. I am not able to work, I don't have my car, I am out over $2,000 already...but I don't deserve to get it back..right? Go live in that little bubble with the nut who is afraid of the radio,and tv, everything is fine.....
FYI: believe it or not, because you were in an accident, even though it wasn't your fault, your "incident count" or whatever the insurance companies call the metric bumped by one. it's potentially a strike against you if you have future claims.
If you do reject the insurance company offer and file a lawsuit against her, it could take a year or two or longer to even get to court. And in the mean time, her insurance will not have paid you a dime (except for your car repair and car rental.) No wage loss, no medical bills, no pain and suffering. And you could lose in court too, winning a small judgement or even none at all if the judge or jury thinks you are trying to cheat somehow or if they don't like you.
If your claim is (arguably) worth much more than her policy limits and your lawyer determines she has assets to satisfy a judgment much larger than her policy limits, then, and only then might he consider a lawsuit against her personally.
And that asset investigation is going to cost YOU money. It could be many hundreds of dollars or even more. And if it turns out she does not have adequate assets, you are going to be out that money.
You need to calm down.
if it is your own company you want to collect from, you may be out of luck. many states do not allow 1st party diminished value claims
Google it
Sounds like you may need to claim against both drivers behind you. They'll have to work out the % of damages to pay.
But if the stories and evidence do not back you up, there could be an argument about it as to who is responsible for which damage.
That told me everything I need to know.
I thought you both had State Farm???? If so you are basically in the long run going to increase the cost of your own policy when they figure there losses at the end of they year.
If they charge all of the damage of all of the cars back to the person who started the whole pileup....that would be great.
I was speaking about a fault based state. The best use comparative fault to determine who pays how much of whose damages. It is the most fair way, but sometimes conflicting drivers' statements or witness statements end up causing an unfair result.
Good luck.
That's exactly what happened to my wife. She was sitting at a red light and rear ended by a drunk driver who was est. at going 45 MPH. There were 3 cars in front of her who also sustained damage due to the chain reaction. The ins co for the drunk driver ended up paying for the whole shabang. He also was ticketed for faulty brakes.
If the 3 cars in front are sitting still, and a 4th car rear ends #3 so hard to push him into #2 and then push #2 into #1, then #4 is totally at fault for "following too close"...(that is the charge for a rear end collision in GA, following too close)...
Oddly, if all 4 cars are in motion, then #4, #3 and #2 may all be cited for "following too close" because if the following distance was adequate, they would never hit the vehicle in front of them after a rear end collision...I don't make the rules, I just tell you what I see...
But, we can bend that rule, too...if a tractor-trailer rear ends a car and sends it flying into the car in front, causing the same chain, the force of the truck, if it creamed the car it hit, may be the only one cited, since even with adequate following distance, the force of a truck impact may overcome the average proper following distance...
Which brings up ANOTHER reason for medpay and adequate U/M...if you are vehicle #1, and vehicle #4 is just a Buick, but not a large semi, the injuries may exceed the policy limits of Vehicle #4 (GA minimum, 25/50 for bodily injury liability), and you may need your own U/M for pain and suffering and medpay for your injuries, as the at-fault driver may have insufficient insurance to cover 3 other cars with injured drivers and passengers...YOU KNOW I WOULD WORK A "BOB" LESSON IN THIS SOMEHOW, DIDN'T YOU???
The insurance companies and/or the courts are the ones who determine who should pay for damages. They do this by trying to figure out who was negligent, not by who may or may not have received a traffic ticket.
The police report is just a piece of paper that may be read and possibly used as evidence by the insurance companies and/or court.
An old stick shift little car is stopped at the Red light when the sleepy trucker slams into the car's rear.
Flames ignite everything including the cargo which consisted of very valuable fur coats and accessories. Loss to the truck, trailer and cargo totals one million dollars.
The little stick shift car is burned to a crisp. Value less than $1,000.
The court awards $900 to the owner of the little car and $100,000 to the trucking company. Why? because the trucker was 90% at fault. Why was the little car 10% at fault? Because the driver had his foot on the gas pedal instead of the Brake so his brake lights were off, making it more difficult for the trucker to see the stopped car in front of him until it was too late.
Another reason for High Limits of Liability.
The police officer collects information and decides whether anyone should get a ticket. He does not determine negligence or even decide if a driver has to pay the ticket.
Negligence is a legal term used when deciding civil damages cases, not when deciding who gets a traffic ticket.
The police have no interest in addressing the legal concept of negligence. It is not their job and they have no reason to offer their opinion on it. They assist at the scene, record information and determine if anyone should get a ticket. That's it.
Even when a cop is called to the stand to testify at trial, he does not give his opinion on negligence. It is not his job, not his function. He may testify as to his observations and information gathering, but his opinion as to who is negligent is not important since it is not his decision to make.
Negligence is important when determining who pays what damages to whom in a legal dispute. That is done by settling, as with an insurance adjuster, or by litigating in front of a judge or jury or arbitrator. The decision on negligence is made there, not at the scene of the accident.
If it is challenged in a court of law, then the court WILL literally decide who is negligent, but, whenever an ins company says they will pay the claim, they are accepting the liability that their driver was negligent by the police report...
When an officer issues a ticket that charges you with "failure to yield" or "running a stop sign" or "improper lane change", you are being charged with causing the wreck due to the charge as listed on the ticket...since most insurance companies will pay on that basis, the negligence of the driver is inferred by the report written by the officer...
However, if someone disputes the charge, or has witnesses or other evidence to disprove the charge, then the officer's determination of fault/negligence can be proven wrong and the driver will NOT be liable...
But as long as the report cannot be disputed, the officer's determination of fault from the evidence is the de facto assignment of negligence, at least in the practical world...
Just curious, what is your experience and/or education on which it is based?
I think you drastically underestimate the greed of large controlling corporations. I would suggest that the "vast" majority of carriers would pretty much constitute the Farm and maybe one other (unless you are strictly speaking numbers and not policies in force -- which would just be crazy) And I can assure you none of the big dogs will take an accident report as the final word unless all other options have been exhausted.
I don't state this to contradict, only to enlighten you next time someone is cited for an improper lane change while merging into you. You need to know that an accident report will likely not save you from any of these greater entities.
In fact, many large carriers are so bogged down with claims that they will order reports through a TPA -- delaying the process by 2 weeks on top of the already likely 10 day wait. Typically, the negligence in these accidents is decided long before an accident report is scanned into some electronic file never to be seen again -- guess it keeps the TPA in business and builds a little revenue for the municipality.
The police will give "opinions" -- often flawed, graphical representations -- often inaccurate, damage descriptions -- lacking in any significane, and an abbreviated version of the parties statements -- this is of utmost importance. The police will also issue citations based on local traffic ordinances.
Case in point. I have illegally parked my '06 small Chevy -- whatever, an Aveo lets say -- with full vinyl kit on a red curb behind your vehicle -- while I get a slurpee and dollar dog. You back legally from a clearly marked position into the side of my Aveo, causing say -- 10k in damages. You call the police, because in this imaginary parking lot, the police will actually come to private property -- or maybe you say you need EMS. The police come, find me, and cite me for illegal parking. You get no such citation, you get ushered away and I get scolded by the police (while they check out my vinyl.)
Per your example, case closed -- the parked and unoccupied vehicle was illegally parked and thus negligent -- heck, they were cited. Now does that seem right? Maybe because I'm a lazy prick who parked there, but really, no -- you are at fault and will pay to fix my smallish and economical Chevy. I guarantee it.
Truth, fault and police reports can be trumped by economics.
2019 Kia Soul+, 2015 Mustang GT, 2013 Ford F-150, 2000 Chrysler Sebring convertible
Good grief...
Maybe instead of putting money into decals, pinstripes and such, that would have helped if applied towards more steel, airbags and safety equipment...
Sky23213... it's not a real Aveo, just a hypothetical one.
MODERATOR /ADMINISTRATOR
Find me at kirstie_h@edmunds.com - or send a private message by clicking on my name.
2015 Kia Soul, 2021 Subaru Forester (kirstie_h), 2024 GMC Sierra 1500 (mr. kirstie_h)
Review your vehicle
The most important item relied on by the company is nearly always their insured driver's statement of facts concerning the accident. Because of the contractual fiduciary relationship, both the company and insured are bound to be truthful, trusting and cooperative with each other.
The decision on whether to pay and to whom and how much is sometimes made without a police report, either because one was not made, was not readily available, or was not considered necessary by the company.
Often, the police report does not significantly deviate from the insured's statement. That makes decisions easier. When there are discrepancies, more in depth investigation and evaluation is done before a decision is made. Most companies will also try to get recorded statements from the other driver and sometimes witnesses too if fault is unclear. If they deem it necessary, a private investigator or photographer may be hired by the company.
The police report could be helpful in that it might contain measurements, diagrams, weather information, speed limits, names of witnesses, obvious injuries, insurance information, records of who said what to whom, point of impact relative to the road and many other bits of information. It may also be used to remind witnesses about things or be helpful in corroborating some of the claims made by the various witnesses.
The police report is just one piece of evidence that may be used in determining who was negligent and to what degree.
Thank you all and have a blessed day!
Advise the Claim Manager he, by his departments slow service, is obligated to reimburse you for the monthly payments occuring after the settlement date. You are not to subsidize their tardyness by continuing to make monthly payments. They have fumbled the ball.
What really stinks is when they pay out with a draft instead of a check...they consider the matter "closed" because they sent you the paper for deposit in your bank...but while a check will clear within 2-5 days, when it (electronically) is received by the originating bank, a draft must wait for the insurance company to actually release the funds when the check returns to the originator, it is not automatic like a check...
Sometimes, when dealing with attorneys, they will issue a draft, and not release the funds until the adjustor verifies receiving their signed release back in the mail...since some attys are slow in mailing back the release, one way to snap us to attention is to withhold funds until the release is returned, signed and notarized...
While I send my releases back immediately (so I can close MY FILE), some attys will hold onto them, why I do not know...:):):):):)...
Also remember, if you settled for, say, $5,000 on your total, but you still owe $6,000 to the lender, the insurance check will be sent directly to your lender, and you will still have payments until you pay the remaining balance of $1,000...........
Many folks on this topic are surprised to learn that a totalled car is paid off at what the car is worth, not how much remains on the outstanding loan...they are shocked to learn they still owe money after their car is totalled...
Which reminds me of my second favorite topic, next to Medpay, which is GAP insurance, which ranks above my thrid favorite topic, umbrella insurance...
But since GAP has its own topic, surprisingly called "GAP Insurance", no need to belabor it here....
Aw, and I was having such a good time.............:):):):):)
What kind of evidence is persuasive? What kind is laughed at? What kind of % losses have you seen paid for by insurance companies? What value do they figure the loss from?
I am (was) the owner of an 06 DTS which was recently TOTALED in a multi-car pileup. I'm fine, the car served and protected me well. However, in dealing with insurance issues for settlement there are various ways the 06 and now the 07 "trim levels" i.e. Luxury Base, I, II, III, IV are being valued or appraised for the DTS. Edmunds appropriately lists the values of the 06 in its used cars under the different levels. However, KBB and NADA appear to only recognize one "base" trim level and consider the upper levels only via add-on/options to the base. However, I noticed the Honda Accord is shown (correctly) as the LX, EX, SE, VP, etc. Or, the Lincoln Town car is shown (correctly) as the Signature, Signature Limited, Designer, and Signature L trims. I assume most other cars are shown correctly as well. Have any other DTS or Cadillac owners run into this, or are they aware of this? It makes getting "fair market value" impossible in this instance. I'd appreciate other ideas, comments, opinions, etc. I've sent each enotes with no corrections following. Thanks in advance. I will be getting an 07 to replace my 06 - I loved the car and its improvements. My last Caddy was a 98 D'Elegance.
Why do you say it makes determination of FMV impossible?