Incident Yesterday Afternoon

[Bill K]

I got caught in the middle of a three car accident and was charged. ( don't ask me for what as it was to long ago )

Bill K

Originally Posted by Radar1

Unless the blue truck did something wrong and was negligent, they aren't liable. Same scenario as if you had stopped in traffic behind the car in front of you, and someone runs into the back of you, pushing you into the vehicle in front of you. You would not be charged since you didn't cause the collision (although if you didn't have your foot on the brake that might factor into the liability). On the other hand, if you ran into the car in front of you first, and then the car behind you ran into you and cause even more damage to the first car, you would both be liable to different degrees.
"Comprehensive" coverage is actually "Other than collision" coverage and does not cover collisions. If Ray didn't have collision coverage (or UMPD) he would be out of luck completely.

John

[cpaharley2008]

If someone hits you from behind, it's their insurance. If you hit someone from behind, it's your insurance. Same results here. I'm not saying the middle guy is given a ticket, but his vehicle caused damage to yours and his insurance should cover that damage, regardless of who is at fault. If a tree fell on that blue car and pushed it into yours, same result, his insurance should cover it. Either way your comprehensive should cover the damage to extent of deductible because it is not under collision's deductible. Similar to a deer hitting your car while it is parked, comprehensive. Any insurance experts here listening, what say you?

[Brian Bran]

Originally Posted by cpaharley2008

Seems to me your claim is against the blue truck that hit you as a result of the first accident. Maybe his insurance has better coverage and you can sue him for the deductible. You insurance company should not charge you a deductible under comprehensive coverage, IMHO.

How could the owner of the blue SUV be responsible for anything?It seems to me that they are just as innocent as Ray.Here in SC,if there is a chain reaction accident the person who caused the accident is responsible for everything.I know this because I was involved in a rearend collision where I was in front so I was the third vehicle that got hit.The car that rearended the motorcycle behind me had to pay for everything.And he was from Canada so apparently it's the same way there.

[cpaharley2008]

I'm not saying the blue truck or Ray is guilty but that the blue truck may be liable for damages, innocent aside. The Red truck could argue that he would not have hit Ray's truck if it wasn't for the blue truck being there. Something to think about on a rainy Saturday afternoon. But as Ray pointed out, same insurance company and he does not wish, or that his spouse does not wish to pursue it. So no harm, no foul.

[Brian Bran]

Originally Posted by cpaharley2008

I'm not saying the blue truck or Ray is guilty but that the blue truck may be liable for damages, innocent aside. The Red truck could argue that he would not have hit Ray's truck if it wasn't for the blue truck being there. Something to think about on a rainy Saturday afternoon. But as Ray pointed out, same insurance company and he does not wish, or that his spouse does not wish to pursue it. So no harm, no foul.

That's just REALLY sad that a completely innocent victim could be liable for anything.I guess that's what keeps the "ambulance chaser" attorneys in business though.

[Frederick L. Simson]

Originally Posted by Ray N

I'll have to pay my $500 deductible because the dirt-bag who caused the wreck didn't have enough insurance to cover all the damage he caused.

Originally Posted by Ray N

Both the owner of the blue SUV and I have the same insurance companies.

Here in California the Blue Tracker would file against the Brown GMC, and the Red Toyota would file against the Blue Tracker (who would increase his claim against the Brown GMC to cover the claim from the Red Toyota.)

I was in a similar situation, except that the perp didn't totally destroy his car and fled the scene.

Mine was the Red Geo Metro. I met my neighbor, the Miata owner because of this accident; we're good buddies today. Since our accident was a hit-and-run, the Miata owner's insurance paid. Since he and I had the same insurance company, they waived my deductible. I was fairly compensated for totaling out my Geo. I miss 44 mpg.

[Radar1]

Originally Posted by cpaharley2008

I'm not saying the blue truck or Ray is guilty but that the blue truck may be liable for damages, innocent aside. The Red truck could argue that he would not have hit Ray's truck if it wasn't for the blue truck being there. Something to think about on a rainy Saturday afternoon. But as Ray pointed out, same insurance company and he does not wish, or that his spouse does not wish to pursue it. So no harm, no foul.

Here's a good article on comparative negligence.
Comparitive Negligence: Where and When Does It Apply | Auto Insurance Tips

John

[Radar1]

Originally Posted by cpaharley2008

If someone hits you from behind, it's their insurance. If you hit someone from behind, it's your insurance. Same results here. I'm not saying the middle guy is given a ticket, but his vehicle caused damage to yours and his insurance should cover that damage, regardless of who is at fault. If a tree fell on that blue car and pushed it into yours, same result, his insurance should cover it. Either way your comprehensive should cover the damage to extent of deductible because it is not under collision's deductible. Similar to a deer hitting your car while it is parked, comprehensive. Any insurance experts here listening, what say you?

A collision with an animal is specifically listed in your policy as being covered under "other than collision" which is sometimes still called comprehensive. Any contact with another vehicle is covered under your collision coverage if you have it. Interestingly, if you swerved to miss a deer and then hit a tree instead, your claim now falls under collision.

[Byron Kinnaman]

Originally Posted by Ray N

Both the owner of the blue SUV and I have the same insurance companies.

I guess it really doesn't matter, since my wife just told me that we aren't about to cause the SUV owner any more grief.

You might want to talk to your insurance company again. The car was parked and comprehensive takes care of repairs I think. Here the deductible is much lower than collision.

[Ray N]

I think I will go have a little chat with my agent. When I stopped by to report the incident the agent was busy and I only talked to one of his staff.

[Donna D.]

Originally Posted by Ray N

I think I will go have a little chat with my agent. When I stopped by to report the incident the agent was busy and I only talked to one of his staff.

GOOD idea Ray. As you've found out we all have opinions... you need the facts for your particular incident. Please let us know what you find out....

[AndyGee]

Sometimes insurance companies will ask you to pay the deductable even when you're not required. Just last year they tried this when my wife's car got mangled to the tune of $3500 and asked her to pay $1000 deductable. First her deductable is only $250 and second it's $0 on comprehensive which it was since her car was parked. When I pointed these errors out to the insurance company all I got was the "Oh we're sorry Mr. Gee." They will try anything to reduce their payout.

[Ray N]

I just got it back from the shop - it looks like new again - (which it really is). I had $500 deductible on both collision and comprehensive so it didn't matter which one they called it. It turns out that here in Florida the person that caused the damage is responsible even if they pushed someone else into me, so the chances of recovering the deductible are next to nil.

[Roy in TO]

Originally Posted by Ray N

It turns out that here in Florida the person that caused the damage is responsible even if they pushed someone else into me, so the chances of recovering the deductible are next to nil.

Can both you and the blue SUV take him to small claims court (class action) for your deductable and other expenses including costs. The issue appears to come from his negligence for both his driving and lack of adequate insurance.

[Mike Magee]

2 people can't make a class action suit, but could be joint plaintiffs. Regardless of whether Blue wanted to join in, you could file in small claims court (assuming your state has such) for the $500 plus filing cost, etc. Small claims doesn't usually cost much. But one downside is that even if you win, there's no guarantee the person will pay up. If they have no job there's no paycheck to garnish. One may have to file a lien on his property to get paid out of proceeds if/when he ever sold it.

An idea: contact the person and ask for money. Maybe he will feel bad about what he did and send you a check. Can't hurt to ask, right?

[Ray N]

My insurance company is going to attempt to recover costs; for themselves and my deductible.

[AndyGee]

Originally Posted by Ray N

My insurance company is going to attempt to recover costs; for themselves and my deductible.

Ah...very good then.
Just lucky you weren't getting in or out of your truck when this happened. I got hit while removing a laundry basket from the back of the car, being that it was my wife's car and her being the primary insured I had to file claim against her. This was basically a formality that allowed her insurance to go after the other party.
Sorry didn't want to hi-jack your thread just wanted to make a point that following your insurace companies policies and procedures can help smooth out a bumpy road. Always ask questions.

[Carol H]

Originally Posted by Ray N

$5000 in damages. I'll have to pay my $500 deductible because the dirt-bag who caused the wreck didn't have enough insurance to cover all the damage he caused. Because I was the last hit, I'm the last in line for a claim on his 10K in insurance, and that will probably mostly be gone just replacing the poles and signs he plowed under.

Ok guys this scares me a little. I need a little help on this one! How can it be legal for someone to be driving around in the USA with only $10,000 in insurance? I can see carrying only $10000 limit in repairs to his own car but how the heck can that limit be applied to damage done to others?

Here every auto insurance policy has included in its basic plan an Underinsured Motorist Protection. You are covered up to $1 million from your own policy, even if the other driver has no insurance at all. Secondly every registered vechile in the province must carry a minimum of $200,000 Third Party Liability coverage.

[Ray N]

Originally Posted by Carol H

Ok guys this scares me a little. I need a little help on this one! How can it be legal for someone to be driving around in the USA with only $10,000 in insurance? I can see carrying only $10000 limit in repairs to his own car but how the heck can that limit be applied to damage done to others?

Here every auto insurance policy has included in its basic plan an Underinsured Motorist Protection. You are covered up to $1 million from your own policy, even if the other driver has no insurance at all. Secondly every registered vechile in the province must carry a minimum of $200,000 Third Party Liability coverage.

Every state is different. It was only a few years ago that Alabama even started requiring ANY insurance. Florida only requires 10K in property damage, and doesn't require ANY liability - I know, it doesn't seem right, but we have to live with it by paying more for our own protection against the dirt-bag uninsured and under-insured motorists.

[Carol H]

Thanks Ray - I understand as we pay **dearly** also for our manditory coverage - I actually have to have by law seperate insurance on my trailer as well, min $200,000 liablity, $150,000 accident benefits and $1 million Underinsured Motorist protection - thats on top of what is manditory insurance for the car towing it. Loss or damage insurance for the trailer itself is extra but optional. I always wondered about the "underinsured "portion of our policy - always assumed it would be needed in the rare case of being hit by someone driving with expired tags (normally those get picked up pretty quick by the highway police) which would mean they dont have insurance. Now I know its really to protect us against being hit by a tourist.

But I have to admit Im really struggling with trying to understand how that could be even possible or the justification a State would make for allowing it. Gezzz what happens if a driver hits some child in a crosswalk and leaving them disabled for life? Who pays for the maintence of that person? The state?