bean29
Senior Associate
Joined: Dec 19, 2010 22:26:57 GMT -5
Posts: 10,025
|
Post by bean29 on Jun 1, 2011 14:12:28 GMT -5
I understand this situation sucks, but I'm a bit surprised as to the level of your outrage/venom. Bad things happen to "good people" all the time. Life has many many ups and downs and you can't be protected from 100% of it. In the grand scheme of things, there is nothing truly bad here (in other words....it could have been SO MUCH worse). For your own mental health, I'd focus on the good in this situation (your DH is OK) and move on. Spending years suing some kid so you can get your $500 in bits and pieces from his future minimum wage jobs sees somewhat crazy. Believe me, if the kid is as stupid as you say he is, he is already paying the price for his decisions. His life could be much better and it will probably always suck. I read this before I went to lunch and did not choose to respond. I thought about it over lunch and I am surprised at your condemning the victim here. If you drive a car, you are stating that you will be responsible for any damages you cause. It is expected that you will carry insurance. If you choose to self insure, it is expected that you will be able to make good on your "promise" to be a responsible citizen. Both Mother (car owner) and child (car driver) are responsible parties. Sheila's feelings are just. I felt/feel the exact same way she does. If you can't afford the consequences of an uninsured accident, your choice should be not to drive. The penalty is very light in this instance. Lets stop enabling irresponsibility as a society. If these two people can not cough up $250.00 each to make Sheila whole, they should throw them in jail, revoke their driving privileges or do something appropriate to punish them. So what, if you are poor, responsibility is no longer expected of you?
|
|
thyme4change
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 26, 2010 13:54:08 GMT -5
Posts: 40,508
|
Post by thyme4change on Jun 1, 2011 14:12:31 GMT -5
I would hardly call this the reason our society is too litigious. This is a reasonable thing. Someone caused her financial loss, and she is using the system to try and re-coup the losses. Too litigious is when someone gets their feelings hurt and they try to gain financial compensation for it.
|
|
muttleynfelix
Junior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:32:52 GMT -5
Posts: 9,406
|
Post by muttleynfelix on Jun 1, 2011 14:19:42 GMT -5
"I am not one of the YM millionaires with money invested out my ass. $500 is a lot of money for me. Plus the money I will have to spend to find a new vehicle for my husband to drive. I am going to make a reasonable effort to be compensated for that. I am sorry if some of you disagree but when the shoe is on your foot than you can be the bigger person and wish the kid well in life and walk away. " Hence the overly litigious society we have today. This isn't a frivolous lawsuit. Have you had a car totaled because of someone else's negligence recently? It is not a fun experience. Even with insurance. Sheila isn't just out the $500 deductible, she now has to spend the time to find a new vehicle. Depending on her insurance carrier, she may either be on a tight timeline to find another vehicle or be a one vehicle family for a time. My insurance carrier only gave us 5 days of a rental after the offer came through. 5 days is not a lot of time to find a vehicle in the price range they are looking.
|
|
❤ mollymouser ❤
Senior Associate
Sarcasm is my Superpower
Crazy Cat Lady
Joined: Dec 18, 2010 16:09:58 GMT -5
Posts: 12,858
Today's Mood: Gen X ... so I'm sarcastic and annoyed
Location: Central California
Favorite Drink: Diet Mountain Dew
|
Post by ❤ mollymouser ❤ on Jun 1, 2011 14:29:38 GMT -5
She is entitled to sue for the deductible, as well as "loss of use" for the vehicle, and any other money that they can document was lost as a result of this accident ... even obtaining a copy of the police report (if there's a charge for that).
A frivolous lawsuit is one which has no legitimate legal basis. This is not the case here.
That being said, I would send 2 registered letters (one to the driver, one to the mom) outlining and documenting the lost $$ and requesting that they merely PAY THE DAMAGES.... before filing the small claims action.
|
|
Formerly SK
Senior Member
Joined: Feb 27, 2011 14:23:13 GMT -5
Posts: 3,255
|
Post by Formerly SK on Jun 1, 2011 14:47:11 GMT -5
A lawsuit would be frivolous in the sense the OP freely admits they won't collect anything and that she's doing it to teach the kid responsibility. The consequence of a lawsuit will be tons of paperwork for a court system that frankly has many more important problems to work out than this. I'm not saying the OP hasn't suffered from the accident, but since when are we supposed to sue over every incident of suffering? Should I sue a restaurant that gives me food poisoning which makes me miss a day or two of work? When do we say "shit happens" and move on. As I said earlier, if the OP truly wants to have no negatives to a car accident, her policy (and premium) should reflect that preference.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Jul 4, 2024 1:54:38 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 1, 2011 14:47:13 GMT -5
I don't plan to punish him that's for the courts to do. They will likely ticket him for his failure to have insurance. They will probably ignore the failure to stop ticket. Can they get the mother for not having insurance, too? Even though she wasn't involved in the accident, she broke the law (and was a crappy example to her son). Really, I wish they could confiscate the cars of people who don't carry insurance.
|
|
thyme4change
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 26, 2010 13:54:08 GMT -5
Posts: 40,508
|
Post by thyme4change on Jun 1, 2011 14:52:35 GMT -5
Actually, she thinks it is unlikely to get anything, but she has the right to try. Who knows - just because the kid is knob, doesn't mean that Mom doesn't have a few bucks squirreled away.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Jul 4, 2024 1:54:38 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 1, 2011 15:26:35 GMT -5
Actually, she thinks it is unlikely to get anything, but she has the right to try. Who knows - just because the kid is knob, doesn't mean that Mom doesn't have a few bucks squirreled away. Yeah, she didn't buy insurance so she must have saved something, right? And to those of you who think people here are being hard on a couple of uninsured drivers- take a look at the Uninsured Motorists portion of your car insurance premium next time you get a bill. I can remember when that amount was so small it was a joke (in the 1970s). It's ballooned over the years despite most states having compulsory insurance requirements. That's what you pay because other people are too irresponsible to buy liability coverage.
|
|
sheilaincali
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 19, 2010 17:55:24 GMT -5
Posts: 4,131
|
Post by sheilaincali on Jun 1, 2011 15:34:13 GMT -5
My hope is that between the boy and his mother there is a chance that I will be able to collect on the money that I am out. I am trying to be realistic with my expectations. I feel that $70 and filing the paperwork is worth my effort in the hopes that I am successful and can get my $500 back.
I DID NOT break the law- my husband was wearing his seatbelt and driving an insured vehicle at the posted speed limit. Why do I feel as though I should feel guilty because this kid broke the law?
According to the police report the mother didn't have insurance either. In MN it is illegal to allow someone you believe to be un-insured operate a vehicle you own. Given that it is her son, he lives with her and she doesn't have insurance it's pretty reasonable to assume that she knew he didn't have insurance either.
|
|
sheilaincali
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 19, 2010 17:55:24 GMT -5
Posts: 4,131
|
Post by sheilaincali on Jun 1, 2011 15:35:11 GMT -5
athena- that's what the cop told DH too "he doesn't have insurance, but that's why you pay extra on yours anyway"
ETA- they did impound the vehicle at the scene of the accident because he didn't have insurance.
|
|
happyscooter
Senior Member
Joined: Jan 5, 2011 9:04:06 GMT -5
Posts: 2,416
|
Post by happyscooter on Jun 1, 2011 15:38:55 GMT -5
I have a friend whose son got 2 speeding tickets in 3 years. 16 and 18 years old. He lived at home but had his own ins policy. Because he lived under the same roof as friend, she got the enjoyment of having her homeowners ins canceled. I think she had 24-48 hours to get something else in place. Had the house burned down, she said she would have been on the hook for the entire mortgage and no house to live in.
This mom should be thankful your DH wasn't hurt and I would think she would be asking if you wanted a cashiers check or money order.
|
|
zibazinski
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 24, 2010 16:12:50 GMT -5
Posts: 47,873
|
Post by zibazinski on Jun 1, 2011 15:44:22 GMT -5
Impounding the car is a GREAT solution to the no insurance problem. It can then be sold to help the innocent party recoup some of their losses.
|
|
Formerly SK
Senior Member
Joined: Feb 27, 2011 14:23:13 GMT -5
Posts: 3,255
|
Post by Formerly SK on Jun 1, 2011 15:47:22 GMT -5
OP...I don't think you have anything to feel guilty about. My only point is that you knew before the accident that you had a $500 deductible and was OK with it. But now that you've had an accident and have to pay the $500, you are outraged and racing to the courthouse to sue someone. And even that wouldn't be quite so bad except that the people you plan to sue are deadbeats and the chances of you actually getting the money are slim. None of this seems very logical to me.
|
|
share88
Junior Member
Joined: Jan 28, 2011 2:36:24 GMT -5
Posts: 182
|
Post by share88 on Jun 1, 2011 15:50:09 GMT -5
You should have no reason to sue because your insurance company should go after them for you. Google "subrogation".
|
|
muttleynfelix
Junior Associate
Joined: Dec 20, 2010 15:32:52 GMT -5
Posts: 9,406
|
Post by muttleynfelix on Jun 1, 2011 15:52:41 GMT -5
I'm pretty sure if the other driver was insured she would not be out her deductible. I can look it up when I get home, but I'm almost positive our settlement offer did not include our deductible. My vehicle had liability only on my vehicle, so my insurance would not cover anything. It was all on the other driver's insurance. It is one thing to be out $500 when you are at fault. It is another thing to be out $500 because another driver disregarded a stop sign or went the wrong way down a one way street.
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Jul 4, 2024 1:54:38 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 1, 2011 15:53:30 GMT -5
I was hit by an uninsured driver in Jan. I just got a letter from our insurer that they do not feel my deductible is collectible. It said if I want to pursue legal action I will have to do it on my own. I did not discuss it with DH yet, but I am seriously thinking about it. We rented a car, if she had had insurance it would have been covered so she owes me a hundred or so for the rental plus the $500 deductible. I also wondered what the state says as we have a mandatory insurance law - is her license revoked or what? Apparently the Dems put in the mandatory insurance with higher limits and the repubs took control and weakened the law. WTF, mandatory insurance sounds more like a republican thing than a democrat thing to me. No, the Republicans are anti-"big" government whereas the Democrats believe in the law protecting the lowest but also requiring a certain level from the lowest. Same reason dems were for the health care bill (in general) and repubs were against it.
|
|
zibazinski
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 24, 2010 16:12:50 GMT -5
Posts: 47,873
|
Post by zibazinski on Jun 1, 2011 15:53:52 GMT -5
Kid is darn lucky you people are civilized. We have a court case now because an uninsured driver hit another car, hurt the driver's girlfriend and the driver got out of his car and beat doo-doo out of the other driver. THEN found out the other driver didn't have insurance and totally smashed up the car as well which was only slightly damaged before. None of the witnesses saw a thing btw. ;D
|
|
Deleted
Joined: Jul 4, 2024 1:54:38 GMT -5
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jun 1, 2011 16:03:26 GMT -5
Yes, but her damages are her deductible...which she chose. She could pay a higher premium and have a $100 deductible...or a lower premium and have a $1000 deductible. At one point the OP did a cost/benefit analysis and decided if she got in an accident (regardless of fault) that it was worth it to have the $500 deductible. If a person doesn't want to pay a single red penny in the case of an accident then they should have their policy (and premium) reflect that. Actually according to my insurance I do not have a deductible with my uninsured motorist coverage just my collision and comprehensive. In fact I can have no collision/comprehensive yet have uninsured motorist and that should cover damage to my car if I get hit by an uninsured person.
|
|
sheilaincali
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 19, 2010 17:55:24 GMT -5
Posts: 4,131
|
Post by sheilaincali on Jun 1, 2011 16:30:19 GMT -5
skinny: Had the accident been DH's fault I would not be outraged to pay the deductible. Had the other driver had insurance I would not be out the deductible. The point is I am out of pocket because this kid knowingly BROKE THE LAW! I am outraged because the whole thing happened- he should NOT have ran the stop sign in the first place! Had DH caused the accident or run the stop sign I would fully expect to be penalized. I would expect to pay my deductible and see my rates increase. I just don't see why I should be penalized for obeying the law.
Share- USAA told us they would sue for their money and if there was any leftover we "Might" get our deductible back. They recommended we take them to conciliation court as we would have a better chance getting the deductible back that way.
happyscooter- same thing happened to a friend of mine too. She also had like 48 hours to find new insurance. Her son had had his license revoked and was not allowed to drive but they claimed that by living in the house he had access to the vehicles.
|
|
|
Post by The Walk of the Penguin Mich on Jun 1, 2011 16:31:21 GMT -5
Actually according to my insurance I do not have a deductible with my uninsured motorist coverage just my collision and comprehensive. In fact I can have no collision/comprehensive yet have uninsured motorist and that should cover damage to my car if I get hit by an uninsured person.
This depends upon state. In this state, uninsured motorist coverage does NOT cover damage to the vehicle. It only covers medical expenses.
I ran into this when I my car was totalled by an uninsured driver. Fortunately, I still had collision on my 13 year old car (I think it was only $50 more for 6 mo) and I collected on my collision. The insurance company told me that I could sue for the $500 deductible.
I never bothered going after the $500, but at the time my life was already too complicated (I was working and in school full time) and simply did not have the time.
FWIW, when I informed the police that the motorist that hit me was uninsured (she had a current insurance card, but it lapsed for non payment the day before she hit me), they were spectacularly unconcerned.
|
|
oreo
Familiar Member
Joined: Jan 4, 2011 19:42:49 GMT -5
Posts: 577
|
Post by oreo on Jun 1, 2011 16:33:52 GMT -5
First of all, this is NOT a frivolous lawsuit. This is the EXACT reason why they have small claims court. The OP should have no concerns about filing a case to get their money back.
Second of all, the OP did pick their deductible and probably would be FINE with being out the $500 had the accident been THEIR FAULT. There is absolutely no reason why he/she should be out ANY money when the accident was NOT their fault. They are already out time and effort to deal with this, there is no reason why he/she should just eat the deductible. If your police report says that the other person is at fault, you will be awarded the deductible and your court costs (and interest). If you need to rent a car or something and your insurance doesn't cover it (for a reasonable amount of time--like days not weeks) you can try to get that back too (and you should be able to as long as it is reasonable). Since we all think you'll have trouble collecting, I'd minimize the damage as much as possible and would just sue for the deductible and court costs. The kid is 19, they'll have to have income eventually and you'll get some money from that (might be $20/month or something). I wouldn't count on getting it in the next month or 2 or anything though.
In terms of this going on their credit report, I don't know if it would but I think it should.
|
|
Phoenix84
Senior Associate
Joined: Feb 17, 2011 21:42:35 GMT -5
Posts: 10,056
|
Post by Phoenix84 on Jun 1, 2011 16:40:12 GMT -5
"What I don't understand is all the backlash over me wanting to take him to small claims court for that $500. Basically you are telling me to drop the whole thing and sit on my hands until my insurance company offers me a settlement so I don't hurt his feelings? Oh poor 19 year old grown adult who "accidentally" forgot to buy insurance and "accidentally" forgot to stop for the freaking stop sign. Should I just pat him on the head and tell him to not do that again?"
I think you're misunderstanding what some posters are saying. You made some comments that gave the impression you were taking him to court to try and teach him a lesson. But as you said, that's the courts job and your job is to recover your losses. I was just trying to point this out to you.
The other thing some of us were trying to impress upon you is that you have to evaluate the cost vs. benefit of taking him to court. If the kid nor the mom has a job and virtually no assets then it's simply a waste of time and money to go after them legally as you won't get blood from a stone. However, since the small claims fee is only $70 I think it's worth it to go after the deductable. The evidence is all in your favor and shouldn't be hard or time consuming to collect. The worst case scenrio is that you'll be out the $70 because the responsible parties can't or won't pay. But if I were in your position, I'd probably try.
"I am out at a minimum my $500 deductible, the difference between the totaled value of the old truck and the purchase of a new truck, plus any insurance rate increases that incur."
I'm no legal expert, but I'm not sure how sucessful you'll be in getting the difference between the value of the old truck and new truck. It's not the kids responsibility to buy you a new truck, but replace the old truck. After all you could by a $60,000 new truck after wrecking a $4,000 old truck. Since you should (and are) taking him to court anyway, you should definitly try to get anything you're entitled too. The judge will decide what you are owed.
I wouldn't think your insurance rates will go up since the other driver is at fault.
|
|
Phoenix84
Senior Associate
Joined: Feb 17, 2011 21:42:35 GMT -5
Posts: 10,056
|
Post by Phoenix84 on Jun 1, 2011 16:44:35 GMT -5
"Share- USAA told us they would sue for their money and if there was any leftover we "Might" get our deductible back. They recommended we take them to conciliation court as we would have a better chance getting the deductible back that way. "
Then that's what you should do.
|
|
Phoenix84
Senior Associate
Joined: Feb 17, 2011 21:42:35 GMT -5
Posts: 10,056
|
Post by Phoenix84 on Jun 1, 2011 16:46:24 GMT -5
"That being said, I would send 2 registered letters (one to the driver, one to the mom) outlining and documenting the lost $$ and requesting that they merely PAY THE DAMAGES.... before filing the small claims action."
I would do this too. Or call them up and demand they pay for it. I've settled car accidents out of the insurance company/court system before. They may just cut you a check in the mail.
When a girl hit me, she sent me a check after I signed and noterized a letter stating that after I received the check, I wouldn't go after them for any future damages.
|
|
sheilaincali
Senior Member
Joined: Dec 19, 2010 17:55:24 GMT -5
Posts: 4,131
|
Post by sheilaincali on Jun 1, 2011 17:06:34 GMT -5
Phoenix- Thank you for clarifying. I do think the kid needs to realize the consequences to his actions- but you are right that's not my job. Yes I also believed that his mother failed to teach him that lesson as well- but again not my job. I apologize if I caused confusion. I do not plan on suing him for anything above the $500 deductible and the $70 filing fee. I realize that replacing my husband's truck is at my own expense. No I won't be buying him a $60,000 truck, but I got a heck of a deal on the truck we have. One listed in our paper for the same make, model, year and mileage is currently listed for $2,000 more than I paid for DH's truck in January. So it's going to likely cost me $ out of pocket to replace the truck (above what insurance gives me).
|
|
thyme4change
Community Leader
Joined: Dec 26, 2010 13:54:08 GMT -5
Posts: 40,508
|
Post by thyme4change on Jun 1, 2011 17:12:11 GMT -5
Skinnykids has been crystal clear that sheila should eat the $500 and smile and be happy, and that sheila is ruining the country by bringing this lawsuit.
I disagree with Skinnykids.
|
|