 |
 | Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us |
 | Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network |
| HomeDiscussion GroupsGeneral TopicsCat AnecdotesHealth and BehaviorRescue CatKB.com Contact UsLink To UsSearch & Site Map |
Cat Forum / Cat Anecdotes / May 2005Accident report GRRRRRR OT and all that
OK, got the police report today. Mike was given a ticket for $10 and $100 court costs for "Failure to Yield." The woman who hit him claimed that she was only doing 45 mph and had hit the brakes before she hit Mike. I'll Post an album of the damages to both vehicles later. BTW she was cited for driving while her license was revoked. Mike is still considered totally at fault for the accident. Geico is refusing to pay us anything for the van. They are going to replace this woman's car. I feel so frustrated and angry right now. Please help me get over my anger with this woman and the insurance system that will reward an illegal driver. Even though the woman was driving with a revoked license, the woman was judged to be not at fault. I want to know what she did to lose her license. The damage to both her Lincoln Town Car and the van is horrendous. I don't think that she could have been doing only 45 in a 45 at the time of impact. It is a long straight stretch of road. There is now way that she couldn't have seen Mike and that big white van. Yes, it was raining, but not heavily. So that shouldn't be an excuse for her. Again, Please help me get over my anger with this. I upset Rob and Jim by calling her what I think of her, and I don't usually use that kind of language. And don't ask me about the VA and their treatment of Rob lately. Pam S. sill living a nightmare. > Geico is refusing to pay us anything for the van. They are going to Isn't your insurance company *obligated* by law to cover your losses? You do pay them for that coverage, right?  SignatureVictor M. Martinez Owned and operated by the Fantastic Seven (TM) Send your spam here: uce@ftc.gov Email me here: pistorLITTER@BOXaustin.rr.com >> Geico is refusing to pay us anything for the van. They are going to > > Isn't your insurance company *obligated* by law to cover your losses? > You do pay them for that coverage, right? I think so. Pam, hire an attorney. Even though I was judged at fault for swerving to hit a dog on a wet street, Geico paid for my car before dropping me. (I hate Geico) Jill >> Geico is refusing to pay us anything for the van. They are going to > > Isn't your insurance company *obligated* by law to cover your losses? > You do pay them for that coverage, right? I replied but it hasn't shown up. Then I noticed a big OOOPS in what I typed so here it is again. Yes, I think they are obligated to pay. Pam, hire an attorney. Even though I was judged to be at fault for swerving on a wet street to avoid hitting a dog (my car was totalled when I hit a pole), Geico paid. Then they dropped me. I had paid them premiums with not one claim for almost 8 years. I hate Geico. Jill > OK, got the police report today. Mike was given a ticket for $10 and > $100 court costs for "Failure to Yield." The woman who hit him claimed [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] > > Pam S. sill living a nightmare. First, take a deep breath, or do some breathing exercises (do you do yoga?). Next, you might want to consider talking to a lawyer (wouldn't you guys qualify for legal aid?). Do you have only liability insurance (most older / paid-off cars have only that so I'm assuming that's what you had). But if you can prove that the other driver was at least somewhat at fault then *her* insurance should help pay for your van. Sit down and make a list of everything you could possibly do. Then stop thinking about it. If there turns out to be *nothing* you can do, then you have to make up your mind to let it go and focus on the fact that nobody was hurt. Vans can, after all, be replaced. [But if you need to vent some first, feel free to come here and do it! ;>] Hugs, CatNipped > > OK, got the police report today. Mike was given a ticket for $10 and > > $100 court costs for "Failure to Yield." The woman who hit him claimed [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] > > > > Pam S. sill living a nightmare. Well, damn, that's doesn't sound fair at all. Getting a lawyer sounds like the right thing to do. Ask friends and neighbors if they have worked with a lawyer on accident cases and chose the best one. Sorry to hear that the VA isn't doing as well by Rob as they should and they should, no question about it. Hope that situation is able to be straighten out soon. Hugs for your heart and sanity. Hopefully Rob and Mikes bumps and bruises have passed and faded by now and they are alright. Charleen with healing purrs from Mr. Pumpkin, Aggie Marble, Victor Velcro ... > Geico is refusing to pay us anything for the van. They are going to > replace this woman's car. ...> Pam S. sill living a nightmare. When we were in Oregon, the no-fault insurance law was in effect. I suppose it still is, but I don't know. Any way, fault is not even considered for an accident. You pay your insurance, and it covers you only, regardless of who is at fault. That means that you are covered as long as you buy insurance. You do not have to pay extra to protect yourself against uninsured drivers. If the driver does not buy insurance, the uninsured driver not only gets cited for not having insurance, but also does not collect from your insurance. In your case, not only would your insurance company not buy the woman a new car (her insurance would do that), your company would have to take care of you. I wish we had no-fault insurance everywhere. Anyway, I really hope things start to turn around for you. I can't think of anyone more deserving of getting a break. Annie > When we were in Oregon, the no-fault insurance law was in effect. I suppose > it still is, but I don't know. [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > you. > I wish we had no-fault insurance everywhere. Is this really the way it works? I could've sworn we (Colorado) recently switched to no-fault, but I've been hit twice since I got my car last year, and both times the other guy's insurance company paid for the damages. Signaturemonique, who spoils Oscar unmercifully pictures: http://www.bounceswoosh.org/rpca > Is this really the way it works? I could've sworn we (Colorado) > recently switched to no-fault, but I've been hit twice since I got my > car last year, and both times the other guy's insurance company paid > for the damages. Maybe there was a "changeover" period before it actually took effect? SFAIK, Annie's description is the way it's SUPPOSED to work. (Although there may be differences in details, in the various states that have it.) >> Is this really the way it works? I could've sworn we (Colorado) >> recently switched to no-fault, but I've been hit twice since I got [quoted text clipped - 5 lines] > work. (Although there may be differences in details, in the various > states that have it.) Google knows all: http://www.dora.state.co.us/dora_pages/faq.htm [quote] What is "no-fault" auto insurance? No-fault insurance, also known as PIP or Personal Injury Protection, provides coverage for certain medical and rehabilitation expenses from injuries sustained in an automobile accident. It pays benefits for injuries whether or not the insured person is negligent or "at fault". (Property damage is the responsibility of the at-fault party.) The no-fault law expires on July 1, 2003. All policies with an effective date on or after July 1 will be issued under a "tort" auto insurance law. [/quote] So ... sounds like we're not no-fault anymore. I had it backwards. But even if we were, the at-fault person would still have to pay property damages. Signaturemonique, who spoils Oscar unmercifully pictures: http://www.bounceswoosh.org/rpca Pam, purrs and prayers from us that things work out to your advantage. hugs Jazz & his mama SignatureIrulan from the stars we come to the stars we return from now until the end of time > OK, got the police report today. Mike was given a ticket for $10 and $100 > court costs for "Failure to Yield." The woman who hit him claimed that [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] > > Pam S. sill living a nightmare. > OK, got the police report today. Mike was given a ticket for $10 and > $100 court costs for "Failure to Yield." The woman who hit him claimed [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] > > Pam S. sill living a nightmare. All I can say is I'm trying to send good thoughts your way which is totally unhelpful. I don't see how they can do anything for her when she was driving without a liscense! I don't get it. I'm very very sorry :( > > OK, got the police report today. Mike was given a ticket for $10 and > > $100 court costs for "Failure to Yield." The woman who hit him claimed [quoted text clipped - 26 lines] > unhelpful. I don't see how they can do anything for her when she was driving > without a liscense! I don't get it. I'm very very sorry :( Here in OZ, the lady without a licence would have been at fault automatically, no matter who was 'really' at fault. She would also not be able to claim a thing from any insurance (any insurance is immediatly valid if you don't have a licence and/or driving an unregistered vehicle), and indeed, you'd have every right to sue her for damages. She'd also cop a horrendous fine as well. I don't tend to like reccomending lawyers, but I suspect, in this case, you probably need one. Got any "don't win, don't pay" type lawyers over there? Yowie > Geico is refusing to pay us anything for the van. They are going to > replace this woman's car. I feel so frustrated and angry right now. > Please help me get over my anger with this woman and the insurance > system that will reward an illegal driver. Not to rub salt in a wound, but if you have been paying for the insurance, how can Geico refuse to cover the cost or partial cost of the van? Something seems really wrong here. Did you have comprehensive coverage or just liability? Hubby has been in more accidents than I care to count and non his fault. He may have some suggestions, besides painting a bulls eye on the side of the car. (grin) Diane > Not to rub salt in a wound, but if you have been paying for the insurance, > how can Geico refuse to cover the cost or partial cost of the van? [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > > Diane We thought we had full coverage, but geico says not. Pam s. depressed >> Not to rub salt in a wound, but if you have been paying for the insurance, >> how can Geico refuse to cover the cost or partial cost of the van? [quoted text clipped - 8 lines] > >Pam s. depressed I would recommend finding your policy and statements, and making sure what type of coverage the printed documents say you have. My first traffic accident was when I was making a left turn through stopped traffic, and was broadsided by a car that was coming straight. Ordinarily, I would have been considered to be at fault, but the car that hit me was driving down the shoulder of the road, not in an official driving lane, so the other driver was cited, not me. He refused to submit the claim to his insurance company, so I finally had to sue him in small-claims court and have his paycheck garnished (i.e., have the court order that his employer withhold part of each paycheck, and issue the payment to me, until the damage to my car was paid off). SignatureJohn F. Eldredge -- john@jfeldredge.com PGP key available from http://pgp.mit.edu "Reserve your right to think, for even to think wrongly is better than not to think at all." -- Hypatia of Alexandria > We thought we had full coverage, but geico says not. What does your policy or last statement say? You will probably have a printed copy somewhere. Seems like maybe you have a claims adjuster who is trying to avoid work, avoid payment or both. If the other driver didn't have a valid license her insurance is probably invalid as well. Hubby says you could easily make a case that since the driver didn't have a valid license, you could easily make a case that would find her at fault because she didn't have a valid license. She was driving without a license, so she was at fault for hitting your Rob and Mike, not the other way around. Why in the world did the police person not cite her as at fault as well. (Amazed) Diane >> We thought we had full coverage, but geico says not. > > What does your policy or last statement say? You will probably have > a printed copy somewhere. Seems like maybe you have a claims > adjuster who is trying to avoid work, avoid payment or both. Even if you don't have a printed copy, the ins. companies I've used allow you to view your policy online. Signaturemonique, who spoils Oscar unmercifully pictures: http://www.bounceswoosh.org/rpca >>>We thought we had full coverage, but geico says not. >> [quoted text clipped - 4 lines] > Even if you don't have a printed copy, the ins. companies I've used > allow you to view your policy online. Geico sent us a statement dated Friday (April 29th, the date of the accident) that states that we're not covered, but supposedly our lien holder is. We called the bank and turned them loose into the mess. I'm at the sit back and watch the floor show stage. Pam S. >>>>We thought we had full coverage, but geico says not. >>> [quoted text clipped - 11 lines] > > Pam S. Were you still paying on the van? In that case I would say you would *have* to have had comprehensive - your lien holder would have insisted on it. When we had another insurance and decided to switch to progressive, the other insurance notified the bank when our payment for renewal was *two days* overdue (thankfully we had already notified the bank, otherwise they would have purchased comprehensive insurance *for* us and added the (outrageously high) payments to our car note). Hugs, CatNipped > Geico sent us a statement dated Friday (April 29th, the date of the > accident) that states that we're not covered, but supposedly our lien > holder is. We called the bank and turned them loose into the mess. I'm > at the sit back and watch the floor show stage. If you were paying the premiums, how is it that you are not covered? We won't even get into how the lien hold is covered but you're not. I think I would let the bank fight this one too. Let us know how it goes. Weird. Not going to buy Geico after this mess. Not that we were going to switch from State Farm. Diane > OK, got the police report today. Mike was given a ticket for $10 and $100 > court costs for "Failure to Yield." The woman who hit him claimed that > she was only doing 45 mph and had hit the brakes before she hit Mike. > I'll Post an album of the damages to both vehicles later. BTW she was > cited for driving while her license was revoked. Mike is still considered > totally at fault for the accident. If the other driver didn't have a license, I'd guess she also didn't have valid insurance. Seems to me that would be one requirement by the insurance company. Did she leave any skid marks? They can tell a lot about speed etc by that. Seems to me with no license it was illegal for her to even be there so to that degree it would be her fault anyway. But legal stuff doesn't always work out fair. Jo > OK, got the police report today. Mike was given a ticket for $10 and > $100 court costs for "Failure to Yield." The woman who hit him claimed [quoted text clipped - 10 lines] > Even though the woman was driving with a revoked license, the woman was > judged to be not at fault. There's something to be said for "no fault" insurance (which some states have, or used to have). The down side is that the premiums can be a good deal higher for "safe" drivers than they are in other states, since regardless of who's at fault, both drivers collect from their own companies, but at least you DO collect! >OK, got the police report today. Mike was given a ticket for $10 and >$100 court costs for "Failure to Yield." The woman who hit him claimed [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] > >Pam S. sill living a nightmare. {{{{{Pam}}}}}} That really stinks. I'm so sorry you're going through all this. Purrs that things will start to get better for you and Rob soon. Ginger-lyn Home Pages: http://www.spiritrealm.com/summer/ http://www.angelfire.com/folk/glsummer (homepage & cats) http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.com/~summer/index.htm (genealogy) http://www.i-love-cats.com/meow/glsummer/ (The Violence Against Animals in Movies Website) > OK, got the police report today. Mike was given a ticket for $10 and > $100 court costs for "Failure to Yield." The woman who hit him claimed [quoted text clipped - 7 lines] > Please help me get over my anger with this woman and the insurance > system that will reward an illegal driver. It would help if you'd stopped being unreasonably angry. The driver of the van was obviously at fault; the driver of the sedan may have been speeding, and driving on a suspended license, but that's not relevant, because she did not cause the collision. Try to be thankful that nobody died. >> OK, got the police report today. Mike was given a ticket for $10 and >> $100 court costs for "Failure to Yield." The woman who hit him [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > > Try to be thankful that nobody died. Were you there? How do you know the driver of the van was at fault? Just because the cop said so? He wasn't there, either! You really have no right to jump on Pam in this manner. You don't know her or her family. You're the idiot who wants to write on his cat with a permanent marker. Obviously not the brightest bulb in the chandelier. Jill >> OK, got the police report today. Mike was given a ticket for $10 and >> $100 court costs for "Failure to Yield." The woman who hit him [quoted text clipped - 16 lines] > > Try to be thankful that nobody died. Actaully, had she not been speeding, she might have been able to stop. > It would help if you'd stopped being unreasonably angry. The driver of > the van [quoted text clipped - 3 lines] > > Try to be thankful that nobody died. First of all, I am thankful that no one died. Second, the anger and frustration is normal after an accident. Yes, Mike is at fault. We've never denied that. However, the insurance company agrees with us that the woman had to have been driving at excess speed. However, there is no way, according to GEICO that we can prove it. So Mike takes the ticket and the hit. Pam S. emotionally drained right now. >> It would help if you'd stopped being unreasonably angry. The driver of >> the van [quoted text clipped - 12 lines] > > Pam S. emotionally drained right now. Well, first of all, *nobody* is at fault if it truly *is* an accident - it's not like Mike said, 'Hmmm, I think I'll purposely drive right into the path of this speeding vehicle!". However, if I were the police officer in charge of the accident investigation, I would have to take a hard look at *why* someone was driving around without a license - it would seem like there is a pattern of *some* sort of reckless behavior there (either too many traffic violations or failing to buy the proper insurance) if her license was suspended. Even if you have the "right of way", speeding can negate your "right" by causing the other person to misjudge the time it would take to clear your path. [It's a shame it was raining - there probably wouldn't be any skid marks to measure to determine how fast she was going. However, speed limits are set for dry, lighted conditions - if it were raining she should have been going *slower* than the posted speed limit!] Hugs, CatNipped Lots of purrs, best wishes and hugs, SignaturePolonca & Soncek > OK, got the police report today. Mike was given a ticket for $10 and > $100 court costs for "Failure to Yield." The woman who hit him claimed [quoted text clipped - 22 lines] > > Pam S. sill living a nightmare. Purrs Pam, maybe cuddling a bitty would help. Suz&Spicey |
Reply to this Message |
 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.