| Message |
Author |
|
 Posted: Sat May 30, 2009 7:46 pm Post subject: Similiar Accident-rearended by 18 wheeler |
|
|
Back in March 3, 2008 I was hit by an 18 wheeler truck. The traffic on the beltway was at a stop with back-up. When I got hit my car happened to slid and hit the girl in front of me in which both of our cars were total. The truck driver recieved a citation and I had a witness at the time. We went to court to fight the cause, but lost due to "NO FAULT' of negligence on either party. Now the girl's parents insurance is trying to sue me for the same cause. I don't see how it was my fault when there was no advoidance to hitting her. I need help on this!
_________________
Register Now to have your Insurance queries solved. |
|
dcoops
Guest
|
|
| Posted: Sun May 31, 2009 11:35 am Post subject: |
|
|
dcoops, I don't understand something... | Quote: | | We went to court to fight the cause, but lost due to "NO FAULT' of negligence on either party |
You went to court to fight what? You were hit by a truck that knocked you into the vehicle in front of you correct? The truck is responsible for both your vehicle and the vehicle in front of you...The truck got a citation for that as well correct? Please explain what you went to court to fight and lost? I'm not clear on that...Also you have given the suit papers to your insurance carrier right? They will provide a defense for you...I'm sure they have already denied her claim....
Couple other questions:
What state/country did this happen in?
How long ago was this accident?
Has the insurance company for the truck not paid to fix your vehicle? if not why not?
Explain that 'fighting' it in court part of your post..
_________________
**************************************
Life gaurantees a chance NOT a fair shake
**************************************
FIND a way EVERY day to lighten the load of another
************************************** |
|
Lori
Moderator
Joined: 10 Sep 2007
Posts: 6810
Location: Missouri
44.12 Dollars($)
|
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 01, 2009 8:41 am Post subject: |
|
|
Hi Dcoops,
| Quote: | | We went to court to fight the cause, but lost due to "NO FAULT' of negligence on either party. |
What cause? If your state is indeed a no-fault one it'd have some restrictions over one's ability to sue the responsible driver.
Under the no-fault status the injured should turned to his/her carrier for coverage. And, if that is the case then the girl's parents can't sue you either.
As, Lori has mentioned the truck driver would be responsible for covering both you and the other driver's damages.
What did you do after losing the case against the truck driver? Have you been compensated by your insurer afterward? |
|
kelvin
Senior member
Joined: 22 Nov 2005
Posts: 207
37.75 Dollars($)
|
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 01, 2009 10:32 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Are you or your insurance company suing the truk driver? I would let my insurance carrier handle this since they shpuld be better euiped to do so. As Lori said they will provide defense for you. They should also be able to explain everything to you about who is at fualt and if the other person can even sue you. Let us know more info and I am sure someone here can assist you. |
|
fireyone
Senior member
Joined: 07 Jan 2008
Posts: 1988
0.00 Dollars($)
|
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 01, 2009 12:33 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Hi Dcoops,
| Quote: | | Now the girl's parents insurance is trying to sue me for the same cause. |
Some how I have this feeling that you're being considered as the party at-fault. Am I wrong?
If I'm wrong then please explain why the other carrier should come after you.
| Quote: | | We went to court to fight the cause, but lost due to "NO FAULT' of negligence on either party. |
Did you receive a citation as well?
Steven |
|
steven
Senior member
Joined: 02 Feb 2006
Posts: 760
116.97 Dollars($)
|
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 01, 2009 12:51 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | Some how I have this feeling that you're being considered as the party at-fault. Am I wrong? |
That's the impression I'm getting too Steven, and can't figure out why?
_________________
**************************************
Life gaurantees a chance NOT a fair shake
**************************************
FIND a way EVERY day to lighten the load of another
************************************** |
|
Lori
Moderator
Joined: 10 Sep 2007
Posts: 6810
Location: Missouri
44.12 Dollars($)
|
|
| Posted: Mon Jun 01, 2009 3:01 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Although I'm not sure what state the OP is in, I know that in Georgia he would have been cited as contributing to the accident. Although it can be argued in certain circumstances (such as a large 18 wheeler plowing into you)...if you hit the car in front of you (whether pushed or not) you are at fault. These accidents happen in Atlanta all the time and you'll commonly see a row of 3-5 cars that have hit each other. Each person is responsible for the car that they hit.
There are driving laws (I know in Georgia, maybe someone can confirm elsewhere) that you are to remain far enough behind somebody that there is a "cushion of safety" and that you will not hit them if you are rearended. The guideline is to stay so far back that you can see the person's rear tires meet the road.
As far as real life goes, if you stay that far behind someone on an interstate...you will be cut off or subjected to road rage! I'm sure the argument could be made that the 18 wheeler was going too fast and there was too much force exerted (after all...it was enough to total two cars).
I think there is more to the story...and it may very well be that the citation the truck driver was given was simply for driving too fast for conditions or the like. It may not have listed the truck driver as at fault...if it did I see no way that the OP could have lost the case. |
|
ChrisBantly
Senior member
Joined: 11 Mar 2009
Posts: 382
Location: Upstate SC
0.05 Dollars($)
|
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 02, 2009 12:07 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | These accidents happen in Atlanta all the time and you'll commonly see a row of 3-5 cars that have hit each other. Each person is responsible for the car that they hit. |
WHAT? Are you kidding me? These vehicles were stopped Chris...are you telling me that in GA if everyone is stopped at a stop sign and an idiot slams someone in the rear causing a chain reaction wreck that the idiot doesn't have to pay for everyone? wow, I'm just blown away by that!
_________________
**************************************
Life gaurantees a chance NOT a fair shake
**************************************
FIND a way EVERY day to lighten the load of another
************************************** |
|
Lori
Moderator
Joined: 10 Sep 2007
Posts: 6810
Location: Missouri
44.12 Dollars($)
|
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 02, 2009 10:42 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | That's the impression I'm getting too Steven, and can't figure out why? |
Lori the girl's parents are suing the OP since after losing the case against the truck driver they only can turn to the OP to recover the damages. And, to sue someone you really don't need to prove that the party was at-fault, do you?  |
|
jeorge
Senior member
Joined: 07 Oct 2005
Posts: 753
129.23 Dollars($)
|
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 02, 2009 11:00 am Post subject: |
|
|
That''s not my point or question Jeorge...the question is how can the OP be at fault (at all based on the information in the post)...when they were rearended...???
_________________
**************************************
Life gaurantees a chance NOT a fair shake
**************************************
FIND a way EVERY day to lighten the load of another
************************************** |
|
Lori
Moderator
Joined: 10 Sep 2007
Posts: 6810
Location: Missouri
44.12 Dollars($)
|
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 04, 2009 10:53 am Post subject: |
|
|
Lori, I do believe that I have ehard this before. I was thinking what Chris was thinking when I read the post. I know it sounds insane because you can keep the required distance from the other vehicle and if hit by something as big as an eighteen wheeler you could easily be thrown into the vehicle ahead of you.
The reason I was thinking as Chris was because I am almost certain I heard of this and thought "that is not fair". How can we find out for sure? |
|
fireyone
Senior member
Joined: 07 Jan 2008
Posts: 1988
0.00 Dollars($)
|
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 05, 2009 10:19 am Post subject: |
|
|
Well if the OP will come back and advise the exact circumstances of this hearing he was involved in that would help....must be a PA (state to state ) thing, I handle chain reactions wrecks a lot..and it's never settled this way...as you said, depends on the speed/force and vehicle that hits you...you could be double the required distance behind someone and still get knoced into them....and 'but for' the first idiot, there would be no chain reaction...I certainly don't agree with this...course, the great state of PA forgot to check with me regarding this law too  
_________________
**************************************
Life gaurantees a chance NOT a fair shake
**************************************
FIND a way EVERY day to lighten the load of another
************************************** |
|
Lori
Moderator
Joined: 10 Sep 2007
Posts: 6810
Location: Missouri
44.12 Dollars($)
|
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 05, 2009 10:55 am Post subject: |
|
|
PA is pretty screwed up when it comes to things like this. They could use a revamp of their entire system. Nothing like driving safe and watching the road only to have some idiot ram you and screw your insurance rates.
One other thing I did not quite understand about PA ( a little off the subject) is when I went for a new policy they said my accident, although not my fault, did count against me in a way. They said I would score a little worse than someone who was not involved in any accident at all. I felt this was unfair but I still got a better policy for cheaper so I am not going to complain. |
|
fireyone
Senior member
Joined: 07 Jan 2008
Posts: 1988
0.00 Dollars($)
|
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 05, 2009 7:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I confirmed it to be true here in SC as well (spoke with a state trooper). In a chain reaction accident, it is their (uninformed) opinion that if there was a significant distance between the vehicles then there would not have been a chain reaction!
He told me of an accident in which a car was stopped waiting to turn left at an intersection, was rear-ended, and already having his wheels turned was pushed into the side of another car. The driver was found responsible for the car he hit because his wheels were turned!
He did say that if there is indication of excessive speed, or lack of braking...then the rear most car can be found at fault.
It really is incredibly hard to prove whether car 2 hit car 1 before or after being hit by car 3!
I wonder if any of these situations can be challenged successfully in court. It really sounds as if a lot of it is at the discretion of the state trooper or investigating officer! |
|
ChrisBantly
Senior member
Joined: 11 Mar 2009
Posts: 382
Location: Upstate SC
0.05 Dollars($)
|
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 05, 2009 8:44 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | It really is incredibly hard to prove whether car 2 hit car 1 before or after being hit by car 3! |
That's why one of your first questions when taking a recorded statement is, 'how many impacts did you feel?"
Well, in the great state of MO, ''it just don't work that way'' There isn't a month that goes by I don't have a chain reactions accident...Generally everyone stopped at stop sign, light whatever, and idiot hit's the one furthest back then bang bang bang, longest one I ever had was five cars, (in a chain reaction, had more in a 'pile up')...It would be interesting to see how the carriers handle this, in arb...or if they even bother...tell you what if I was the middle of the oreo cookie, and got it on both ends...we'd be trying that law...
_________________
**************************************
Life gaurantees a chance NOT a fair shake
**************************************
FIND a way EVERY day to lighten the load of another
************************************** |
|
Lori
Moderator
Joined: 10 Sep 2007
Posts: 6810
Location: Missouri
44.12 Dollars($)
|
|
