| Message |
Author |
|
 Posted: Tue Mar 24, 2009 3:16 pm Post subject: person rear ends you...Does their |
|
|
| person rear ends you...Does their insurance company have to pay to fix your car? |
|
maddywhite
New member
Joined: 24 Mar 2009
Posts: 1
1.50 Dollars($)
|
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 24, 2009 5:15 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| If the other person was liable, yes. Rear ending someone, while a good indicator, does not mean without a doubt that they were liable. |
|
tcope
Forum Expert
Joined: 22 Nov 2006
Posts: 5065
Location: Salt Lake City, UT
272.43 Dollars($)
|
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 25, 2009 6:46 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Okay Maddy, please elucidate the query. A detail account of the accident is required in oder to determine the liability of the driver, otherwise, as tcope has stated, there is a fair chance that the responsible driver's insurer would pay for the damages caused by its insured. |
|
JeremyHolter
Senior member
Joined: 06 Jun 2007
Posts: 1194
210.30 Dollars($)
|
|
| Posted: Thu Mar 26, 2009 12:44 am Post subject: insurance |
|
|
| From what I understand, if someone rear-ends your car, the accident is AUTOMATICALLY their fault...reguardless of the circumstances involved. |
|
sdchargersfan
Senior member
Joined: 21 Aug 2007
Posts: 2055
4.67 Dollars($)
|
|
| Posted: Thu Mar 26, 2009 6:27 am Post subject: not always at fault |
|
|
car A cuts in front of car B and slams on his brakes immediately. car B is not always at fault even though he rear-ended car A.
_________________
Register Now to have your Insurance queries solved. |
|
anonymousadjuster1
Guest
|
|
| Posted: Thu Mar 26, 2009 9:23 am Post subject: insurance |
|
|
| This similiar 'senario' happened to a friend of mine. I was a passenger in her car. She's a REALLY good driver. A car was came over two FULL lanes, on the Interstate and went right in front of my friend. She had to slam on her brakes to try and NOT rear-end him. Yep...that happened anyway. Her Insurance company said it was automatically her fault because she rear-ended someone. This was in the state of PA. |
|
sdchargersfan
Senior member
Joined: 21 Aug 2007
Posts: 2055
4.67 Dollars($)
|
|
| Posted: Sun Mar 29, 2009 4:56 am Post subject: |
|
|
| maddy, before we can determine if their insurance company should pay, you should let us know more details of the accident. was the driver at fault? how did the accident happen? although highly likely that the driver's insurance company would have to pay, i disagree with SD that the person who rear-ended you is always automatically at fault. i know some exceptions, but of course, those cases are rare. |
|
seven7
Member
Joined: 22 Mar 2009
Posts: 75
11.14 Dollars($)
|
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 30, 2009 11:14 am Post subject: insurance |
|
|
| Quote: | | i disagree with SD that the person who rear-ended you is always automatically at fault. |
This was the information that was told to me by 'my' Insurance company, anyway. |
|
sdchargersfan
Senior member
Joined: 21 Aug 2007
Posts: 2055
4.67 Dollars($)
|
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 30, 2009 11:40 am Post subject: |
|
|
Being hit in the rearend is not a slam dunk claim for the 'rear-end ee', most of the time, yep, but there are occuasions, anoy. adjuster pointed out...hit on one...here's another...car in front has no break light (and can be proven so)...
What or How EXACTLY were you rearended,and what does the other company say?
_________________
"Never, never be afraid to do what's right, especially if the well being of a person or animal is at stake. Society's punishments are small compared to the wounds we inflict on our soul when we look the other way." Martin Luther King Jr. |
|
Lori
Moderator
Joined: 10 Sep 2007
Posts: 8173
Location: Missouri
287.90 Dollars($)
|
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 30, 2009 11:47 am Post subject: |
|
|
The way I understand it is ···· the person who rear-ended you is automatically assumed to be at fault, unless they can Prove Otherwise.
That's my 2¢ worth for now. ( maybe ± a couple ¢ ) 
FK, |
|
FK
Senior member
Joined: 10 Feb 2008
Posts: 290
Location: Pa.
41.08 Dollars($)
|
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 30, 2009 11:58 am Post subject: |
|
|
In most cases but I think every adjuster could testify to there being the exception..one that pops into mind.#1 is rearended by #2 causing #1 to hit the rear of #3..so 1 rear ended 3 but they are not liable..#2 is...see there's just alot of variables and as i said, it's not ALWAYS a slam dunk..(most of the time but not always  )
_________________
"Never, never be afraid to do what's right, especially if the well being of a person or animal is at stake. Society's punishments are small compared to the wounds we inflict on our soul when we look the other way." Martin Luther King Jr. |
|
Lori
Moderator
Joined: 10 Sep 2007
Posts: 8173
Location: Missouri
287.90 Dollars($)
|
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 30, 2009 12:07 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | In most cases but I think every adjuster could testify to there being the exception.. |
Isn't that what I said??
"Proving Otherwise" being the exception??
That's my 2¢ worth for now. ( maybe ± a couple ¢ )
FK, |
|
FK
Senior member
Joined: 10 Feb 2008
Posts: 290
Location: Pa.
41.08 Dollars($)
|
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 31, 2009 2:30 am Post subject: insurance |
|
|
| LORI...i do see your point. I suppose things can come, up concerning the accident (s), that can prove "otherwise." Especially..if there are witnesses to the accident(s). |
|
sdchargersfan
Senior member
Joined: 21 Aug 2007
Posts: 2055
4.67 Dollars($)
|
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 31, 2009 6:15 am Post subject: |
|
|
Hi,
| Quote: | | Especially..if there are witnesses to the accident(s). |
Apart from that there are instances wherein pictures have helped establish facts that didn't surface initially.
Roddick |
|
roddick
Senior member
Joined: 05 Oct 2005
Posts: 962
143.16 Dollars($)
|
|
