by Guest » Fri Nov 02, 2007 09:50 pm
I was wondering if someone could answer a question for me. My husband was involved in an accident in 9/05. Nobody was injured and we thought the matter closed. I got a phone call from the other driver's insurance company yesterday saying they would sue me if I didn't fork over the $6,000 bill for the other driver's car. We had no insurance at the time, though we didn't realize it. They canceled our policy but we didn't get the notice. Anyway, they're going after me because the car was registered to me. Can they really sue me and cause me to lose my license because my car was involved in an accident when it was uninsured? Also, isn't there a certain amount of time they'd have to do it in? Why wait over two years?
Posted: Sat Nov 03, 2007 01:16 am Post Subject:
There is a legal concept called subrogation which basically means in this sense that an insurance company can attempt to recover damages that they paid to a policyholder that were inflicted by a third party (in this case, you).
I am far from a lawyer, and only a life, accident, and sickness agent, not a property and casualty agent which is who would deal with car insurance.
I'd be interested to hear under what conditions your car insurance was canceled.
My best advice for you is to consult a lawyer.
Posted: Sat Nov 03, 2007 05:08 am Post Subject:
Was it the actual insurance company or a collection agency? I'm betting it was actually a collection agency that bought the debt as an insurance company would not just sit on the loss for 2 years before attempting recovery. My guess is that shortly after the accident happen the insurance company _did_ send a letter to you requesting payment.
If your husbands drivers license was not suspended as a result of this accident he should consider himself very lucky. Usually the state will suspend the DL until the driver can prove the loss was settled (called "financial responsibility"). Some states also allow the carrier to request a suspension until their loss is settled.
An insurance company would have the right to file suit... but they won't. It's not worth their time to obtain a judgement... which is just a peice of paper which gives them the legal means to file liens. It's not worth their time to do all this (it would cost them more then the $6k to do all that work and then it's still unlikely they would see a dime).
The statute of limitations applies as to how long you can be held responsible. That can be anywhere from 1-6 years (in most states its 4 years).
You thought the matter was "closed"? Like, you could just walk away from the damage caused to the other person's vehicle?
Driving without insurance is a crime and not knowing your policy was cancelled it no excuse (you should have known you never paid the bill regardless of the cancellation notice). I don't know for sure but responding to a collection might start the time frame all over again.
Posted: Sat Nov 03, 2007 06:48 am Post Subject:
Your husband was involved in an accident and he simply let it go? You have never bothered to contact your insurance career in this regard. Weren't there any damages to your car?
I feel something is grossly amiss in the whole post. Tcope is right, you should have come to know that your policy is no longer in force the moment you have stopped paying premiums towards it.
Anyway, coming to your question….. yes, you can be sued for the losses caused by you two years ago.
Like tcope, I too believe that it is a collection agency and not the insurance company itself who have called you up. Henceforth, ask the caller to identify himself/herself. Along with, try to record the conversation that you have with them. And tell them that you are quite conversant with the "Fair Debt Collection Practices Act" . You must have understood by now that from now onwards you have to play your cards very wisely because responding to their call will refresh the whole matter again.
Posted: Sat Nov 03, 2007 11:23 am Post Subject:
Hi kelmc, and welcome.
You all have got yourselves into a bit of mess huh? I'm surprised your husband (driver) isn't also being pursued.
An insurance company would have the right to file suit... but they won't. It's not worth their time to obtain a judgement... which is just a peice of paper which gives them the legal means to file liens. It's not worth their time to do all this (it would cost them more then the $6k to do all that work and then it's still unlikely they would see a dime
.I wouldn't bet on them not pursuing you and your husband, even through suit, they have attorneys on staff. This is solely based on the company, most larger companies have huge subrogation departments, and it does not cost them even close to this much. The company I work for their subro department is like a dog with a bone, and they NEVER let it go, (unless the debtor dies). A judgment also will give them the right to garnish your wages. I began my career as a subrogation specialist for a smaller company (13 states), I had attorneys (in the town I live in) that would handle these suits, for a flat fee, there isn't much work involved in these kind of suits/judgements. Did you cause this accident? Were you insured? This is what you owe...pretty simple......(assuming clear cut liablity of course, which it sounds like). Collection agencys also have attorneys that do the same thing...And are usually even more 'hard core' they generally get paid half of what they collect or nothing at all!
Why did it take two years? I don't know, and doubt it did. I'm betting there have been many attempts to contact you folks. And more than likely you all just hoped it would go away. The insurance company now (I'm guessing of course) has decided (maybe) to hire a collection agency in your area. Again, they have the power to also file suit, on behalf of their client (ins company).
I disagree with the ignore them advise. You and your husband, are responsible for the damage, and should set up a payment plan. My prediction is that if you continue to ignore them your next contact (within sixty days or so) will be a summons, but if you don't care about a judgement/garnishment, credit problems, etc. Then continue to ignore the request that you 'make right' what you owe.
Posted: Sat Nov 03, 2007 01:29 pm Post Subject: smthing missing
i feel that theres sm data not correct or smthings really missing in ur text as all the above doesnt apply simultaneously
Your husband was involved in an accident and he simply let it goWeren't there any damages to your car at the time of accident cause i think there might have been sm action thats not been reported in here
Posted: Sat Nov 03, 2007 06:32 pm Post Subject:
Your post is missing some important information.
1) Was your husband at fault? You cannot be held liable for not having insurance unless he was at fault.
2) Why was your policy cancelled? How long before the accident? Was it for a missed payment or something else?
3) What state are you in?
Be advised that even if coverage was denied on your own policy your company may still need to provide defense for you. If you do receive summons you should send your insurance company a copy right away.
Posted: Sun Nov 04, 2007 12:17 am Post Subject:
i feel that theres sm data not correct or smthings really missing in ur text as all the above doesnt apply simultaneously
Your husband was involved in an accident and he simply let it goWeren't there any damages to your car at the time of accident cause i think there might have been sm action thats not been reported in here
:roll: This is exactly the same thing as said above, Lakemen on the lookout!
Posted: Mon Nov 05, 2007 10:59 pm Post Subject:
1) Was your husband at fault? You cannot be held liable for not having insurance unless he was at fault.
Sorry, but not necessarily the case. Just about every state requires that you are able to prove financial responsiblity, and that is normally done through an automobile insurance liability policy. Some states allow the concept of "self-insurance" through the posting of a cash bond at the DMV, but this is normally reserved for commercial auto use and generally requires you have at least a certain minimum # of vehicles (25 is common).
The fact of the matter is that you certainly can, and normally will be, at odds with the state if you are involved in an auto accident, whether at-fault or not at-fault and you don't have valid insurance! They absolutely can whack you for not having valid coverage in force at the time of the accident, and it does not matter if it was your fault or not!
Properly stated, the poster should have said that you won't be held financially liable to the other party if you don't have insurance, and only if it was the other guy's fault. The state is another matter entirely!
Whew.....
BTW--> Way to go Lori! That assasinator guy has no original thoughts...Lakemen, help those of us who do! As well, I wonder if he's aware that there are actually WHOLE WORDS out there, and not just weird abbreviations!
InsTeacher 8)
Posted: Sun Dec 23, 2007 04:10 pm Post Subject:
hi kelmc.....
i think you should talk to the insurance company in detail and that too face to face....
phone calls would not help much....
try to solve out the matter.
tell them it's not your husband's fault and as nobosy is injured(as you wrote) then there's no point in askingg for a bill
you can just pay for the damage done to the other person's car...
also persuade your husband to explain the scenario
Posted: Mon Dec 24, 2007 02:24 am Post Subject:
Wow, looks like you got all the information and more than you ask for. I would think that someone would have to pay the damages, doesn't seem like they would just disappear, got to make it right one way or another.
Add your comment