by Guest » Thu May 08, 2008 04:30 am
I was involved in a rear end accident last November. I was stopped at a red light and had my blinker on to make a left hand turn. While setting there I was rear ended. My sister was in the car with me and she started complaining about her back and leg hurting (she had back problems before accident). The girl that hit me got out of her car and came up to mine and asked if we were Ok and asked if I would move my car because we were blocking traffic. I told her I wanted to call the police first, which I did and told them about the traffic and being out in the intersection. The dispatcher advised me to move my car to the nearest shoulder. Since I had my blinker on to turn left, I turned and parked in a parking area. The police came and took statements.
My sister went by ambulance to the hospital. I decided to get out of my car after my sister was in the ambulance to inspect the damages to my car, surprised damages was not that bad because I thought the impact was pretty hard. Went back to the girl that hit me to exchange insurance information and the officer taking the report asked for me to return to my vehicle that she would supply with the insurance information. The paint on my car was scratched in some areas and my license plate light was broken and there was a few small buckles on both ends under my tail lights (damage was estimated at $850). No damage was done to her vehicle because she had metal bars on the front. She was driving an SUV, I was driving a little sports car.
After the accident I went to hospital to check on my sister and they just said she was going to be sore for awhile. They took xrays and gave her prescriptions for pain pills. While I was waiting for her I got a real bad headache and my neck and right shoulder started to bother me. I went on ahead and took her home and I went home and took some advil, but the pain just got worse, so I ended up going to the hospital and was told it was from the accident. They took xrays, put a neck brace on me and told me to wear it for a week (plus prescription). What an ordeal!
I called my insurance company and than I called her insurance company to file a claim since she rear ended me. Found out the officer that took our statements gave me the wrong policy number and insurance agent for her. Anyway, I got the correct insurance info from the officer and called them to file a claim. Waited and waited to hear something back. When I would call to find out about the claim they just kept giving me the run around saying they couldn't get a hold of the other driver. Then one day at work they call and tell me that they are not going to pay the claim, becauce the accident was my fault. The girl said my car stalled and rolled back and hit hers. My car is a standard, but that is not happened. I was just setting at a stop light waiting to make a left hand turn.
BUT HERE IS THE KICKER!, the officer that took the report believed her over me and made it out to be my fault, but in the officer's report she didn't include that the vehicles had been moved, she didn't get a statement from my sister and she didn't note that where the accident happened the road was flat and sloped downward. I called the Police station and talked to the supervisor of the officer and was able to get an amended report stating the vehicles had been moved, my sister's statement (which was the same as mine) and the officer said she wasn't sure who was at fault because both vehicles had been moved after the accident. Still her insurance company refused to pay for the damages to my car.
Anyway here is where I'm at and sorry to make this so long. Her insurance company refused to pay. My insurance company believes it was not my fault, but my deductible is $1000. Damages to car $850. They talked about subrogation of claims here, but since the damages were below the deductible they couldn't do claims subrogation. So, I thought about small claims court and checked into it. Small fee and found out even if I won I would probably have to hire an attorney to have her wages garnished to get my car fixed. That would be more of an expense. So, I dropped it and just wished hurful, hateful thoughts that something bad would happen to the girl that hit me, that lied and got away with it.
NEWS! Today I receive a call from my insurance company wanting to get a statement from me about the accident because they want to go after her insurance company and get the money back on what they paid on the medical bills. Kansas is no fault state. Right!? Can my insurance company do this if they can't go for a subrogated claim ? Never heard of this before. Please advice me on this. Sorry so long, but I hope someone can help me.
My sister went by ambulance to the hospital. I decided to get out of my car after my sister was in the ambulance to inspect the damages to my car, surprised damages was not that bad because I thought the impact was pretty hard. Went back to the girl that hit me to exchange insurance information and the officer taking the report asked for me to return to my vehicle that she would supply with the insurance information. The paint on my car was scratched in some areas and my license plate light was broken and there was a few small buckles on both ends under my tail lights (damage was estimated at $850). No damage was done to her vehicle because she had metal bars on the front. She was driving an SUV, I was driving a little sports car.
After the accident I went to hospital to check on my sister and they just said she was going to be sore for awhile. They took xrays and gave her prescriptions for pain pills. While I was waiting for her I got a real bad headache and my neck and right shoulder started to bother me. I went on ahead and took her home and I went home and took some advil, but the pain just got worse, so I ended up going to the hospital and was told it was from the accident. They took xrays, put a neck brace on me and told me to wear it for a week (plus prescription). What an ordeal!
I called my insurance company and than I called her insurance company to file a claim since she rear ended me. Found out the officer that took our statements gave me the wrong policy number and insurance agent for her. Anyway, I got the correct insurance info from the officer and called them to file a claim. Waited and waited to hear something back. When I would call to find out about the claim they just kept giving me the run around saying they couldn't get a hold of the other driver. Then one day at work they call and tell me that they are not going to pay the claim, becauce the accident was my fault. The girl said my car stalled and rolled back and hit hers. My car is a standard, but that is not happened. I was just setting at a stop light waiting to make a left hand turn.
BUT HERE IS THE KICKER!, the officer that took the report believed her over me and made it out to be my fault, but in the officer's report she didn't include that the vehicles had been moved, she didn't get a statement from my sister and she didn't note that where the accident happened the road was flat and sloped downward. I called the Police station and talked to the supervisor of the officer and was able to get an amended report stating the vehicles had been moved, my sister's statement (which was the same as mine) and the officer said she wasn't sure who was at fault because both vehicles had been moved after the accident. Still her insurance company refused to pay for the damages to my car.
Anyway here is where I'm at and sorry to make this so long. Her insurance company refused to pay. My insurance company believes it was not my fault, but my deductible is $1000. Damages to car $850. They talked about subrogation of claims here, but since the damages were below the deductible they couldn't do claims subrogation. So, I thought about small claims court and checked into it. Small fee and found out even if I won I would probably have to hire an attorney to have her wages garnished to get my car fixed. That would be more of an expense. So, I dropped it and just wished hurful, hateful thoughts that something bad would happen to the girl that hit me, that lied and got away with it.
NEWS! Today I receive a call from my insurance company wanting to get a statement from me about the accident because they want to go after her insurance company and get the money back on what they paid on the medical bills. Kansas is no fault state. Right!? Can my insurance company do this if they can't go for a subrogated claim ? Never heard of this before. Please advice me on this. Sorry so long, but I hope someone can help me.
Posted: Sat May 10, 2008 06:05 am Post Subject:
Thank you all for your comments and concerns. After reading my first post over again I realized I did leave something out (meant to put it in). The officer that took our statements said in the report that my car rolled back when I left the scene. I remember my car rolling back, but I was parked on a slope. Where the accident took place the road is flat and slopes slightly downward, not backwards. My mistake was I didn't get a copy of the police report right away. I should of, I know, but I thought to myself it was a rear end accident, it was her fault. I'll let the insurance companies take care of it. I never dreamed that the girl would say my car rolled back and hit hers. Also I thought the police officer would of done a better investigation. Both vehicles were moved as stated in the amended report, so she couldn't determine who was at fault. That statement should of been in the first report, but the officer sided with the other driver. Her supervisor told me that the officer was only suppose to take statements, not take sides.
I did talk to 2 attorneys about what I could do and since the damage to my vehicle was only $850 and medical wasn't that much and was paid by my insurance company, they suggested small claims court. Even told me it would cost $50 to file a petition, but then I was told that even if I won it wouldn't guarantee that I would get the money to fix my car. It would be my job to pursue the driver and that I would probably have to hire an attorney to garnish her wages if she refused to pay. That is what I was told. So that is the reason I backed down from filing.
All I can say is I know it was not my fault! I was just setting at a stop light and was rear ended. Wish I would of NOT of moved my car. Just hope I will never have to go through this kind of ordeal again. Hopefully next time I will be better prepared on what to do. I know now to get a copy of the police report, ASAP and not trust anyone, even the police, I hate to say. I do now keep a camera in my car, just in case I need it.
Thank you all again! Will keep you informed.
Posted: Sat May 10, 2008 09:57 am Post Subject: accident
OMG!! I'm sorry all of this has to happen to you, BUDDY. I'm not an Insurance 'expert', by any means. I just want to 'show my support' for you, in this situation. I live in the state of PA. ( I think?) If you rear-end someone, it's AUTOMATICALLY 'your' fault ( the person who did the rear-ending..) Are you injuries 'any better'? Are you recovering ok? Sometimes we are so worried about our transportation ( not saying it's NOT a concern..) that we put our 'well-being' second. What about your passenger......etc.?
Posted: Sat May 10, 2008 07:06 pm Post Subject:
It would be a little like an insurance company telling you how to repair a vehicle, huh.
And you believe this doesn't happen? I will give you this; they try. If I was a DRP shop, they would definately tell the shop how to repair the car even though they are not experts.
What I am about to say isn't a slam against you personally T, unless the shoe fits. Just like I don't claim to be an insurance expert as you are quick to point out, I am a policy holder, a claimant who has gone through the personal injury process and I am familiar with attorneys both, good and not so good who use my services and expert opinion to make determinations on factors involving the personal injury settlement process.
I have had property damage appraisers in my customer waiting room attempting to settle personal injury claims along with the property damage who had been adjusters for less than six months for one of the top five insurers in the country. That's just wrong, waiving a small check in front of someone who they sense that will grab a quick settlement to avoid paying for possible agravating injuries that may surface later.
I do not claim to be an expert on personal injury, but I do understand the process of settling a personal injury settlement having been the victim of a head on collision where both vehicles were traveling 55mph at the moment of impact. I understand the force of two masses impacting at opposing speeds and directions where the car stops but the internal organs of your body do not . What it feels like to have the floorboard press against every joint in your body, what your temporal mandible feels like when it been misaligned due to hitting steering wheel and what your hands feel like when you can no longer hang on to the steering wheel after you have folded it over in half and then rammed your hand through the windshield. What price do you pay for seeing an infant come out of a side window of the vehicle that struck you and hit your windshield and die in front of you? You can't place a price on what it is worth to not be able to give your grandchildren piggy back rides or wake up ever morning for 15 consecutive years of having to run hot water on your neck and back to loosen it up so you can stand erect. Just how do you place a value on that? That value is a different figure to every individual that experiences it.
I provide those pictures and documentation to attorneys that want to see the crush zones, collapsed bumper shocks, the damage at the opposite end of the car where the energy traversed. I prepare estimates for actual costs to repair for the attorneys of the actual damage of the vehicle and not what the insurer pays for the property loss based on their visual inspection. I am aware of M.I.S.T and it's implications in injury settlements.
The carrier wants to pay as little as possible for the claim and the injured party want's $200 million.
I think you may have made your point better by stating that, you as an insurer, want to pay what is fair and reasonable dictated by the individual circumstances of the claim rather than as little as possible. But I understand, insurers must make money. Fifty Five billion just last year.
And the claimant wants 200 million? That's not an insult to claimants everywhere? I personally believe the need for attorneys could be partially eleminated if insurers would intially offer to pay what was fair and reasonable rather than "as little as possible" and to not delay paying for what is owed or denying it entirely.
I received 23 percent of what potentially could have been the maximum amount of stacked uninsured motorist policies I possessed. I asked for about 40 percent. Today looking back 100,000 percent of the amount would not have paid for the pain and suffering I have dealt with to this point. If I had not had an attorney, the insurer would have never explained that I could have stacked certain UM policies. We won't even discuss my own company's putrid initial offer.
I work with a young attorney that use to be an insurance defense attorney for one of the county's largest insurers. He told me in confidence that he could no longer work as a bodily injury insurance defense attorney. He didn't have the stomach to look into the eyes of parents of children they owed settlements to, and offer what he felt was severely and woefully inadequate. He left a lucrative job to become a stay at home dad while his wife left the insurance industry as an attorney as well to work in the private sector.
I guess if you stick with it long enough you can develope a desensitivity to what you are required to do in order to settle for "as little as possible" for gigantic wealthy corporations. I don't envy you, I do comprehend the stress you are likely going through in your work. It can't be a fun job if you are determing what the death or dismemberment of and individual is. I can also understand where a personal injury adjuster could develope a condescending attitude towards claimants all demanding 200 million dollars and for anyone that is not an injury settlement expert.
Posted: Sun May 11, 2008 02:37 am Post Subject:
And the claimant wants 200 million? That's not an insult to claimants everywhere? I personally believe the need for attorneys could be partially eliminated if insurers would initially offer to pay what was fair and reasonable rather than "as little as possible" and to not delay paying for what is owed or denying it entirely.
My entire point was that there is a difference in opinion as to what an injury claim is worth. One side wants as much as they can get, the other side wants to pay as little as possible. Many times these amounts _are_ "fair" but what is "fair". You keep stating that the settlement should be this "fair" amount. Again, I'll ask... what is a fair amount?You give the impression that attorneys are some caped crusaders, doing right by the little and defenseless mother/father/child. I'm sure there are one or two of those types of attorneys. Truth is, the other 99.99999% just want a pay check at the end of the day. Anyone who knows anything about personal injury attorneys will agree with this. Don't buy into those afternoon commercials attorneys put on TV. I find most of them funny. I especially like the ones where they claim I have a pocket full of attorneys handling the claim, against the little injured person. Truth is, there is 1/2 a phone book of personal injury attorneys will to take 33% of someones settlement money and then there is just me.
How do I sleep? Most of the time fairly well. I think of myself as a good shepherd of the companies money. I treat people like I would want to be treated and I settle claims for what I feel is fair to both parties. But then we get right back to the _real_ question... you tell me what is a "fair" settlement amount.
Posted: Sun May 11, 2008 02:44 am Post Subject:
OP, if where the accident happen is level, go out and take a picture of the area. Hold the camera down low so it shows the grade of the road. Offer to send those photos to the adjuster to show that it's highly unlikely that you rolled backward. Perhaps google maps has been in the area and there is a Street View of the road. If the adjuster is any good, they should understand that rolling backward into someone almost never happens.
Also, if an attorney told you that you might not be able to collect on a small claims judgement, they need to go back to school! The contract between the other carrier and their insured states that they will pay when their insured is legally liable. A ruling in small claims against the other party would me they were "legally liable" (to pay as a result of property damage). If they did not then pay you and you pursued the other person directly for this legal collection, their insured could then file a bad faith claim against his/her own carrier (and should, if they did not pay).
Posted: Sun May 11, 2008 03:51 am Post Subject: Too funny, but really sad.
Your analysis and self righteous pontification is a prime example of why people need attorneys to help them settle their claims oftentimes. You think it's your job to protect the insurance company's gold from people you perceive don't deserve it, when in fact, that money is set aside to pay for losses that is owed to people with ligitimate claims. That money belongs to the people who rightfully are owed for losses and gambled they would never have to use it. It's not hitting the jack pot when you get paid for losses that leave permanent scars and death to loved ones.
I think you believe it is the insurance industry rather than lawyers that are caped crusaders swooping in to rescue victims with their contractual indemnification and to decide what is owed to injured people, including my 15 or more area Missouri and Oklathoma neighbors that were killed this evening in tornadoes and countless home owners and vehicle policy holders that will be trying to get a fair settlement on their damaged homes and cars and injured bodies. Just like Katrina, Just like Oklahoma, Just like Northridge. Your industry has earned some deserved black eyes the last few years.
Posted: Sun May 11, 2008 02:33 pm Post Subject: Sanity makes a comeback.
T, I don't think it's good to justify paying out as little as possible on claims, by saying that there are people out there trying to commit fraud. You only can control your actions. I think that it's ironic that you brought up advertising. We both know that claims practices are a far cry from the slogans insurers advertise. I think what bothers me the most is that the people calling the shots in these companies, don't have to look the consumers in the eyes.
Posted: Sun May 11, 2008 03:33 pm Post Subject:
You think it's your job to protect the insurance company's gold from people you perceive don't deserve it, when in fact, that money is set aside to pay for losses that is owed to people with legitimate claims.
I'm pretty sure most every time I stated what should be paid is what is owed. This means no more... no less.Again, I'll ask the same question (I'll make it simple this time)... what is a fair settlement on an injury claim? You keep saying that fair settlements should be offered... please give me an example of one of these "fair" offers. Truth is, you can't. It's nice to be able to _say_ that offers made by carriers are not fair... when you don't have to back it up in anyway.
Posted: Sun May 11, 2008 03:37 pm Post Subject:
T, I don't think it's good to justify paying out as little as possible on claims, by saying that there are people out there trying to commit fraud.
I never said that but those two statements were mentioned closely together so I can understand how it could be taken that way. One statement was to show that settling an injury claim is a adversarial situation by nature. The other was to show that _all_ claimants are not pure saints as some would have people believe.I agree... almost all commercials are simply propaganda. I place no weight on any of them other then for entertainment purposes.
Posted: Sun May 11, 2008 04:42 pm Post Subject:
Fair is a reasonable amount to take care of all immediate expenses and unforseen expenses related to the accident or injury that you could reasonbly predict one will incur and to do so in a manner that will make them whole as they were prior to the loss.
There is an old adage that applies, " Do not take monetary advice from the very people who owe you money"
Let's say you are a reasonable person ( I believe you most likely are) but you have to answer to your employer who has ultimate control of the amount the check is written for. I also believe that there are attorneys driven by moral principles. I also believe there are adjusters that attempt to be driven by a moral compass but may be influenced by a higher authority. That being said let's agree that you are a trained and skilled negotiater and you come to the bargaining table with years of experience and skill developed to settle the claim for what you say is as little as possible for it is your duty to so, as you say.
Do you feel it is not fair that the unskilled, the uneducated, the illiterate, the minority, the old, the untrained person come to the table without representation or someone who is their advocate? One company advocated that they could do both for the insurer and the claimant. They advertised that you won't need to hire representation that they would treat you fair. It was determined that they could not and ordered to cease and desist from saying so.
I do not feel all attorneys are driven by greed, I feel a great many of them are driven by a moral compass as are you and others here.
Add your comment