Pedestrian/Vehicle Collisions in CA, Insurance

by beardancing2 » Wed Sep 22, 2010 10:11 pm

Hi. I'm trying to understand how pedestrian/vehicle collisions are settled and or litigated in CA. Scenario: PED/VEH collision results in pedestrian's death. CHP investigation finds Pedestrian at fault and driver found not at fault due to several witness statements, physical evidence and some traffic monitor video footage (collision occurs more than 50 feet beyond intersection). Pedestrians family hires lawyer, sues not at fault driver,who has full coverage insurance. Drivers Carrier informs driver they will not pay a settlement when their insured is not at fault but and will fight lawsuit on behalf of insured but then warn insured that if they (ins. carrier) is not found liable, the at fault pedestrians family may then sue Driver and drivers family personally. Drivers car totalled. Driver not physically injured but suffers great emotional distress. Questions: Isn't drivers ins.carrier required to represent driver? and If driver not found at fault during the course of that litigation, can driver and drivers family be sued again? Driver's Insurance carrier says they (Pedestrians family) can and that they (the carrier) would no longer be liable for any claim or award related to accident. I don't understand how this could be accurate. Can anyone offer some insight here? It would be appreciated.

Total Comments: 5

Posted: Wed Sep 22, 2010 10:55 pm Post Subject:

but then warn insured that if they (ins. carrier) is not found liable, the at fault pedestrians family may then sue Driver and drivers family personally.

This part is incorrect. The other party can only sue they at fault party... they don't sue the insurance company (as the insurance company was not in the accident). If the driver/owner is not found guilty then that is that. End of game. I _think_ you might have misunderstood. The insurance company would/should warn of an _excess verdict and that the insured may be liable for that. An excess verdict is when the injured person is awarded more then the policy limits on the insurance. The insured is then responsible for the difference. Of course, a bad faith claim is filed by the insured against the insurance company but that is another matter.

Isn't drivers ins.carrier required to represent driver?

Yup, which is being done according to your post.

Unless for some reason the driver is not being considered an insured under the insured's policy. But I doubt this is the case.

An insured is the person who has the policy and also anyone else that meets the definition of an insured under the policy. Usually this includes the driver. A driver is the person who is driving the vehicle.

Posted: Thu Sep 23, 2010 12:36 am Post Subject:

Carrier informs driver they will not pay a settlement when their insured is not at fault but and will fight lawsuit on behalf of insured



All of this is correct. The insurer will not simply pay a claim when their insured is not at fault just because there has been a death. They are only responsible to pay a claim if the insured is found to be negligent and not criminally liable for the death.

The only party who can be sued here for the death of the pedestrian is the driver of the vehicle. If there is a different owner of the vehicle, it is possible that person could be dragged into the suit, but I don't think that's being asked here.

As tcope has written, any notice from the insurer would be to indicate that their liability for a judgment ends at the liability limit of the policy. If it's $100,000, and a judgment is obtained for $1,000,000, then the insurer pays their $100,000 share and the driver is on the hook for the remaining $900,000.

Another good reason to carry high liability limits, and possibly consider a personal umbrella policy on top of that.

Posted: Thu Sep 23, 2010 01:52 am Post Subject:

MaxHerr!
Thank you for your speedy reply!
Yes, I thought that was how it was supposed to work.
I didn't get the information firsthand, but rather than taking my assumptions for granted I decided to post the facts as I was made to understand them precisely because they didn't make complete sense to me. I was trying to discover if there might be any circumstances under this State's Law or Insurance Regulations that could make this scenario possible.

I am guessing that the person I heard it from Misunderstood as you suggested or possibly was Misinformed.

The driver and the driver's family in this tragedy have suffered financially and emotionally. And while legally they are entitled to compensation for those damages, they felt that seeking recompense from the pedestrian's family, in light of the anguish that they must be suffering from the loss of their loved one, to be a response wholly lacking in compassion.

It is my understanding that the pedestrian's family is, as so many of us are in these times, struggling financially and unable to pay first the medical and now the burial expenses of their loved one.

It is my opinion that the the pedestrian's family, in their anger and grief, consulted an attorney of questionable integrity who has convinced them, despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary, that he could get them
a size-able settlement or award of some kind. I can only hope, though I doubt, that this poor family was not bilked for a retainer.

The insurance carrier said that they will not seek or accept settlements for lawsuits against their policy holders when they are not at fault. (No nuisance claims). In the likely event the lawsuit fails, can or would the insurance company counter sue for expenses?
I hate to think of that poor family getting stuck for bad advice.

The drivers family, while maybe being in a little bit better condition to weather this storm don't have unlimited resources either but should, at least, be able to take some comfort in knowing what the insurance companies responsibilities are regarding them.

The truly sad part of this is that the real wounds on both sides will be kept from closing and healing for a longer time than necessary.

While I am firmly in the Driver's corner here, I am, none the less, praying for everybody involved in this horror. Even the attorneys. I would ask that anyone reading this post take moment to do the same.

Thank you all for providing and participating in this forum.

Feel free to let me know if you think I'm missing anything. And. uh,
sorry for the run ons.

Bear Dancing

Posted: Thu Sep 23, 2010 02:01 am Post Subject:

Balls!
I meant thank you "tcope" aand "MaxHerr" for you speedy responseS.

Add your comment

Image CAPTCHA
Enter the characters shown in the image.
Get new captcha!