Allpar Forums banner
61 - 80 of 99 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
218 Posts
Reminds me of a case in Chicago involving Wal*Mart Auto service. The story was in the Chicago Tribune(a lot of years ago) from one of their national writers. A customer took their car in for tires I think, after the service the Wal*Mart employee parked the car then came back and drove it off. During his joy ride he wrecked the car and seriously injured others. Wal*Mart immediately sued the car owner. This writer took on not Wal*Mart but the entire billionaire Walton family to task for shedding responsibility in a clear case to increase their wealth over taking responsibility for their own employees. Now look, this was an insurance move but he was trying to attention to the sheer stupidity of what was happening. I think but not sure the Wal*Mart case was thrown out. Anyone from that area remember the case?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,803 Posts
The full story should be told, but the fact is people need to be aware when they are exposed to potential liability. The original story served that purpose.
The ORIGINAL story posted in #1 of this thread is an abbreviated version of the WHOLE story, and probably leaves the reader dumbfounded, quizikal and probably wondering what has happened with the entire legal system o_O

And the abbreviated version is the one that also appeared on my local FOX affiliate news.

To read the FULL story, one must either click on the link in the middle of the abbreviated version:


Or read the FULL version that was posted in #19:

Better explanation...
But reading either FULL version answers many questions.

But if the vehicle owner now has to sue the dealership to recoup any judgement against them, all that does is clog the legal system with additional and unnecessary cases.

So just dispose of 2 cases in 1: the family of the deceased sues the vehicle owner, and the vehicle owner sues the dealership for their negligence. ;)
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
40,536 Posts
The original version is correct. The vehicle owner is being sued because the victim’s family can’t sue the employer. All that is added in the “full” story is that the dealer (likely insurance) will make it right with the car owner. That’s fortunate that is happening without a second lawsuit.
I also don’t see anything in any version of the story blaming the vehicle.
I do see a big problem with the current laws in this case.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
40,536 Posts
Makes one want to consider some sort of umbrella insurance policy.
Not just consider, buy. Anyone that has any assets (even just some home equity) should have an umbrella policy. Think of lawsuit verdicts and compare that to the limits in your auto insurance or home insurance policy. And no, I’m not an insurance agent.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Dave Z and Doug D

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,803 Posts
Even if the dealership's insurance covers the payout to the victim's family, I hope that the Jeep owner then goes after the dealership for any and all additional $ that they may be out for all of their anguish, emotional distress and especially to pay back to their insurance company the $100,000 that they paid to the victim's family.

If the Jeeps owner pays back their insurance company, hopefully their rates won't go up.
 

·
Jeepaholic
Joined
·
6,839 Posts
This is nuts. The owner of a manual trans Jeep took their vehicle in for an oil change, and the dealer gives the keys to an employee who doesn’t have a driver’s license, nor do they know how to drive a stick. Then that employee strikes and kills a tech. The family of the tech is suing the owner of the Jeep because they apparently can’t sue the dealership. Unbelievable.


Please delete, I didn’t realize there was already a thread.
 

·
Administrator
1974 Plymouth Valiant - 2013 Dodge Dart - 2013 Chrysler 300C
Joined
·
39,919 Posts
Not just consider, buy. Anyone that has any assets (even just some home equity) should have an umbrella policy. Think of lawsuit verdicts and compare that to the limits in your auto insurance or home insurance policy. And no, I’m not an insurance agent.
I agree. $2 million of coverage for a few hundred dollars a year? Absolutely worth it.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,803 Posts
Insurance is one of those things that you hate paying the bill for it. You just get a piece of paper with words and nothing really else to have, touch or hold, it's almost invisible.

But then when you need it, you're glad you did pay for it.

For instance, I still have full coverage on my PT, and I could likely get by for less by just carrying liability.

But last year when my car got vandalized on the rear and then damaged on the side by the person parking next to me, the comprehensive that I carry covered both repairs, I just had to pay my deductible.

If I had liability only, there is no way that I could have afforded to have my car repaired.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Dave Z

·
KOG
Joined
·
7,311 Posts
The other thing is, if you have insurance, you have the insurance company's lawyers on your side.
You've just identified what you're really buying with insurance. What you're doing is paying a retainer for a pack of lawyers.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 06PTElectricBlue

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,803 Posts
You've just identified what you're really buying with insurance. What you're doing is paying a retainer for a pack of lawyers.
Basically :ROFLMAO:

I took on an insurance company once for a guy that tried to push me forward a little bit more, so that he could make his right turn.

The morning of the trial, I got a call from his insurance company that they would settle the case for 1/2 of what I was seeking. I should have taken their offer, at least 1/2 is better than 0.

I lost the case because before it came to trial, I had traded the vehicle for my PT. It was very minor damage to the rear end that he caused, and I had not had it repaired before I traded it. But because I could not prove how much in diminished value I had lost during the trade, that's why I lost.

But the other driver had to appear at the trial, but he didn't have to say a word as the lawyer for the insurance company did all the talking for him.
 

·
Administrator
1974 Plymouth Valiant - 2013 Dodge Dart - 2013 Chrysler 300C
Joined
·
39,919 Posts
You've just identified what you're really buying with insurance. What you're doing is paying a retainer for a pack of lawyers.
Partly, yes. But I've known some people who either won or lost cases for over a million dollars. There's a high degree of randomness due to the way courts work. I wish that, as a society, we valued justice enough to use tribunals rather than single judges who tend to lose their sense of proportion over time.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,462 Posts
If I had liability only, there is no way that I could have afforded to have my car repaired.
Another reason to carry both comprehensive and collision on an older vehicle, if another vehicle hits and totals your car you will get reimbursed under collision. Years back my '93 Intrepid was hit by a neighbor and totaled. When called by the other insurance adjuster the first question was "Did you have collision coverage" and not how my daughter was doing (she was the driver). Right then I decided to have my insurance company pay me and deal with the other insurance company. I got a better than expected check from my insurance company and was able to get a replacement quickly. Side note, did get a another call from the other insurance adjuster basically complaining that my car was not worth what my insurance company paid me; all I could do was smile.
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
40,536 Posts
Another reason to carry both comprehensive and collision on an older vehicle, if another vehicle hits and totals your car you will get reimbursed under collision. Years back my '93 Intrepid was hit by a neighbor and totaled. When called by the other insurance adjuster the first question was "Did you have collision coverage" and not how my daughter was doing (she was the driver). Right then I decided to have my insurance company pay me and deal with the other insurance company. I got a better than expected check from my insurance company and was able to get a replacement quickly. Side note, did get a another call from the other insurance adjuster basically complaining that my car was not worth what my insurance company paid me; all I could do was smile.
Similar situation when someone pulled out in front of my in my 99 Dakota R/T. The car owner (through the insurance company) tried claiming her "ex" boyfriend wasn't allowed to use the car and she was not liable. I stopped talking with them at that point. My insurance company paid for my truck, a quite reasonable offer which I took. About a month later my deductible was reimbursed when the other insurance paid up.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,803 Posts
Another reason to carry both comprehensive and collision on an older vehicle, if another vehicle hits and totals your car you will get reimbursed under collision. Years back my '93 Intrepid was hit by a neighbor and totaled. When called by the other insurance adjuster the first question was "Did you have collision coverage" and not how my daughter was doing (she was the driver). Right then I decided to have my insurance company pay me and deal with the other insurance company. I got a better than expected check from my insurance company and was able to get a replacement quickly. Side note, did get a another call from the other insurance adjuster basically complaining that my car was not worth what my insurance company paid me; all I could do was smile.
That's almost how it is now, if you have insurance, but it's the other person that was at fault, just go through your insurance and let the insurance companies haggle it out with each other, much easier that way.

It's called subrogation when your insurance company pays for your repairs, you then allow (subrogate) your insurance to go after the other drivers insurance for reimbursement.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
135 Posts
Had an incident a few years ago that finally settled last year. It involved an older guy near my age who was riding a bicycle on a sidewalk and crossing over a tollway entrance ramp. The pedestrian walkway he was on has clearly marked Walk and Don't Walk colored signals. I was turning left onto the tollway with a green arrow, along with several cars behind me. He had a BIG Orange Hand, clearly showing the Don't Walk symbol. Luckily for him, the ramp was partly under construction, so I was entering at a much slower speed than normal, but that still didn't stop the moron from disobeying his signal, and his bike pedal caught the lower left corner of my car. The impact sent him to the hospital and resulted in the State Police issuing him a ticket. He tried to settle (extort) money from my insurance, but they refused. He sued me for an undisclosed amount. I had $300K insurance coverage, and when the case finally went to court last year, his ambulance-chaser (lawyer) was asking for a total amount in excess of $800K!!! My insurance company said they were 99% certain we'd win, but if not, they would not leave me hanging, as it was their decision to go to trial.

I had taken several pics with my phone when it happened, from many angles. My insurance even called in 2 county traffic experts who service those signals who testified that a pedestrian (or bicyclist) must stop and press the call button to ever get that signal to change, and when it does, it never puts the pedestrian in harms way with other vehicle traffic cycles. Then, yo-yo's lawyer tried to make an issue of the fact that my car is a very "bright color, and louder than normal" to imply I was a speedy driver. That back-fired BIG time! I had a husband and wife out-of-state couple in the car behind me who had stopped and gave police the same version I told. Oops! Then, when I was called to testify, I threw it back in his lawyer's face - "Sooo, your client never saw or heard my BIGLY, BRIGHT, LOUD car?". As did my insurance lawyer. The couple behind me testified they had a better view of him, and the wife (passenger) saw him speeding down the sidewalk towards the ramp against the signal (the wife who jogs estimated close to 20MPH), after he just perjured himself by bragging about his expensive bike, with great brakes. When my attorney asked him just how fast he was going when he approached the cross-walk, he said that he had braked rapidly, down to maybe 3MPH. I also asked his attorney about that, asking if he had slowed so rapidly, how is it he still hadn't seen or heard me coming or couldn't stop, and why that contradicts what other witnessed said his speed was. Oops, AGAIN! The jury was very restless and upset after the first day, and when his attorney asked the judge to drag the case out a few more days by calling medical "experts" to testify to his medical bills, even the judge lost it and told him to wrap it up the next day, that either way, the jury was getting the case. Bottom line was the jury found 100% for me, but as others mentioned, IF I had lost for some reason, and IF my insurance had left me hanging, could have been on the hook for $500K+!!! So, lessons learned - increased my coverage, plus if you put your house and assets in a Trust, after a 5 year period, in some states they can't be touched by a lawsuit. Amazing that other people's gross irresponsibility costs those of us with insurance.
 
61 - 80 of 99 Posts
Top