by OMAR » Sun Jul 13, 2008 04:55 pm
My car was hit while parking in a street in philadelphia, the other car owner claim that someone attempted to car jack him while his vehicle was running,
the thief shoved him out jumping into the vehicle, the car owner grabbed the wheel from the thief making him hit my car. their was no eye witness except a 7 years old boy. the problem is that his company didn't want to pay. now what I have to do? , go to the court and sue the insurance company that no one can proof his story or go to the court and sue the car owner for his reckless action that cause the accident???
OMAR
the thief shoved him out jumping into the vehicle, the car owner grabbed the wheel from the thief making him hit my car. their was no eye witness except a 7 years old boy. the problem is that his company didn't want to pay. now what I have to do? , go to the court and sue the insurance company that no one can proof his story or go to the court and sue the car owner for his reckless action that cause the accident???
OMAR
Posted: Wed Jul 16, 2008 03:22 pm Post Subject:
the car owner left his car running, and was outside it
I did not realize that he left his car running and was out of the car (I don't think you mentioned this). If that is the case, I could see a little liability against the owner but not much. It's also a judgment call. Some adjusters might not accept any liability for this.he might killed a person or even the 7 yrs old child who was there,, or may be turning a healthy man to a handicap, or even kill the thief...
If, if, if... all of which never happened. What _if_ the owner successfully recovered his car with no damage and the theft went to jail? As that _could_ have happened, is it a good reason to deny liability for what _did_ happen? The questions is, was what the owner did reasonable in attempting to stop the thief. Would many other people have done the same thing if they thought they could stop the person. The owner should have the right to try to stop the theft of his car. As I mentioned before, I don't see why anyone would grab the wheel as this would not stop the car. More likely he was trying to stop the thief and perhaps needed to grab the wheel to brace himself. When this person sits in front of a jury and tells them his only means of transportation was being stolen right next to him and he was trying to apprehend the car thief and save his car from getting stolen... do you really think the jury is going to send a message that tells people they should not try to stop their cars from getting stolen? The owner certainly has a right to protect his own property.this is why the invented something called the cops.
Police officers chase stolen cars all the time. This also causes property damage to innocent 3rd parties. They have the same recourse you do... against the thief.I will go to the court not because of the money, but because I feel injustice, from both the owner and the insurance company, and if I stop fighting for myself no one will fight for me.
You certainly have that right. I think you have a good case for _some_ liability against the car owner (for leaving the car running and walking away). But for any more then that... this is why people pay for collision coverage.I think your really upset because you were not at fault for the damage to your vehicle so you feel someone else should be. You are correct... but that person is the thief who stolen the car.
Posted: Thu Jul 17, 2008 12:00 am Post Subject:
I did not realize that he left his car running and was out of the car (I don't think you mentioned this).
I don't think she did either, or the fact the he reached inside the car and grabbed the wheel...this would've been good information to have Omar...however, I don't think it will change a thing...Omar, remember now I don't make the laws, or have any say so at all in them..I'm just telling you what from my 23 years experience will happen...If the guy left his car running, CLEARLY he was close to it...close enough to not only chase it down but get atleast his hands inside the window and grab the steering wheel...
I totally understand your frustration and angry...but honestly you have no idea FOR SURE what you would do in similar circumstances...Take your car, you have no comprehensive coverage do you? If someone steals it you are flat out of luck unless the cops find it, and they NEVER find it in the same condition it was in prior to the theft....this being your circumstance (no coverage) would you if you thought you could try and stop the thief? Hell, I would and I have the coverage, it would be a natural instinct for me anyway to try and stop someone taking my stuff! The owner of the vehicle perhaps doesn't have comp either...
Take the guy to small claims court, and let us know how it turns out...all I'm telling you is from the benefit of my experience I have never not one time for one single penney seen any insurance company pay for any damage that was caused by a thief and the proximent cause of this damage was car theft....I'm sorry.
Posted: Fri Sep 19, 2008 04:09 pm Post Subject:
Hi Lori
I hope that you still remember my case,, i took your advise and I went to small claims court,, i filed a case and I was waiting for my court date.
what happened is that I received a letter from the insurance company attorney that he will defend their client.
I imagined the situation will be my story against the other car owner story,, but now it will my story against a lawyer defense.
do you have an advise for me about this new situation.....
Posted: Fri Sep 19, 2008 04:13 pm Post Subject:
continue.......
for me it seems logic to me that the insurance company defend their client,, that if the other car owner was accused by the court then he will be liable to the accident and his insurance should pay..
but for me the case become harder now I will fight a big lawyer office not an ordinary guy. I need to be sooooo prepared and i need advise for what to do next.
MY REGARDS
Posted: Sat Sep 20, 2008 10:05 am Post Subject:
but for me the case become harder now I will fight a big lawyer office not an ordinary guy
Nope it won't....in all cases like this I have been too the judge is really kind of pissed off that an attorney is trying to bull dog another...the attorney will be held to a legal regard that you will not...this is small claims...where people come in and talk to the judge about what happened, the judge may not even allow the attorney to talk.. I've seen several times the judge just slap the attorney around and be nice to the other guy...without an attorney...Don't worry about law...you won't be held to that level...the judge will explain it all to you...in fact you might mention, 'i'm a little intimidated here by an attorney, I can't afford one and only want what is right' the judge willl then likely (if he hasn't prior) eleviate your fears...
Be prepared to cross exam, and exam witnesses and to be crossed yourself....have all your facts and questions and answers as to why you feel this person is at fault ready and written down...
Please don't worry the attorney in small claims is generally a henderance rather than a help..Please do let us know the outcome...
Add your comment