by Joann » Thu Dec 20, 2007 02:29 am
I was involved in an accident over 3 months ago. I was hit by a van and my car was totaled. The van had a minor scratch on the bumper. The man did not get out of the van or call the cops. i called the cops while he moved his van to a parking lot and sat there. he didn't even get out of the van when the police arrived. The accident happened in between 2 townships so the first responding township took my statement and the other drivers statement. while talking to the other driver they said he was acting evasive and they smelled alcohol on him. they gave him a breathalyser and it came up 0.0. The officer told me that the accident actually fell in the other township and the other officer would be there shortly. After 45 minutes the accident was cleared and the other township officer finally arrived. he took our statements and left. When I received the police report from the second township it was very unclear. The officer stated that he responded and arrived right away. He wrote that there was no sign of intoxication of the other driver but he did smell of alcohol. He wrote in one part that the was a breathalyser given and then in another part wrote that there was not one. The report was a mess. I did not have collision coverage so my insurance company did nothing. The other drivers insurance company acted like they were going to pay. They sent an adjuster and told me that when it was settled i would get a rental and $3000 for my car. After that i did not hear much more. When i called, the claims representative told me that they did not know who was at fault because we both claimed to have a green light. Now almost 3 months later I am still out of a car and when I try to call the claims rep. she is not there and doesn't call back. When i speak to someone else they just tell me that it is still being investigated. I don't know what to do anymore.
what should i do? should i sue the insurance company?
what should i do? should i sue the insurance company?
Posted: Thu Dec 20, 2007 02:55 am Post Subject:
If you mean your own, then no. If you don't have collision coverage, then theres nothing they can do. But I'm assuming that your talking about his insurance company, so I'll go on from there.
Keep in mind that some investigations can take a lot of time, especially if traffic lights are involved. They need to know when it happened and how often they change. Not to mention that the traffic lights might've been out of sync, resulting in two green lights at the same time. Even though that probably only happens once in a blue moon, it can still happen.
Settlements can take a really long time as well as it has to go through several departments who are already swamped with work. I think you can try asking for the paperwork they have on the accident to see how far they've proceeded. I don't think they're allowed to say that they're investigating it if they're not.
Just give it time, it's only been 3 months.
As for the police report, I don't know who you would give that to, but it sounds like it's unacceptable in quality, and should be reported to someone.
Posted: Thu Dec 20, 2007 03:26 am Post Subject:
There is really no reason to take 3 months to get all the information in this loss. Two peoples statements and the police report. It does not sound like there is anything else. That should take 4 weeks, tops.
Most states don't allow 3rd party actions. That is, almost no states allows you to sue the insurance company of the other party... as they are not a party to your loss (Only state that I know of that allows this is LA.. I think).
You need to file a complaint with your state Dept of Insurance. They can look into the matter and get some quick answers.
If the police report was incorrect you could have it corrected (difficult 3 months later) but I can't see that going in your favor. You state that an on scene test showed the other person's BAC at 0%. If they gave a test and somewhere in the report state that they did not, having that correct would not change the outcome.
There sounds like a good possiblity that the other carrier will deny the claim as it seems like their insured is stating that his light was green. Is that what he told the officer? This is one reason why its a good idea to have collision insurance on your own vehicle.
Posted: Thu Dec 20, 2007 09:20 am Post Subject: Agreeing with some of you!
Hi!
They sent an adjuster and told me that when it was settled i would get a rental and $3000 for my car.
Yes, they meant that you might get this amount only after the case is settled.
Most states don't allow 3rd party actions.
This is quite the truth & the reason is also worthy of it.
You need to file a complaint with your state Dept of Insurance.
Absolutely! Since nothing more that you can do under the present circumstances (there are no other governing bodies who might help you better.).
Keep in mind that some investigations can take a lot of time, especially if traffic lights are involved.
Yes, they do. You may not get settled till the outcome is known.
Do keep us informed from time to time,
Rhodes_Cleveland
Posted: Thu Dec 20, 2007 11:15 am Post Subject:
Good mornig Joann and welcome...
Tcope is (of course) correct...
what should i do? should i sue the insurance company?
you can't sue his company, you could however sue him, but I doubt it will do much good....Sounds to me you have what we refer to as a 'green light question' claim..meaning no witnesses and both claim green light...if that's the case then more than likely his company will/should've already denied your claim...another possiblity (dependant upon your states statutes regarding negligence) they could offer 50/50 (you pay half of his he pays half of yours) I'm in a pure comparative negl. state and I would (with the info you have provided) denied the claim, taking my insured's word, if ALL other evidence is equal. You don't give us the facts of loss including points of impact, so I'm assuming it is a draw....Now, three months WAY TOO LONG! As tcope advised you contact your stated DOI....
They sent an adjuster and told me that when it was settled i would get a rental and $3000 for my car.
This was just getting the inspect/leg work out of the way and ONLY IF they accepted full liability....Regardless of the liablity determination, this carrier has run a foul of their duties..and have had more than enough time to reconcil this claim...File a complaint..yesterday!
Let us know if we can be of any further assistance to you.
Posted: Thu Dec 20, 2007 01:56 pm Post Subject: point of impact
This is how the accident happened...
i was turning left at a green arrow. The other driver was going straight on the street that i was turning left on to. When i went to turn he came flying up and hit my front driver side. The cops did say that there were no skid marks from him so he didn't attempt to slow down. Also at that time in the afternoon the sun is behind his traffic light so it is hard to see it. The insurance company won't listen to anything i have to say. It would be more likely for him to have ran that light than me since even if my arrow had just passed, his light would still be red. If i would have ran the red light there would have been more cars involved since it is a busy intersection. The insurance company won't listen to me when i try to tell them anything they just say it doesnt tell them who caused the accident. I've talked to several people who said they could probably tell by the way i was hit but the insurance company told me they can't. I have offered to send pictures also and they don't want them
Posted: Thu Dec 20, 2007 04:02 pm Post Subject:
The only think the damage would show is the angle of impact (does not seem to be in question) and the extent of the impact (not an issue). It won't show who had the green light.
I'll be honest... I've handled thousands of claims like you were involved in. Here is the problem... someone ran the red light. I doubt the person who ran the light did it on purpose, that is, they thought their light was green. This is why this situation happens so often.
If I were to guess, I thing the other carrier may very well deny your claim. Most adjusters feel bad when they deny a claim when it's based on a guess. This is probably way the adjuster has not made a decision.
Posted: Fri Dec 21, 2007 10:20 am Post Subject:
tcope is correct of course,
The only think the damage would show is the angle of impact (does not seem to be in question) and the extent of the impact (not an issue). It won't show who had the green light
. It won't tell us who had the green light, but the point of impact (POI) can show who had control (or was thru further) of the intersection...for instance if your damage were to the left quarter of your vehicle rather than the front then you 'might' have a better argument (i was nearly thru my turn when he hit me!)...These left turn arrows are bad ones to sort out without a witness behind you (literally in the car behind you)...You have to yield on a flashing green arrow but can proceed and have right of way on a solid green...people run these A LOT! I'm not saying you did, just that it happens a lot...Unfortunately if I were handling your claim and my insured maintained he had the green light without any other evidence I would be forced to deny the claim....Are you sure that intersection doesn't have cameras? many many do now......I'm sorry.Posted: Fri Dec 21, 2007 02:06 pm Post Subject: the sun
Another thing that the insurance company wouldn't even listen to is that the accident happened at 1:30 pm, at that time the sun is behind the light that he was going through. The sun makes it very difficult to see the light so that may have blinded him a little. The insurance company says that he told them that the sun was not affecting his driving so they won't even consider it. Couldn't they investigate that?
Posted: Fri Dec 21, 2007 04:09 pm Post Subject:
Couldn't they investigate that?
They did...
The insurance company says that he told them that the sun was not affecting his driving so they won't even consider it.
Keep in mind that they are not investigating the claim with the intent of finding proof that there insured is lying. If while investigating what happen this comes out, so be it. Their insured is the one paying them money for coverage. Ultimately. it would be your responsibility to prove that their insured ran the red light.
These are difficult situations... when two people disagree about what happen, everyone knows one person is incorrect, but there is really no proof one way or the other.
Posted: Sat Dec 22, 2007 10:15 am Post Subject:
The sun makes it very difficult to see the light so that may have blinded him a little. The insurance company says that he told them that the sun was not affecting his driving so they won't even consider it. Couldn't they investigate that?
All anyone can prove is that the sun was up, not that it affected him. How many other people went thru that intersection with the sun in their eyes and did'nt have an accident that day? I don't understand what you want them to investigate on that point. If he said he could see the light fine in spite of the sun how can they or anyone prove differently? I certainly understand your frustration and as tcope has mention too, these are very difficult situations/claims to handle and when it's a 'draw' they have to give their insured the benefit of the doubt, as your insurance carrier should you as well...Speaking of that has he filed a claim against your policy? If so what has your carrier done?Add your comment