4 car accident

by Guest » Wed Feb 29, 2012 10:53 am

Hello,

I was involved in an accident on the freeway involving three other drivers. The police report stated that It had found me to be the cause for driving upon a highway at a speed greater than is reasonable with regard to weather, visibility, etc..

The road was wet and when I was coming around the bend for the freeway onramp my back tires just lost traction leading me to spin out into traffic where three other cars where damaged, and one person ended up being taken to the hospital (he suffered "minor injuries"). I wasn't traveling too fast or anything (though the police report does conclude otherwise).

I've found a lot of helpful information on here from the experts that frequent here a lot, but I have a few questions I'm still concerned and unsure about.

Let me start by stating my current situation. Three other cars were involved. This takes place in California, At the time of the accident I had minimum liability 15/30/5. All other drivers were insured as well, to what extent I don't know. Two of the other cars including mine were totaled. The only information I have right now is my own memory of what happened and the police report.

The police report concluded me to be the cause of the accident. My concern is will everybody just try to come after only me? Am I totally 100% responsible to pay for all damages and injuries to everybody, or is there other factors that come into play to determine who owes who? Like one of the drivers was driving over the speed limit, and another had a suspended license, and two of the other cars collided with each other. I expect the other parties to seek compensation from my carrier, but the damages are definitely going to exceed $5,000 for PD. My question is what will happen then? I've heard on here that my carrier will try to get them to settle with the check they offer and not come after me, but I doubt $5,000 divided three ways would be acceptable. What will happen if the other parties don't accept? Will they file suit against me or my carrier? Will my carrier give me any legal representation? Under what circumstances will my carrier NOT represent me? And what happens after that? I'm really young (over 18 but under 24) I make just a little over minimum wage, I have no type of assets, there's not much for anyone to take. Will I end up having a huge debt against me for the rest of my life until I pay off what is owed? How will I owe, garnishment?

Thank you to anybody that can help. I'm trying not to worry about this too much cause I know these things take a lot of time to play out and worry/stress helps nothing, and so far I've been able to move on and continue living my life normally but this is still something I have to deal with and pay attention too, and it would be great if I knew what too expect.

Thanks,

Total Comments: 7

Posted: Thu Mar 01, 2012 09:30 am Post Subject:

my back tires just lost traction leading me to spin out

and

I wasn't traveling too fast or anything

:lol: No, of course you weren't driving too fast "or anything." But miracles of miracles, you managed to total three out of four vehicles by driving just 10 mph on a rainy day. How about 50 mph? Does that sound a little more realistic?

Sorry, your tires did not "just [lose] traction" -- you were driving too fast for the weather and road conditions as a result of your inexperience as a driver. Be responsible and own up to that fact. You are most likely 100% at fault.

I doubt $5,000 divided three ways would be acceptable. What will happen if the other parties don't accept?

The $5,000 is unlikely to be divided. Someone is probably going to get it all. Any of the other drivers with Uninsured / Underinsured coverage will probably just turn the claim over to their own insurer. Whether that happens or not, you are likely going to be sued by three other persons or their insurance companies for the full amount of damages not covered by your insurance.

Will they file suit against me or my carrier? Will my carrier give me any legal representation?

Yes, they will sue YOU. And Yes, your insurance company must defend you. But what is there to defend? You're just another one of the 20+ million CA drivers I have to watch for and try to avoid every day I'm on the road -- I can only do that by watching all the other drivers around me and do what I can to avoid them, because I don't know which one is "you".

You might be the one in the #1 lane driving 70mph with a cell phone in one hand and a mascara brush in the other. Or the same guy I see occasionally on his way to work with the LA Times spread across his steering wheel and dashboard (one day, he was eating a bowl of cold cereal in addition to reading the newspaper). Or you might be like the woman in Florida several months ago who ran into the back of a semi-trailer at 60 mph while "shaving her bikini area on the way to meet her boyfriend". Not sure I would have liked to see that one.

What I do know is this: you're one of the several million reasons I have to carry high limits Uninsured / Underinsured Motorist coverage on my and my wife's vehicles, and recommend the same to my clients, students, and friends. You're one of the reasons why I pay more than $1500 per year for insurance on two vehicles with no collisions or citations on either of our driving records.

I'm really young (over 18 but under 24) I make just a little over minimum wage, I have no type of assets, there's not much for anyone to take. Will I end up having a huge debt against me for the rest of my life until I pay off what is owed?

First, you cannot use your 18-24 age group as an excuse for being improperly insured. If you don't make much money, you should not be driving a car in CA with minimum liability limits. But how will I get to all the parties? you might ask. Not my problem. If you don't have much money, you can't afford to party either.

Here's what is true. You are probably facing bankruptcy court as a result of all this -- property damage claims can be released, but personal injury claims might not. If the fellow who "went to the hospital" had expenses of less than $15,000, including his "pain and suffering" you won't have to worry about that. But it will all have to wait until all of the judgments are in. You don't want to file for bankruptcy before then.

Your insurance company won't pay for that. So start saving money now to pay that attorney his $2500 to get you out of this jamb of your own making, or plan on paying the full cost of the damage you did over time with interest. Can your wages be garnished? Yes. Can you prevent that? Yes . . . don't work. But what does that do for you?

Here's the moral of the story: Live and learn. Ideally, you will never drive a vehicle in CA or any other state without sufficient insurance: 100/300/50 is a minimum most folks should have here. Even the $50,000 might not have covered all the damage you did to three other vehicles, but it's $45,000 more coverage than you had, and it would only have cost about $30 more than you paid. Ever heard the expression: pennywise and poundfoolish? Now you know what it means.

Maybe you can sue your agent for negligence in not telling you all this. Oh, wait! You bought your insurance online, and picked the lowest limits because it was the cheapest? Sorry, sue yourself. NO! DON'T DO THAT . . . you can't afford it.

Posted: Thu Mar 01, 2012 10:10 am Post Subject:

This takes place in California, At the time of the accident I had minimum liability 15/30/5

Yeah, saw that one coming. First, CA needs to wake up and get out of the 1800s! Second, people who drive in CA should be shot if they only take $5,000 property damage limits! An agent's fingernails should be pulled if they don't talk someone out of taking hire limits.

I don't agree with Max completely. Your carrier won't (can't) pay dime one to anyone unless _all_ parties are willing to settle for your $5,000 limit. It's doubtful that the other people have UMPD. They probably have collision which is about the same thing... they would file their loss with their carrier and your carrier would attempt to settle with the other carriers for your $5,000. No difference.

Will my carrier give me any legal representation? Under what circumstances will my carrier NOT represent me?

Yes they will. They probably won't need to as there is a 99.99% chance that the other people's carriers would settle for your $5,000. Of the other people don't have collision coverage they might not accept the $5,000 and file suit but think about this... they won't get one dime until the case is settled. Your carrier would hire an attorney who would file motions for discovery, obtain statements from witnesses, etc. All of that takes time. In the mean time, the other person gets nothing. At the end of the day if they win (maybe they won't... maybe they will get less then 100%) they will get a portion of that $5000 and a judgement against you. A judgment is not cash. They would then still need to go about legally collecting from you. Now... do they really want to do this? Your attorney would set up a settlement conference with them and explain to them why pursuing the lawsuit is probably not going to get them anything else.

What you _really_ need to be doing is increasing your $5,000 PD limit. Are you getting the idea that this low limit is just stupid? I'm betting $25,000 in PD will not cost much more.

P.S. max is just being "mean" (i.e. truthful) because he's trying to wake you up. What would you do if someone hit you and 3 other people and only had $5,000 in PD? CA just needs to tell people they are on their own when someone hits them and not require PD liability any longer. Then people would realize the truth.

Posted: Thu Mar 01, 2012 10:18 am Post Subject:

I'm betting $25,000 in PD will not cost much more.

It's about $10 - $15 more every 6 months for most drivers.

Posted: Fri Mar 02, 2012 12:58 pm Post Subject:

No, of course you weren't driving too fast "or anything." But miracles of miracles, you managed to total three out of four vehicles by driving just 10 mph on a rainy day. How about 50 mph? Does that sound a little more realistic?

Sorry, your tires did not "just [lose] traction" -- you were driving too fast for the weather and road conditions as a result of your inexperience as a driver. Be responsible and own up to that fact. You are most likely 100% at fault.

Or not... While I did state I wasn't driving too fast, please don't (though from your hostile response it seems you already have) take that as an attempt on my part to disconnect myself from the responsibility of my mistake. Too explain further let me say I was NOT speeding or traveling too fast for the wet road conditions, however that's not to say a mistake wasn't made on my part. I gave my car too much gas too suddenly near the end of a turn. A mistake on my part yes, A mistake that had significant repercussions? yes. A mistake I make all the time? no. A mistake I've made before? no. A mistake I'll make again? no.

Mistakes happen, accidents happen, you of all people (a person in the insurance industry) should know that, but it seems that tid bit of reality escaped you when you turned on super assumption rage mode.

You're just another one of the 20+ million CA drivers I have to watch for and try to avoid every day I'm on the road -- I can only do that by watching all the other drivers around me and do what I can to avoid them, because I don't know which one is "you".

Now If you're so worried about me and the other "20+ million CA drivers" that are so incredibly irresponsible and reckless about our driving and such a danger too you, perhaps you should stop acting so irresponsible and reckless by driving on the dangerous roads and just take the train or bus. NO! DON'T DO THAT.... Buses use roads too :cry: And I doubt you'd step down from your pedestal to do so anyway :/

Way to completely misunderstand the question and inject more of your assumptions :roll: I'm noticing a pattern here.... I included this bit of information so that whom ever is reading and decides to graciously offer their advice and help has a better understanding of my current economic status, and thus offer more accurate advice. NOT for someone to use as a tool in an attempt to justify extravagantly arrogant and ignorant assumptions.

You might be the one in the #1 lane driving 70mph with a cell phone in one hand and a mascara brush in the other. Or the same guy I see occasionally on his way to work with the LA Times spread across his steering wheel and dashboard (one day, he was eating a bowl of cold cereal in addition to reading the newspaper). Or you might be like the woman in Florida several months ago who ran into the back of a semi-trailer at 60 mph while "shaving her bikini area on the way to meet her boyfriend". Not sure I would have liked to see that one.

What I do know is this: you're one of the several million reasons I have to carry high limits Uninsured / Underinsured Motorist coverage on my and my wife's vehicles, and recommend the same to my clients, students, and friends. You're one of the reasons why I pay more than $1500 per year for insurance on two vehicles with no collisions or citations on either of our driving records.

Super Assumption Rage Mode: [ON] OFF ??? I'm sorry that my text based words have offended and upset you so much, but your entire rage response is based on grand assumptions. I really hope you were able to get everything off your chest. Now lets just Super Assumption Rage Mode: ON [OFF] okay?? It's not good for your health or your character.

Now I'd like to get to the advise and help graciously offered in a rational and civilized manner by tcope (someone you should aspire to be more like).

Posted: Fri Mar 02, 2012 01:10 pm Post Subject:

Thanks tcope for your response.

You said my carrier will represent me with any legal matters that may arise. Is there any scenario that would prevent that? The reason I ask is, my premiums are due soon, and they changed the cost for me to renew for three months from $240 to $850. Needless too say that's a tad too much for me, so it's likely I'm not going to be capable of being their customer anymore. Will they continue to represent me even if I'm not a continuing customer?

I also received a letter from an attorney representing the man that went to the hospital. It just says that It appears I'm at fault and they may attempt to seek compensation from me and my insurance company for his clients injuries, and that I should notify my insurance company of this letter. What are your thoughts on this?

What you _really_ need to be doing is increasing your $5,000 PD limit. Are you getting the idea that this low limit is just stupid? I'm betting $25,000 in PD will not cost much more.

Needless to say I've learned the error of my ways, It's too easy now to see that minimum liability is just plain dumb, then again hindsight is 20/20. I wish I could go back in time to correct past mistakes but unfortunately I can't. But what I can do is learn from past mistakes, and not make them again. A mistake has been made and repercussions are happening, I thank you tcope for taking the time to help me instead of chastising me. The world has enough people that would like to go around pointing fingers at everybody and saying "idiot, you done bad" and offering no insight or help, luckily we have people like you that offer insight on both sides of the spectrum. The world could use a little more tcope and a little less MaxHerr.

Posted: Fri Mar 02, 2012 07:11 pm Post Subject:

Is there any scenario that would prevent that?

Only if they denied coverage completely.

Will they continue to represent me even if I'm not a continuing customer?

Yes, that won't change a thing.

What are your thoughts on this?

That the other person hired an attorney to make a claim against you for his injuries. It _will_ happen.

Needless to say I've learned the error of my ways

I really blame the state of CA for not waking up and requiring more. I then blame your agent (if you had one). There is simply no reason that any state should allow a minimum of $5000 in coverage. It's almost the same as not requiring insurance. What that also means is that you need to obtain UM coverage... as CA's message is, its everyone for themselves.

Posted: Sat Mar 03, 2012 03:19 am Post Subject:

I was NOT speeding or traveling too fast for the wet road conditions,

If that were true, you would not have had the accident. But throw that aside.

I realize my post was highly critical. It was intended to be, as tcope picked up on. It was not intended for your benefit or castigation alone. I have written the same sort of thing many times here before now.

a better understanding of my current economic status

Again, this is a cop out. I don't care what a person's economic status is. It has nothing to do with being properly insured. If a person cannot afford the proper insurance when operating a motor vehicle, then they should do the one thing that IS responsible: stay the hell off the road. Not because it makes you a bad driver, but because it's the right thing to do for yourself. It protects you more than it protects any of those other drivers. And now you see, first hand, the problem with not being properly protected. But you're in the 18-24 demographic (that we all have gone through, or will eventually) that believes in the supremacy of INVINCIBILITY. Even Superman had his weakness.

And, believe it or not, I gave you the same answer in that first post, as tcope did, which is exactly what you were looking for: YES your insurance company must provide you with a defense.

But, when you think about it, as I also said, what is there to defend? They are not going to be successful in getting the property damages reduced or limited to a total of $5000. All they can do is try to limit your upside exposure. But they suffer no consequence if you are held responsible for $1,000,000 in damages. The insurance company has limited its exposure, courtesy of you, to $5,000.

And if you stay with them, at $850 per 3 months $3400 per year compared to $1000, it will only take them 2 years and 1 month to recover their loss. You'll be paying on the $50,000-$60,000 loss for many more years than that. Another $100 in premiums 6 months ago would have prevented all of it, and then some.

And you don't even have to renew your coverage with them for them to provide you a defense, because the claim for damages occurred during the term your insurance was in force. That's all that matters. They cannot refuse you a defense even if you are no longer their insured. You paid for it.

Shop around for less costly coverage. And be sure to get quotes for the correct amount of coverage. When it comes to property damage, anything less than $25,000 is too little, and even $50,000 is generally not enough.

Ever see someone who knocked down a street light pole or a tri-color signal pole (the one on the corner that hangs out over traffic. Either of those events starts at $20,000, and some tri-lights start at more than $50,000 with labor to replace them.

Think about all those Lexuses, Mercedes, Audis, and other "luxury" vehicles on the roads where you drive. Any one of them will cost more than $25,000 to replace, and many of them will cost more than $50,000.

My recommendation to you, like to most folks I talk to here in CA, is not less than 100/300/100. For homeowners, 250/500/100 or 300/600/100 depending on the company, and if the homeowner is even remotely concerned about what happens if they do more than $250,000 in damage to another person, for less than $250 per year, they can have a $1,000,000 umbrella liability policy on top of that and their homeowners insurance.

Pay $250 or pay $1,000,000? A or B? Pay $250 per year for the next 20 years, and you've only paid $5000 for $995,000 of net benefit in all that time. That's a pretty fair exchange as far as I'm concerned.

Total Comments: 7

Add your comment