Dump trucks suck

[Gyrene]

Ok, my girlfriend was driving home from work yesterday, and was following behind a line of dump trucks (our area is undergoing heavy construction right now). She wasn't following too closely, just the normal two seconds. All of a sudden, a rather large rock (so I assume from the damage) falls out of the back of the truck, hits the road, then skips up and through my girlfriend's front windshield. She freaks out, swerves off of the road, but manages, somehow, to get the truck number and company. The truck keeps on driving because he has no idea that anything has happened. She calls the police, they show up and file a report.

So, I call the company today and speak with the area manager, explaining the situation to him. He says that he's sorry that it happened, but the company is not responsible for any damages that occur because of objects falling off of the trucks, they have a sign on the back of their trucks that says so. I told him that didn't seem right, and I'd look into it, but to have a good day and I'll keep in touch.

I'm going to call my lawyer when he gets back from vacation to discuss this with him, but I'd like to know more right now. Do dump trucks escape all responsibility of damages just by posting a sign on the back of their truck? Or is it some understood law that I've just never heard about? It's kinda like me wearing a sign that says "Not responsible for damages occured when I flip out and kill someone." If they're allowed to do this, why can't we all just wear signs denying all responsibility for certain actions? And if it's an understood law, then why did the police even bother filing a report? This is pissing me off, it's $860 out of pocket if the construction company gets out of this.

 

[Electric Amish]

Can you think of a better way to move stuff?

 

[HiTek21]

I always wondered who was at fault if something fell out of someone elses vehicle and damaged yours. I almost got hit by a small safe that fell out of the back of this moving van that had the back gate open.

 

[ThaGrandCow]

I'm sorry to say it, but I really don't think the company is responsible. They might be if they were hauling logs and the chain broke and crushed a car, but a rock taking a bad skip on the road doesn't seem like they're liable. Good luck getting them to pay, but I really don't think you'll get anything out of them

 

[filmmaker]

Stay back 500 feet

 

[Gyrene]

Originally posted by: Electric Amish
Can you think of a better way to move stuff?

Maybe I should make the title, Construction companies who put signs on the back of dump trucks to shirk responsibility suck, but that just seemed kinda long. I know that they're useful, I just wanted to express frustration.

 

[Gyrene]

Originally posted by: filmmaker

Stay back 500 feet

Actually they say stay back 100 feet here, and I'm pretty sure she was, if not more.

 

[Jzero]

I recall reading somewhere that those signs do not necessarily absolve them of their responsibility.

 

[hopeless879]

I don't think they would be able to waive any iability just because they have a sign on their truck. It just doesn't make sense to me. I think that if you have a decent lawyer, you shouldn't have any problem getting reimbursed for it. Although, I don't know anything about the laws, this is just my guess.

 

[slag]

Here's the law in Kansas, courtesy of my wife who is an insurance adjuster and has worked with tons of these claims before.

1. If a truck kicks up an object off the road and it damages your car, they are not liable for that damage. The object came from the road and is not the fault of the driver of the truck. Its just a hazard of driving.

2. If something falls off a truck and strikes your vehicle, then the driver of the truck is responsible for the damage from the object. For example, if the truck driver was hauling rocks and the rocks fell out and hit your vehicle, then they are at fault. Just because they post a sign saying they are not responsible for damages does not make it so. They put that sign there hoping many people will just take it as gospel and not pursue the truck company but they are at fault. In your story, replace the word "rock" with "piece of lumber" and the outcome remains the same. They are at fault for not securing their load.

Sounds to me like the truck company is 100% liable for the damage called since the item fell off their truck and hit your vehicle.

 

[rahvin]

Originally posted by: slag
Here's the law in Kansas, courtesy of my wife who is an insurance adjuster and has worked with tons of these claims before.

1. If a truck kicks up an object off the road and it damages your car, they are not liable for that damage. The object came from the road and is not the fault of the driver of the truck. Its just a hazard of driving.

2. If something falls off a truck and strikes your vehicle, then the driver of the truck is responsible for the damage from the object. For example, if the truck driver was hauling rocks and the rocks fell out and hit your vehicle, then they are at fault. Just because they post a sign saying they are not responsible for damages does not make it so. They put that sign there hoping many people will just take it as gospel and not pursue the truck company but they are at fault. In your story, replace the word "rock" with "piece of lumber" and the outcome remains the same. They are at fault for not securing their load.

Sounds to me like the truck company is 100% liable for the damage called since the item fell off their truck and hit your vehicle.

This should be true in any state. A sign does not absolve them of responsiblity.

 

[Gyrene]

Thanks, slag, I'll call the area manager back and tell him he can expect a call from my lawyer within the next few days.

 

[iamwiz82]

how can you prove if came off the truck as opposed to getting kicked up by the tires?

 

[CraigRT]

honestly i don't think there's much you can do

stay WAY back ......

 

[Gyrene]

Originally posted by: iamwiz82
how can you prove if came off the truck as opposed to getting kicked up by the tires?

Considering the size of the rock, I'd say it's pretty damn near impossible for a tire to kick it up. It's about twice the size of a baseball.

 

[jemcam]

Originally posted by: rahvin

Originally posted by: slag
Here's the law in Kansas, courtesy of my wife who is an insurance adjuster and has worked with tons of these claims before.

1. If a truck kicks up an object off the road and it damages your car, they are not liable for that damage. The object came from the road and is not the fault of the driver of the truck. Its just a hazard of driving.

2. If something falls off a truck and strikes your vehicle, then the driver of the truck is responsible for the damage from the object. For example, if the truck driver was hauling rocks and the rocks fell out and hit your vehicle, then they are at fault. Just because they post a sign saying they are not responsible for damages does not make it so. They put that sign there hoping many people will just take it as gospel and not pursue the truck company but they are at fault. In your story, replace the word "rock" with "piece of lumber" and the outcome remains the same. They are at fault for not securing their load.

Sounds to me like the truck company is 100% liable for the damage called since the item fell off their truck and hit your vehicle.

This should be true in any state. A sign does not absolve them of responsiblity.

Partially true. If you hit something or something hits you that is airborne, it is usually covered by your comprehensive coverage, vs. hitting something that is on the ground, which is covered by your collision. In any case, have your girlfriend make a claim with her insurance company and they will pursue subrogation against the dump truck owner, which will eventually make them pay everything, including her deductible.

Just make sure that they cover it under comprehensive and not collision since in most states comprehensive is not a "chargeable" loss, meaning they shouldn't (or can't, depending on the state) hold it against you when it comes time to renew your policy. Again, this varies by state law, but should hold somewhat true in all states.

 

[Gyrene]

Thanks, jemcam, I'll make sure we do that.

 

[jemcam]

Originally posted by: dtyn
Thanks, jemcam, I'll make sure we do that.

Any other damage besides the windshield? If not, she may not have a deductible at all. If there is only w/s damage, some states won't allow any deductibles to be taken on glass only. If there is any interior damage, exterior molding damage, or paint damage, you have to pay your comprehensive deductible.

 

[Gyrene]

Originally posted by: jemcam

Originally posted by: dtyn
Thanks, jemcam, I'll make sure we do that.

Any other damage besides the windshield? If not, she may not have a deductible at all. If there is only w/s damage, some states won't allow any deductibles to be taken on glass only. If there is any interior damage, exterior molding damage, or paint damage, you have to pay your comprehensive deductible.

No, just the windshield, though her passanger side seat has a slight tear in the leather around the headrest, but that won't be too much to fix.

 

[Thegonagle]

It's best not to follow too closely behind dump trucks. The two second rule is out with dump trucks anyway. Were you with her? Do you KNOW she wasn't following too closely? And why couldn't she manage to stay on the road?

It's probably best that she just call her insurance company (assuming she has full coverage), make a claim, and let them scrap it out with the trucking company, or thier insurance.

 

[Howard]

Was she driving your Supra?

 

[GroundZero]

Motorists may
want to heed signs to stay 200 feet
behind dump trucks, but the signs
on the trucks may carry no legal
weight if a falling rock breaks their
windshield.
Some haulers and firms that
insure them say the warning should
provide legal protection because fol-lowing
too closely is against the law
anyway. Truck operators say they
should not be responsible if rocks
from the road fly up and nick a tail-gater?s
windshield.
But officials say the signs give an
inaccurate impression that
motorists can?t pursue damages if
debris from the bed of a truck flies
off and breaks car glass.
?As far as those signs, it?s going to
be highly questionable whether that
releases them from any liability,?
said Randy Ort, spokesman for the
state Highway and Transportation
Department.
?I can?t find anything in the law
or anywhere else that supports
putting up those signs,? added
Robert Wilson, the department?s
chief counsel. ?It?s just a basic mat-ter
of liability to me. That sign itself
doesn?t exonerate them.?
Arkansas law prohibits a truck
from hauling sand, gravel or rock
on paved public roads without a
tarp covering the bed. But the law
makes exceptions for loads that are
6 inches below the panels around
the perimeter of the truck.
Some insurance carriers also
refer to a road-hazard provision that
they say limits liability from rocks
or other debris that may be kicked
up by a vehicle?s tires and cause
damage.
?If it comes out of the trailer or
the bed of the ... truck, it?s covered
under the trucker?s liability,? Little
Rock insurance broker Pansy Blan-ton
said.
?But if a rock flies up (from the
road) and hits your windshield,
that?s not their responsibility,? said
Karen Regan of Ramsey, Krug, Far-rell
& Lensing insurance brokers
for contractors. ?You?re following
too close.?
R.J. Jones, owner of R.J. Bob
Jones Inc. of Benton, said he?s seen
the stickers on other dump trucks
but said he does not use them on his
two trucks or know where the idea
originated.
?But I think there would be some
legal protection there, yes, because
they?ve been warned,? Jones said.
?There are people who will try to
run you down and say gravel came
off your truck and broke their
windshield.?
Proving rocks or gravel came
from a particular truck can be diffi-cult,
but motorists often try because
a lot can be riding on who picks up
the tab for a vehicle?s broken glass,
AAA Club spokesman Mike Right
said.
Windshield damage is the most
frequent claim made on an auto-insurance
policy, according to
Right, the AAA?s vice president for
public affairs in St. Louis.
?Depending on the make and
model of vehicle, you could be talk-ing
some significant money. It?s not
unusual to go for several hundred
dollars, and the cost far exceeds the
deductible amount a person has on
his policy,? he said.
Because of deductibles some-times
ranges from $200 to $500, even
a motorist with collision and com-prehensive
coverage pays the vast
majority of the cost, Right said,
?and they get a little more excited
when the money to replace or
repair a windshield comes out of
their own pocket.?
Jerry Nabholz, owner of A&B
Dirt Moving in Conway, said he
buys four or five windshields a year
for people who claim rocks from his
four dump trucks damage their
vehicles, rather than reporting the
damage on his insurance coverage.
The stickers probably don?t give
truckers any more legal protection
but may help them get the message
across to other vehicles to keep
their distance and reduce the risk of
damage, Nabholz said.
?We don?t have any on our
trucks, but I have seen some of
them myself,? he said. ?As far as
having stickers, my personal opin-ion
is that they?re trying to let people
know to stay back. It might just
be their way of saying please.?
Such a plea carries no legal
authority, according to Chief Ron
Burks of the Arkansas Highway
Police, the agency that monitors
and governs truck traffic on the
state?s highways.
Any vehicle can be ticketed for
following too closely. The rule of
thumb is to keep a car-length dis-tance
for every 10 mph of speed,
Burks said.

 

[Thegonagle]

Originally posted by: dtyn
Thanks, slag, I'll call the area manager back and tell him he can expect a call from my lawyer within the next few days.

Does she have full coverage? Just let her insurance company handle it. That's what she pays them for. That's what they do. Her insurance compay will go after the trucking company, and ultimately, will probably settle with the the trucking company's insurance company.

You're just wasting your money bringing your lawyer into it.

 

[Gyrene]

Originally posted by: Thegonagle
It's best not to follow too closely behind dump trucks. The two second rule is out with dump trucks anyway. Were you with her? Do you KNOW she wasn't following too closely? And why couldn't she manage to stay on the road?

It's probably best that she just call her insurance company (assuming she has full coverage), make a claim, and let them scrap it out with the trucking company, or thier insurance.

No, I wasn't with her, if I was I'd be dead. Have you ever had a huge rock come through your windshield while you were going 55 mph, it'd probably freak you out, and with the glass cracking you might not know what to do. She freaked out at what happened, couldn't see, so she went off the road. She could keep driving without being able to see. I based my assumptions off of what she told me, and the fact that she never, ever, speeds or breaks a traffic law. She's a paranoid girl when it comes to driving due to past incidents involving cars and family.

 

[Gyrene]

Originally posted by: Howard
Was she driving your Supra?

Hell no, nobody drives that car but me. If my Supra had been hit, that driver would be dead.