• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Today's car accident victim is...me

Page 4 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Originally posted by: sactoking
Originally posted by: SarcasticDwarf

Thanks. Now to spend to hours deciphering it.
Click to expand...

33-18-242 (1): Your bad faith claim is independent of any first party bad faith claims (i.e. those made by the insured person)
33-18-424 (2): You only need to prove that this one thing was bad faith, not that the defendant made bad faith practices part of their normal business practices
33-18-242 (3): Does not apply, only applies to first-person insureds
33-18-242 (4): Damages can be consequential (i.e., for the damage caused) and exemplary (i.e., to punish the wrongdoer)
33-18-242 (5): Insurer can't be guilty of bad faith if their actions were legal
33-18-242 (6)(a): Does not apply
33-18-242 (6)(b): You can't file for bad faith until AFTER the underlying claim has been settled
33-18-242 (7)(a): Does not apply
33-18-242 (7)(b): You statute to file a bad faith lawsuit is 1 year from the date you settle your claim
33-18-242 (8): Does not really apply, it just defines 'insurer'
Click to expand...

Nifty, thanks!

 
Originally posted by: Rumpltzer
Originally posted by: eits
Originally posted by: Codewiz
Originally posted by: eits
go to a chiropractor
Click to expand...

Seriously, do you have a hardon for chiropractors. I see you recommend them in every thread you can. WTF
Click to expand...

people don't usually think to see a chiropractor when things like this happens (or other things happen). that's why i drop the comments. it will probably end up saving them a lot of wasted money, time, degeneration, and pain down the road if they go to see a chiropractor before they see an md in many cases, this being one of those cases.
Click to expand...
I dislocated my pinkie this weekend. It was pointing off to the right after my hand slipped off the edge of the tub and hit the floor. I couldn't believe it.

I stared at it for a few minutes, wondered what to do, then I pulled on it until it went back into place.

Should I go to the chiropractor? 😀
Click to expand...

for that? nah. just keep cracking your knuckles, do hand strengthening exercises, take plenty of vit c, and ice your finger.
 
Originally posted by: Onita
Originally posted by: eits
Originally posted by: Codewiz
Originally posted by: eits
go to a chiropractor
Click to expand...

Seriously, do you have a hardon for chiropractors. I see you recommend them in every thread you can. WTF
Click to expand...

people don't usually think to see a chiropractor when things like this happens (or other things happen). that's why i drop the comments. it will probably end up saving them a lot of wasted money, time, degeneration, and pain down the road if they go to see a chiropractor before they see an md in many cases, this being one of those cases.
Click to expand...

And that is part of the reason that chiros have bad reputations.
Click to expand...

no, they have a bad reputation because people don't know what they can do. all they know is what the ama used to say about them for 80 or so years.
 
Originally posted by: jagec
Originally posted by: eits
go to a chiropractor
Click to expand...
I bet you'd recommend a chiropractor if I so much as stubbed my toe on a couch cushion.:roll:
Click to expand...
As long as you didn't stub it on a couch cushion in his house.

---

Talk of a filing a civil suit or obtaining an attorney is premature. The OP should calm down and let his insurance company deal with it and he should no longer speak with the opposing insurance company. That is what he is paying his IC for. Any calls he receives from now from the other IC should be referred to his IC. Any paperwork he receives from the other IC should be sent or cleared by his IC. The other IC "first offer" of 80% is an "opening bid" or a low bid or a sucker's offer - and as such you never take it. And never over the phone and without consultation with your own IC.


 
Originally posted by: Fatdog
Either way your insurance is going to go up, unfortunately. Even if you don't call them, they will see it on your record when they pull it for renewal purposes. Might as well call them and see what they recommend.
Click to expand...

your an idiot!!
 
Originally posted by: JEDIYoda
Originally posted by: Fatdog
Either way your insurance is going to go up, unfortunately. Even if you don't call them, they will see it on your record when they pull it for renewal purposes. Might as well call them and see what they recommend.
Click to expand...

your an idiot!!
Click to expand...

Actually it is true if you call the national number it will count against you.
 
So here's a question.

1. Friend's car got scratched by an idiot trying to pull out of a parking spot. Instead of trying to pull out first and THEN turning the wheel, said idiot turns wheel while pulling out.
2. Friend got idiot's info, but did not file a police report.
3. Parking attendant saw whole thing.
4. Idiot cuts off all communication.
5. Friend pays his deductible and has his own insurance take care of things.

Leaving out the fact that my friend should've filed a police report, the idiot driver SHOULD pay my friend's deductible, right?
 
Originally posted by: Turin39789
next time swerve
Click to expand...

I think I did really, really well to notice him in time enough to hit the brakes and shed most of my speed. And considering that the only direction I could swerve was left (directly into where he was) it was unlikely that anyone in that situation would have swerved.
 
Originally posted by: weirdichi
So here's a question.

1. Friend's car got scratched by an idiot trying to pull out of a parking spot. Instead of trying to pull out first and THEN turning the wheel, said idiot turns wheel while pulling out.
2. Friend got idiot's info, but did not file a police report.
3. Parking attendant saw whole thing.
4. Idiot cuts off all communication.
5. Friend pays his deductible and has his own insurance take care of things.

Leaving out the fact that my friend should've filed a police report, the idiot driver SHOULD pay my friend's deductible, right?
Click to expand...

No, the idiot driver's INSURANCE should pay the full claim. And he should call the police to see if he can still file a report.
 
Originally posted by: SarcasticDwarf
Originally posted by: weirdichi
So here's a question.

1. Friend's car got scratched by an idiot trying to pull out of a parking spot. Instead of trying to pull out first and THEN turning the wheel, said idiot turns wheel while pulling out.
2. Friend got idiot's info, but did not file a police report.
3. Parking attendant saw whole thing.
4. Idiot cuts off all communication.
5. Friend pays his deductible and has his own insurance take care of things.

Leaving out the fact that my friend should've filed a police report, the idiot driver SHOULD pay my friend's deductible, right?
Click to expand...

No, the idiot driver's INSURANCE should pay the full claim. And he should call the police to see if he can still file a report.
Click to expand...

That's what I thought. My friend says the insurance is taking care of it, but I suggested he get his friend of a friend's lawyer friend to write a friendly reminder letter to the idiot to speed up the process. It's been over 6 months now though. The bottom line is, if it wasn't your fault and the other is 100% at fault, then you shouldn't have to pay anything when it all comes down to the end.
 
I'm sorry to see that this has been dragging on for so long.

I know what it is that the other insurer is doing, I've done it a few times myself (part of the reason I quit claims, couldn't live with myself). The adjuster is under tremendous pressure to assess 'comp neg' on as many claims as possible. Since the other driver made it across what, 3 lanes of traffic AND a turn lane (that's what I see on the street view and PR) it seems reasonable to say that you *should* have been able to avoid the accident.

I also know that's a BS tactic. If you were going the speed limit, there's not much you could do. Swerving left would take you into oncoming traffic. Swerving right would take you into the impact. Even though the skids weren't measured, you DID lay down rubber, meaning you braked to avoid. You're 100% in the right and I encourage you to continue to fight the good fight.
 
I finally got my car back today after it sitting in the shop for 27 days being fixed. Apparently the hood for a 02 Mercury is obsolete and they were trying to locate one.

Coincidentally, received a letter from my ins. co in the mail today letting me know that they are going after the other guys insurance company for the whole amount, so I may end up getting my deducticble back. One can only hope.
 
Originally posted by: sactoking
I'm sorry to see that this has been dragging on for so long.

I know what it is that the other insurer is doing, I've done it a few times myself (part of the reason I quit claims, couldn't live with myself). The adjuster is under tremendous pressure to assess 'comp neg' on as many claims as possible. Since the other driver made it across what, 3 lanes of traffic AND a turn lane (that's what I see on the street view and PR) it seems reasonable to say that you *should* have been able to avoid the accident.

I also know that's a BS tactic. If you were going the speed limit, there's not much you could do. Swerving left would take you into oncoming traffic. Swerving right would take you into the impact. Even though the skids weren't measured, you DID lay down rubber, meaning you braked to avoid. You're 100% in the right and I encourage you to continue to fight the good fight.
Click to expand...

I did brake to avoid. I could not really safely swerve (which is something their insurance company is saying I should have done) because it would have required perfect handling (slick roads) and good timing and angle judgment to turn my vehicle INTO the direction he was coming from.

Their insurance company letter stated that the other driver believed I was going OVER the speed limit. Even the state auditor's office commented on that as they said it is ridiculous to claim that when there was zero evidence of it. But that is really what gets me. I understand why they are doing what they are doing, but it seems a bit odd. Regardless this case is going to inter-company arbitration AND has a state auditors office complaint filed...so they will lose indirectly if not directly.

I also just spoke with my insurance company and they recorded a statement from me for arbitration. I had thought it had already gone there but they were apparently waiting to hear if I was going to need a rental or not. My new bumper gets installed tomorrow so any supplements will be done then and it will hopefully be filed by the end of the week.
 
Do you have a witness to the accident? The insurance company is going to argue that you hit him based on the damages to the car. Your police report is good evidence but follow up with the courts. Arizona keeps the records online.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top