"tanada" wrote in message
ink.net...
223rem wrote:


It would help if you'd stopped being unreasonably angry. The driver of
the van
was obviously at fault; the driver of the sedan may have been speeding,
and driving on a suspended license, but that's not relevant, because
she did not cause the collision.

Try to be thankful that nobody died.


First of all, I am thankful that no one died. Second, the anger and
frustration is normal after an accident. Yes, Mike is at fault. We've
never denied that. However, the insurance company agrees with us that the
woman had to have been driving at excess speed. However, there is no way,
according to GEICO that we can prove it. So Mike takes the ticket and the
hit.

Pam S. emotionally drained right now.

Well, first of all, *nobody* is at fault if it truly *is* an accident - it's
not like Mike said, 'Hmmm, I think I'll purposely drive right into the path
of this speeding vehicle!". However, if I were the police officer in charge
of the accident investigation, I would have to take a hard look at *why*
someone was driving around without a license - it would seem like there is a
pattern of *some* sort of reckless behavior there (either too many traffic
violations or failing to buy the proper insurance) if her license was
suspended. Even if you have the "right of way", speeding can negate your
"right" by causing the other person to misjudge the time it would take to
clear your path. [It's a shame it was raining - there probably wouldn't be
any skid marks to measure to determine how fast she was going. However,
speed limits are set for dry, lighted conditions - if it were raining she
should have been going *slower* than the posted speed limit!]

Hugs,

CatNipped