Accident report GRRRRRR OT and all that

"tanada" wrote in message
ink.net...
Geico is refusing to pay us anything for the van. They are going to
replace this woman's car. I feel so frustrated and angry right now.
Please help me get over my anger with this woman and the insurance
system that will reward an illegal driver.

Not to rub salt in a wound, but if you have been paying for the insurance,
how can Geico refuse to cover the cost or partial cost of the van?
Something seems really wrong here. Did you have comprehensive coverage or
just liability? Hubby has been in more accidents than I care to count and
non his fault. He may have some suggestions, besides painting a bulls eye
on the side of the car. (grin)

Diane

pmendhall wrote:


Not to rub salt in a wound, but if you have been paying for the insurance,
how can Geico refuse to cover the cost or partial cost of the van?
Something seems really wrong here. Did you have comprehensive coverage or
just liability? Hubby has been in more accidents than I care to count and
non his fault. He may have some suggestions, besides painting a bulls eye
on the side of the car. (grin)

Diane


We thought we had full coverage, but geico says not.


Pam s. depressed

On Wed, 04 May 2005 03:21:22 GMT, tanada wrote:

pmendhall wrote:


Not to rub salt in a wound, but if you have been paying for the insurance,
how can Geico refuse to cover the cost or partial cost of the van?
Something seems really wrong here. Did you have comprehensive coverage or
just liability? Hubby has been in more accidents than I care to count and
non his fault. He may have some suggestions, besides painting a bulls eye
on the side of the car. (grin)

Diane


We thought we had full coverage, but geico says not.


Pam s. depressed

I would recommend finding your policy and statements, and making sure
what type of coverage the printed documents say you have.

My first traffic accident was when I was making a left turn through
stopped traffic, and was broadsided by a car that was coming straight.
Ordinarily, I would have been considered to be at fault, but the car
that hit me was driving down the shoulder of the road, not in an
official driving lane, so the other driver was cited, not me. He
refused to submit the claim to his insurance company, so I finally had
to sue him in small-claims court and have his paycheck garnished
(i.e., have the court order that his employer withhold part of each
paycheck, and issue the payment to me, until the damage to my car was
paid off).

--
John F. Eldredge --
PGP key available from http://pgp.mit.edu
"Reserve your right to think, for even to think wrongly is better
than not to think at all." -- Hypatia of Alexandria

"tanada" wrote in message
ink.net...
OK, got the police report today. Mike was given a ticket for $10 and $100
court costs for "Failure to Yield." The woman who hit him claimed that
she was only doing 45 mph and had hit the brakes before she hit Mike.
I'll Post an album of the damages to both vehicles later. BTW she was
cited for driving while her license was revoked. Mike is still considered
totally at fault for the accident.


If the other driver didn't have a license, I'd guess she also didn't have
valid insurance. Seems to me that would be one requirement by the insurance
company.

Did she leave any skid marks? They can tell a lot about speed etc by that.

Seems to me with no license it was illegal for her to even be there so to
that degree it would be her fault anyway. But legal stuff doesn't always
work out fair.

Jo

"tanada" wrote in message
ink.net...
We thought we had full coverage, but geico says not.

What does your policy or last statement say? You will probably have a
printed copy somewhere. Seems like maybe you have a claims adjuster who is
trying to avoid work, avoid payment or both.

If the other driver didn't have a valid license her insurance is probably
invalid as well.

Hubby says you could easily make a case that since the driver didn't have a
valid license, you could easily make a case that would find her at fault
because she didn't have a valid license. She was driving without a license,
so she was at fault for hitting your Rob and Mike, not the other way around.

Why in the world did the police person not cite her as at fault as well.
(Amazed)

Diane

tanada wrote:

OK, got the police report today. Mike was given a ticket for $10 and
$100 court costs for "Failure to Yield." The woman who hit him claimed
that she was only doing 45 mph and had hit the brakes before she hit
Mike. I'll Post an album of the damages to both vehicles later. BTW
she was cited for driving while her license was revoked. Mike is still
considered totally at fault for the accident.

Geico is refusing to pay us anything for the van. They are going to
replace this woman's car. I feel so frustrated and angry right now.
Please help me get over my anger with this woman and the insurance
system that will reward an illegal driver.

Even though the woman was driving with a revoked license, the woman was
judged to be not at fault.

There's something to be said for "no fault" insurance (which
some states have, or used to have). The down side is that
the premiums can be a good deal higher for "safe" drivers
than they are in other states, since regardless of who's at
fault, both drivers collect from their own companies, but at
least you DO collect!

On Tue, 03 May 2005 22:15:03 GMT, tanada wrote:

OK, got the police report today. Mike was given a ticket for $10 and
$100 court costs for "Failure to Yield." The woman who hit him claimed
that she was only doing 45 mph and had hit the brakes before she hit
Mike. I'll Post an album of the damages to both vehicles later. BTW
she was cited for driving while her license was revoked. Mike is still
considered totally at fault for the accident.

Geico is refusing to pay us anything for the van. They are going to
replace this woman's car. I feel so frustrated and angry right now.
Please help me get over my anger with this woman and the insurance
system that will reward an illegal driver.

Even though the woman was driving with a revoked license, the woman was
judged to be not at fault. I want to know what she did to lose her
license. The damage to both her Lincoln Town Car and the van is
horrendous. I don't think that she could have been doing only 45 in a
45 at the time of impact. It is a long straight stretch of road. There
is now way that she couldn't have seen Mike and that big white van.
Yes, it was raining, but not heavily. So that shouldn't be an excuse
for her. Again, Please help me get over my anger with this. I upset
Rob and Jim by calling her what I think of her, and I don't usually use
that kind of language.

And don't ask me about the VA and their treatment of Rob lately.

Pam S. sill living a nightmare.

{{{{{Pam}}}}}}

That really stinks. I'm so sorry you're going through all this.

Purrs that things will start to get better for you and Rob soon.

Ginger-lyn

Home Pages:
http://www.spiritrealm.com/summer/
http://www.angelfire.com/folk/glsummer (homepage & cats)
http://freepages.genealogy.rootsweb....mmer/index.htm (genealogy)
http://www.i-love-cats.com/meow/glsummer/ (The Violence Against
Animals in Movies Website)

On 2005-05-04, pmendhall penned:
"tanada" wrote in message
ink.net...
We thought we had full coverage, but geico says not.

What does your policy or last statement say? You will probably have
a printed copy somewhere. Seems like maybe you have a claims
adjuster who is trying to avoid work, avoid payment or both.

Even if you don't have a printed copy, the ins. companies I've used
allow you to view your policy online.

--
monique, who spoils Oscar unmercifully

pictures: http://www.bounceswoosh.org/rpca

On 2005-05-04, Annie Wxill penned:

When we were in Oregon, the no-fault insurance law was in effect. I suppose
it still is, but I don't know.
Any way, fault is not even considered for an accident. You pay your
insurance, and it covers you only, regardless of who is at fault. That
means that you are covered as long as you buy insurance. You do not have to
pay extra to protect yourself against uninsured drivers. If the driver does
not buy insurance, the uninsured driver not only gets cited for not having
insurance, but also does not collect from your insurance.
In your case, not only would your insurance company not buy the woman a new
car (her insurance would do that), your company would have to take care of
you.
I wish we had no-fault insurance everywhere.


Is this really the way it works? I could've sworn we (Colorado)
recently switched to no-fault, but I've been hit twice since I got my
car last year, and both times the other guy's insurance company paid
for the damages.

--
monique, who spoils Oscar unmercifully

pictures: http://www.bounceswoosh.org/rpca

Monique Y. Mudama wrote:


Is this really the way it works? I could've sworn we (Colorado)
recently switched to no-fault, but I've been hit twice since I got my
car last year, and both times the other guy's insurance company paid
for the damages.

Maybe there was a "changeover" period before it actually
took effect? SFAIK, Annie's description is the way it's
SUPPOSED to work. (Although there may be differences in
details, in the various states that have it.)