*His* insurance refuses to reimburse my rental.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Godiva @ Apr 20 2007, 05:03 PM) [snapback]427055[/snapback]</div>

Well there you go. I never saw you mention those herniated dics. Not even once here on Priuschat before the accident. That is our point exactly.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Godiva @ Apr 22 2007, 09:06 PM) [snapback]428147[/snapback]</div>

no kidding! your doing the right thing the right way. Just keep at it tilll you win. For the insurnace company to suggest that you drive a car with headlights that are broken and a hood that may pop open at any time your driving along a street or hiway is just plain stupid and setting you up for a more serious accident, one where you could loose your life. Mind you they'd probably like that at this point. Let us know how you make out.

 

Nobody is suggesting that.

However, you you don't know for a fact you have no internal damage. You need to make ABSOLUTELY SURE that there's nothing else happening. That should very much be a concern of yours. And you should be sure to express that concern, as directly and forcefully as possible, to the insurance adjuster.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Godiva @ Apr 22 2007, 09:06 PM) [snapback]428147[/snapback]</div>

Surprised? I'm not.

But I am glad you were not hurt, and I agree that fraud and perjury would be an unwise route to take.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(chuck_k @ Apr 23 2007, 08:45 AM) [snapback]428242[/snapback]</div>

Some are hinting at it enough to interpret it that way.

 

Do you have underinsured motorist coverage on your policy? Would that cover the other guy's insufficient insurance?

 

The limits of the other driver's insurance policy DO NOT limit his liability. If the company does not pay, you sue him personally (usually in small claims court). He buys insurance to help him pay his liabilities, not to limit them. I have found most people do not understand this.

 

Whether or not you can join the insurance company under this set of facts varies by state. In FL, you can't do it until after you've obtained a judgment against the insured. Strange procedure, but that's how it works here. And of course, you're essentially prohibited from saying the "I word" in front of the jury -- making it appear as if poor Mr. Insured is going it alone. Smart jurors, I think, usually figure out that "Joe Sixpack" isn't paying the freight for the guy in the expensive suit... Smart lawyers make sure that, without ever saying the work, everyone knows who's lurking in the background.

They're just hoping you won't have the gumption to do it. They know that for "small" value cases, it's not worth it to hire a lawyer. Do your homework, and make the ba$tards pay... Good luck with it!

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(KTPhil @ Apr 25 2007, 02:04 PM) [snapback]430005[/snapback]</div>

Very true. We have a whole body of "bad faith" law here that has evolved around the insurance industry's attempts to pretend that their policies are limiting factors. We have zillions of drivers tooling about with $10k liability policies (an absurdity, of course). With ridiculous frequency, we see the insurers, even "reputable" ones, offering 8k to settle a 100k case when their insured has a 10 policy, and we've given them a full month to tender their limits for a full release. It's like they're trying to explode their policy limits. Then they accuse us of "setting them up" for a bad faith claim...

Get the full judgment, including all the stuff you can tack on under CA law (standard costs, I presume, perhaps some others, again, that homework is critical). Begin execution procedures if they don't pay immediately (or in the time allowed under your law).