Does a police report opinion decide accident liability?

Status
Not open for further replies.
kevinaz06 said:
I still have not seen one shred of evidence that you were negligent in any way. Were you accused of speeding? It looks as if you realized that there was a potential for an accident and did the best you could to get out of the way.
I am going to guess at what mabe comming into play. I am assuming that you either dont have insurance, or do not carry collision coverage. The reason I say this is that in your state, if you are 51% at fault, you cannot collect from the other parties insurance co. If he knows that you dont have collision coverage or insurance at all, he knows that your insurance company wont/cant come after him.
Neglegence really isnt a negotiation, it's something that has to be proven, and then assigned a resonable and explainable percentage.
He has not given you (that I have seen) one single piece of evidence that you had a part in this. He cannot assign you any neglegence due to snow, ice, maintanance to the road, those are all contributing factors, but not an explanation as to how you are neglegent.
His job shouldnt be to lessen the cost that his company will have to pay, it should be to properly investigate, protect his insured by properly indemnifying the people he has caused damages to so they dont sue the insured, and to make all of these decisions based upon your states laws.
I would stand firm on the fact that you are not neglegent. If he is not willing to budge, request his decision in writting and let him know that you need that so when you send your formal complaint to DOI, they will have all of the evidence.
I know this is probably frustrating, but it looks as if you vehicle is still driveable, hang in there and play the game.
Oh, sorry to reffer to you as man, I just assumed that you were the person in the photos!
Click to expand...

awww.thank you KevinAZ for hanging in here with me. And your right, I only have liability on my vehicle because of its age. And no, I was not accused of speeding, I wasnt accused of anything that I know of...actually, I dont know what the other gal is saying happened, I tried to get a copy of her version of the accident from the Sheriff dept but they wouldnt give it to me because it contains social security numbers and DL numbers etc. So I can only speculate here. The adjuster has already verbally told me that he feels they were over 51% at fault, but he is saying that they are not 100% at fault and is asking me to pick a percentage of fault (a number) and I told him zero percent. I did call my insurance company yesterday, I figured if the other company is trying to stick me with comparative negligence, then my insurance company would have an interest in protecting me (and their wallet) (I dont know if that was a good idea) I explained to my ins company about what the adjuster is trying to do...I dont know if it was a good idea or not because my ins company is sounding too kick back about it...they are telling me...ohhhh...when we see a "he said...she said" accident where its your word against her word and there are no witnesses...we normally end up settling those claims as a comparative negligence...but I insisted I am not liable in any way so they had me forward my accident pictures to them...I hope they dont buckle and give in to the other companies demands of comparative negligence because then my rates will probably go up and I didnt do anything wrong. Yes my vehicle is still driveable..lol...but its a little humiliating driving around a truck with a huge smash in the side of it...its a slap in the face to women drivers everywhere..lol...And regarding referring to me as a man...thats okay...I wasnt offended...it just made me smile...I thought you were referring to me as a man because I came across as tough...that made my day...(smiling).
 
Oh Kevin, by the way...I DID receive one offer in writing from the adjuster...their collision estimator came to a figure of appx $4300.00 as my total collsion damages so the adjuster sent me an offer of $2150 and the offer contained all the verbage that the other party still has the right to sue me later if they choose to...well needless to say..the offer is collecting dust here on my desk...
 
Hi Kevin...The following is a copy of the decision letter received today from their adjuster as to why he feels I am partly at fault...

Dear Ms. :

Thank you for your cooperation in connection with your claim on the above matter.

As you probably know, our obligation, as an insurer, is not to pay all losses, but to reimburse you only if our insured is legally liable for causing your damage. We must be guided by all information available to us, including the report of our insured and any other witnesses acquainted with the facts.

After careful consideration, we do not believe our insured is fully responsible for your damage, and for this reason, we must inform you that we cannot pay this claim in it's entirety. Our basis for this decision is as follows: Our insured indicates she was going up the hill. The road narrowed to an 8 foot width. When each of the drivers saw each other both took evasive action. One pulled to the right with the rear of the vehicle pivoting partway out in the road. The other applied her brakes to avoid impact. The impact pushed your vehicle back to the side. It is evident that two vehicles entered a single lane width area, both attempted to avoid and inspite of their efforts the accident occurred. When applying the Nevada Comparative Negligence laws it is evident that this is not a 100% accident fully the responsibility of one driver. Both drivers were attempting to enter the same single width road at the same time. It appears our insured does not have 100% negligence, the cause of this loss was due to combination of actions by both drivers. Therefore we are unwilling to pay you 100% of your damages.

Secondly, the damages you are claiming are excessive. You are attempting to collect total loss damages as well as repair damages. On the total loss valuation the valuations are not from the local area. Based on our evaluation the total damage of the vehicle is $2,775.00 plus sales tax of $180.38 plus license transfer of 28.25 for a total value of $2,983.63. From this a salvage value deduction would apply for a net loss of $2,555.87. That figure plus loss of use of $560.00 would constitute full payment of your property damage claim at $3,115.87.

Our previous offer of (1) $2,150.00 to you (with your retention of the vehicle) and (2) $307.52 for temporary repairs to the window, come to a total of $2,457.52. We still feel this offer is a reasonable compromise after considering the facts of the accident and the damages. Please sign and return the enclosed RELEASE FOR PROPERTY DAMAGE ONLY and I will send you a draft for $2,150.00.

As I indicated, we are making this decision based on the evidence we have available. If you have any information or witnesses which may affect this decision, please provide it or them to us for further consideration.

Sincerely,
 
A few questions.
How far out in the road was the rear of your vehicle?
Is this the road both of you travel on a regular basis?
What amount of damages are you claiming for the vehicle and how did you get to that number?
Are there any witnesses? I think I remember you saying no.
Who is responsable for maintaining the roads?
Are there any contributing factors on your side listed on the police report?
 
kevinaz06 said:
A few questions.
How far out in the road was the rear of your vehicle?
Is this the road both of you travel on a regular basis?
What amount of damages are you claiming for the vehicle and how did you get to that number?
Are there any witnesses? I think I remember you saying no.
Who is responsable for maintaining the roads?
Are there any contributing factors on your side listed on the police report?
Click to expand...

Actually, I wasnt out in the road...I was already off the road..maybe 6 inches of my vehicle was touching the roadway....I viewed my pictures carefully, and it appears that her impact may have pushed me an additional 5-6 inches into the snowbank...but I was not protruding into the roadway for her to cause me to "pivot" as the adjuster says. The damages I asked for...I did an internet search...printed out 3 vehicles like mine that were for sale...they ranged in price from $4900 to $5900...I added all 3 numbers and divided by 3 to come to my vehicle ACV..I was unable to locate vehicles in my immediate town so I had to use vehicles located in Texas and Montana...but in all likelihood, if and when I buy another vehilce, I would have to travel 4 hours to Salt Lake City Utah to find another vehicle like mine. I also added 560 for loss of use...so my total settlement offer to him was appx $6,300. There were no witnesses. No one is responsible for maintaining the roads...we live in the desert....30 miles from town. There are no contributing factors on the police report regarding me. On the police report it has Fault checked by the other gals name and it also says that she was traveling too fast for conditions. I was carefully viewing my pictures...they are 8 megapixel so they can REALLY be blown up to view detail...I noticed that you can clearly see the point of impact debris in the snow next to my truck on the side of the road...not in the middle of the road (if she would have hit me in the middle of the road and "pushed" me into the snow bank...then it would stand to reason that the debris would be in the middle of the road. At the accident scene, I took a picture of the inside of my truck ...the glass...broken mirror etc...and you can see that my truck was in 4 wheel low..which MEANS...I can only drive 10 mph max in that gear.
 
I would start off writting a letter to the adjuster stating that you do not believe that you are at fault for this accident at all. The road conditions were snowpacked and icy, you were exercising extreme caution due to you being familiar with the road and the road conditions. The other party has the same obligations as you do, she is familiar with the road and the conditions. Given that both of you are familiar with both, the other parts should have been exercising the same extreme caution as you were. It is evident on the police report that she was not. It clearly states that she was not. Point of impact clearly shows that had the other party been using extreme caution, she could have passed with no impact. What other evasive action could I have done to avoid the accident? I saw the other party comming, at a greater that normal speed for the conditions, talking on her cell, the only thing I could do was to pull over into the snowbank. I think that given the same situation, just about everybody would have reacted the same way to try and avoid the accident. The fact that the rear of my vehicle was in the road approx 6 in, has no bearing on any liability on my part. If she would have hit me with enough force to move my vehicle, a large suv vs a small unibody suv, the front of her car would be wiped out. Clearly there isnt any structual damage to the frame of the other parties car, therefore, she did not have enough force to push me. Look at the debris in the photos, they are right where the impact happened. Your insured had a greater duty to drive at a resonable speed and exercise caution while driving the snow pact roads that day. The fact that we were trying to occupy the same narrow area in the road has no bearing as well, again if your insured had been cautious, knowing the conditions of the road, and being familiar with that stretch, she knew that at this point in the road there might be another vehicle comming. Your insured again had a greater duty to exercise caution given the road conditions, and she did not. I will accept nothing less than 0% liability on my behalf for the reasons above. If this were to go to arbitration or to court, I am very confident that they would see I did not breach any duty's, the duty I owed of driving appropriatly for the conditions and taking evasive action were fulfilled. Your insured is clearly at fault and I would like this resolved asap.
-
Use the context in the ifo i just typed, it has alot of insurance lingo, that will make the adjuster go "she knows whats up". If you cant get him to do anything, talk to his manager. Adjuster are graded on how quickly and accuratly they can settle claims. If you are being resonable, his manager is going to want him to get this file closed.
You did a good job on the value of your vehicle. You do need to try and find three comps in your area though. Salt Lake should have quite a few, call three dealers and ask them what they would actually sell it for, not list price but sell price. Document all of that. The insurance company owes for all of the fees and taxs, those should be included, and the adjuster is right about salvage value, if you are going to keep the vehicle that should be deducted from the settlement. Just make him prove where he called to get that value.
All and all you did a great job of documenting the scene and damages.
Let me know how it goes and when you are ready to discuss the injury settlement process, let me know
 
saw an attorney

Hi Kevin AZ, well I went to see an attorney yesterday. After thorough review of all pictures etc that I presented to him, he told me that the other party's explanation of how the accident occurred wouldnt hold water in court. I got the impression that he felt the case would be worth appx $15,000.00 and he also gave me a bit of information that I wanted to toss out here...because I think it important that everyone know of this...that is...when you are involved in a car accident and it is not your fault...try not to settle the auto portion of the settlement if you can help it. Settle the whole case at the same time. The reason being is that in court you can use pictures of your damaged vehicle and the jury can better envision exactly how you were injured. If you settle your auto damages claim first, the court...in all likelihood will not allow the pictures of your "vehicle" to be used in the court room because those damages dont show injury to your "body". Now, Kevin, I have a few more things I am requesting your help with...can I email you...or you email me?? quixiotic1@yahoo.com thanks everyone...especially KevinAZ for your help, and moral support...I will check back and let you know how this plays out.
 
I am not a lawyer but I would disagree with the attorney on the pictures. Pictures of the vehicle would be necessary to prove point of impact, severity and the movement of the human body due to the impact. Damage to a vehicle is very telling of how somebody was injured. Therefore, I dont understand how the pictures would be inadmissable in court. Even when we have attorney repped claims, the frequently settle the property damage before the injury due to the length that the injury can take to heal. If you want to email me you can, kevinaz06@yahoo.com. I look forward to hearing from you and will help with whatever I can.
 
Last edited:
kevinaz06 said:
I am not a lawyer but I would disagree with the attorney on the pictures. Pictures of the vehicle would be necessary to prove point of impact, severity and the movement of the human body due to the impact. Damage to a vehicle is very telling of how somebody was injured. Therefore, I dont understand how the pictures would be inadmissable in court. Even when we have attorney repped claims, the frequently settle the property damage before the injury due to the length that the injury can take to heal. If you want to email me you can, kevinaz06@yahoo.com. I look forward to hearing from you and will help with whatever I can.
Click to expand...


How bout that!? Someone knows their job, and disagree's with a shyster. God bless ya man.
 
Seriously, I have never heard of people not being able to use photos of a damaged vehicle if the property damage claim is settled before the personal injury claim. I don't know NV law all that well, I know CA law but the partner in my firm is licensed in NV and he ENCOURAGES the property damage claims to get settled before they move past the initial setup of the case file. In fact, adjusters and defense Attorney's are VERY quick to point out minor PD on a vehicle when they don't want to pay out for injuries (even when the PD claim is settled)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Share this page

Get a free case review from a lawyer
Back
Top