Quote:
Originally Posted by Nine8Six
Satanism..... lolll
So in all traffic accident cases the police officier's last word is, what it is (solid). Interesting. Looks like friend Jake there is safe then
Then still doesn't make sense to me why any party would need to hire a lawyer. I was convinced the insuranceCo' adjuster had a black book in hand and was quoting accordingly - in case of total loss anyway. Lawyers or not, not sure with what they could assist.
Re repairs, that's defined by the adjuster as well or they normally leave it to an insusranceCo' appointed bodyshop to quote? or is that the same..... confusing
15+ years driving - never been in any accident (touching wood with one hand, typing with the other)
|
The insurance companies now see themselves and their stockholders as the most important people to be protected.
Either party can hire a lawyer to handle the claim in what is called Civil Court. If some one had been ticketed, it would be handled in Criminal Court. Major differences in the two courts can be best be summed up in the OJ Simpson murder cases. He was found Not Guilty in criminal court, but held liable for the deaths in civil court.
Most policies state that if your at fault, they will only pay what their preferred repair shop says it will cost. There is more leeway when someone has hit your car.
In this case, it does not work well for the insurance company to find Jake at fault. If they do, they pay his repair, and the Bronco repairs. If the Bronco is at fault, they likely do not have comprehensive, so they only pay Jakes repair. However, if they find both at fault, they pay Jakes repair minus the deductible. I see them try to make the latter stick.