New Car Hit by an uninsured motorist

[Job Hunter 13]

What is the name of your state?
California

A friend of mine had his new 2003 acura for less than a month and it didn't even have a license plate yet. He was rear-ended by an uninsured motorist who had traces of alcohol on him but not at the toxicity level to be arrested. Furthermore, right after the accident occured, the first thing the other party said was that his brakes were bad. The damages are over $5000 but my friend was not injured. It will take about 4 weeks to fix and his insurance only pays for 80% of the car rental fees. The party at fault was being negligent since he admitted to his brakes being bad and was drinking as well. Should he get a lawyer to sue the uninsured motorists for rental fees, possibly for a new car or for anything else?

 

[I AM ALWAYS LIABLE]

What is the name of your state?
California

A friend of mine had his new 2003 acura for less than a month and it didn't even have a license plate yet. He was rear-ended by an uninsured motorist who had traces of alcohol on him but not at the toxicity level to be arrested. Furthermore, right after the accident occured, the first thing the other party said was that his brakes were bad. The damages are over $5000 but my friend was not injured. It will take about 4 weeks to fix and his insurance only pays for 80% of the car rental fees. The party at fault was being negligent since he admitted to his brakes being bad and was drinking as well. Should he get a lawyer to sue the uninsured motorists for rental fees, possibly for a new car or for anything else?

My response:

Unless your friend suffered physical injuries, then quite frankly, there's little or no money in it for an attorney - - at least from a pure "contingency fee" standpoint. However, if your friend wants to hire an attorney on an hourly basis to make the U.M. claims, and for representation in a U.M. Arbitration, that's another matter altogether.

IAAL

 

[spawn_x]

Regardless, even if you do win, how are you going to collent the money from an uninsured motorist? I say fat chance..

Also, him having alcohol in his blood is a rediculous statement. If you say he had alcohol then obviously police was there and did a test but since he was still below the state's BAC level no citation was issued and hence nothing illegal happened.

Just because a person drank does not mean they are drunk and incapable of driving, especially if they are below the BAC level.

Good luck..

 

[I AM ALWAYS LIABLE]

Regardless, even if you do win, how are you going to collent the money from an uninsured motorist? I say fat chance..

MY RESPONSE: Through a U.M. Claim under his friend's own insurance policy, that's how.



Also, him having alcohol in his blood is a rediculous statement. If you say he had alcohol then obviously police was there and did a test but since he was still below the state's BAC level no citation was issued and hence nothing illegal happened.

MY RESPONSE: You don't have to be drunk to reap the benefits of the law in a "third party" accident claim - - at least not in California. All that matters is if there was an "impairment" due to an "intoxicant". But, in U.M. Claims, this is a moot subject.



Just because a person drank does not mean they are drunk and incapable of driving, especially if they are below the BAC level.

MY RESPONSE: That's not the law in California for winning a "Third Party" claim, or an Uninsured Motorist Claim. Being "impaired" due to an intoxicant can make the tortfeasor liable for Punitive Damages in California. But, again, this is meaningless in "First Party" U.M. Claims and arbitrations.

IAAL

 

[spawn_x]

I hardly doubt that anyone could make a strong case of a person being impared of driving if their BAC was below level.. not enough proof IMO especially if no tests were performed at the scene...