• FreeAdvice has a new Terms of Service and Privacy Policy, effective May 25, 2018.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our Terms of Service and use of cookies.

Not At Fault Accident-Lapsed Insurance being paid w/in minutes of accident happening

Accident - Bankruptcy - Criminal Law / DUI - Business - Consumer - Employment - Family - Immigration - Real Estate - Tax - Traffic - Wills   Please click a topic or scroll down for more.

Status
Not open for further replies.

dboismama

Member
Thank you BruceLeejr.

I spoke with my attorney (in a separate matter, but he handles personal injury as well) this morning. He stated that he has come across similar situations before. He stated that if it comes down to it that since in the past my insurance company accepted payment and reinstated the policy after it was cancelled and did not ask or require me (or Dh) to sign anything saying we were not in an accident during that period nor do they issue new insurance cards and declarations stating a new "effective date", that they simply continued the coverage as if it had never lapsed that he could argue that Dh "acting in good faith" when he made the payment had a reasonable assumption that by them accepting the past due payment not deducting any pro rated amounts for the days which we had been cancelled that they were re-instating the policy retroactive to the date it had been cancelled and therefore would "estop and waive" their rights to claim that I was not covered when the accident occured. It made sense to me when he was explaining it. I hope he is right.
 


cyjeff

Senior Member
Thank you BruceLeejr.

I spoke with my attorney (in a separate matter, but he handles personal injury as well) this morning. He stated that he has come across similar situations before. He stated that if it comes down to it that since in the past my insurance company accepted payment and reinstated the policy after it was cancelled and did not ask or require me (or Dh) to sign anything saying we were not in an accident during that period nor do they issue new insurance cards and declarations stating a new "effective date", that they simply continued the coverage as if it had never lapsed that he could argue that Dh "acting in good faith" when he made the payment had a reasonable assumption that by them accepting the past due payment not deducting any pro rated amounts for the days which we had been cancelled that they were re-instating the policy retroactive to the date it had been cancelled and therefore would "estop and waive" their rights to claim that I was not covered when the accident occured. It made sense to me when he was explaining it. I hope he is right.
again, it comes down to timing.

If that payment came in one minute AFTER the accident, you were not covered.

Even if the insurance company had retroactively applied the payments in the past, the company is not on the hook if the accident happened before that incident.

I appreciate and applaud your decision to seek counsel. I assure you that the insurance company will have theirs.
 

CourtClerk

Senior Member
I know you take it personal when I disagree with you so this is more fuel to the fire. Sorry this is not personal but your comment is the most illustrative.

dboismama, these people are making too big a deal with it because in reality everyone here is making the same calculated risk.

The days of multimillion dollar accident claims are here and unlimited policies are gone. Everyone has a policy limit which would not cover a major accidents.

Everyone that drives take a calculated risk that they will die. They take the risk that they ma kill someone but we all drive anyways. Why? Because it is not the harm we are concerned about but the risk.

Everyone flies when the likelihood of surviving a plane crash is almost impossible. Yet we fly because it is unlikely to happen.

If you kill someone the basic $30,000 or even $100,000 dollar policy is not going to cover the likely seven figure verdict. The insurance takes calculated risks by taking policies and so does everyone else. If everyone was truly concerned about liability then we would all be paying $800 a month for a $5 million policy limit. yet nobody on here that drives has that policy.

Why do we drive without sufficient coverage? We all drive because we all know the likelihood is not going to happen. I think it was not the best choice but I understand your reasoning. Don't worry too much. Believe in yourself.
Sorry dear, I believe in insurance, lots of it. And the example given was a real life one where my nephew was run over in the crosswalk, minding his business going to middle school by someone who knew their insurance was expired, but was going to pay it at lunch time when she got her check. Major surgery, my sister off of work for 6 months while he recovered.... and my family got to pay for it all.

I've yet to see an $800/mo insurance policy yet (dramatic much??), but I'll tell you that my policy limits are so high (with an umbrella policy) that I could believe that I could hit a couple of Porsches and be OK. If you have a premium that's $800/mo, then it probably has more to do with the fact that your driving is as bad as your command of the language.
 

dboismama

Member
again, it comes down to timing.

If that payment came in one minute AFTER the accident, you were not covered.

Even if the insurance company had retroactively applied the payments in the past, the company is not on the hook if the accident happened before that incident.

I appreciate and applaud your decision to seek counsel. I assure you that the insurance company will have theirs.
I'm not seeking compensation from my insurance only from the other person's insurance. B/c of La's "No Pay/No Play" law if my insurance company does not say coverage was retroactive when they accepted payment then the other person who ran the light's insurance company doesn't have to pay me anything. If it comes down to it my attorney said that with a bit of negotiation since I won't be seeking any relief from my company for the damages that they are probably more likely to lean to the side that they did retroactively reinstate the policy since I am not at fault in the accident. I even told him that I would waive my right to file the claim with them if it came down to that, since I know that they simply will just be looking not to pay out any cash. I know this places me as a high liability as an insured and I probably won't get renewed when policy is up. I'll deal with that if and when it comes. He said my case isn't that bad because he had a case where the person's policy was cancelled for nearly a month. The person was in an accident with no other vehicles involved, but did not report the accident. They went into the office to pay the policy the next day. The company accepted the payment and retroactively reinstated the policy to the date of cancellation, did not ask if there were any accidents, and that their policy "effective date" remained the same meaning no new declarations were signed nor did they issue new insurance cards. The person went home and called the companies claim department and reported the accident. The company said that he wasn't covered for the time the accident happened. He said that he argued that since the company had a history of accepting late payments from the person and reinstating his policy without insuing a new policy then they could not say that just because the person had an accident this time that he wasn't covered b/c when they accepted payment for the period of lapsed insurance they waived their right to claim they weren't covered. That was a day after the accident. Mine is a few minutes before or after and I haven't even made a claim with my insurance only the other person's. He definetly has given me hope.
 

ecmst12

Senior Member
You're assuming that the other person is going to ADMIT running the light or that there was a witness who saw him do it. If not, then it's your word vs his who had the red light and his insurance company isn't going to pay you anything.
 

dboismama

Member
Sorry dear, I believe in insurance, lots of it. And the example given was a real life one where my nephew was run over in the crosswalk, minding his business going to middle school by someone who knew their insurance was expired, but was going to pay it at lunch time when she got her check. Major surgery, my sister off of work for 6 months while he recovered.... and my family got to pay for it all.
I'm so sorry that happened to your nephew CourtClerk, but as I as well as countless others on this forum have been reminded of this isn't forum isn't about "what if's" and "could have's". Yes I could have injured someone else, but I didn't. I hit someone who either wasn't paying attention at the wheel or took a chance and thought she could make it through the red light (which by the way hadn't just instantly turned red, but had been red a significant amount of time) before the countless numbers of cars going with the flow of traffic on a highway akin to a freeway (55-65 MPH speed zones). Those are the facts of my situation plain and simple. I may have "choosen" to drive during my 3 day lapse period but she also "chose" to disregard the law by blatantly ignoring an obvious red light and in the process taking my life and countless others lives in her hands. She drove away unscathed w/ a mere dent in her back bumper while me and the other person were both badly injured with near totalled vehicles. BTW-the policy that I carry and is now current is for the maximum amount of coverage allowed by my company, b/c I do believe in insurance not only for my protection but for the protection of those I may possibly injure. Sometimes things happen where one has to choose b/t one one necessity and another unfortunately this time I made the wrong choice. If if had injured someone else I would feel absolutely responsible and would fight my company tooth and nail to say I was covered or would do what was right and help them outside of that with what little I do have. I'm not the type of person to say "Oh well, sucks for you that I didnt' have insurance." It may have destroyed my family financially but that is the risk I took when I drove under the lapsed policy.
 
Last edited:

ecmst12

Senior Member
The fact that you hit her BACK bumper makes your case even more difficult. That means even if her light was red, her car was in the intersection before yours - she had control of the intersection and you had the last chance to avoid the accident.
 

dboismama

Member
The fact that you hit her BACK bumper makes your case even more difficult. That means even if her light was red, her car was in the intersection before yours - she had control of the intersection and you had the last chance to avoid the accident.
Not back bumper more like rear quarter panel. What part of "ran a red light" did you not get? She had no right to be in the intersection! Another car had to swerve and miss her from their lane and I would have completely T-boned her had I not slammed on my brakes with everything I had in me!!
 

cyjeff

Senior Member
You also don't understand how this process works.

The other car's insurance will call YOUR insurance carrier to work out the claim.

"Why no", your insurance carrier says, "they were NOT covered at the moment of the accident."

You see, your insurance carrier understands that they are throwing you under the bus... but doesn't care (see previous remark about how they HATE to pay out claims).

The other car's insurance carrier immediately files a suit against YOU for damages incurred during the accident. To answer this suit with even a SHOT of winning, you need a very good attorney.

The other car's insurance carrier will tell the court that YOU were at fault and, so, are not only responsible for YOUR damages but the other car's as well. Without a good attorney, that case will, most likely, go in their direction.

Then, you will get to pay out of pocket for YOUR damages, HIS damages and, maybe, the legal fees....for both parties.

If you are lucky, you will only have to pay for your attorney fees when you sue the insurance carrier to admit liability. If THAT suit fails, you get to pay for those fees AND your attorney fees when the other driver's carrier takes you to court for damages.
 

ecmst12

Senior Member
Doesn't matter. If she hit YOU, then your case would be clear. But you hit HER, in the back part of her car, showing she was most of the way through the intersection when the accident occurred. That puts at least SOME of the fault on you, if not MOST of it.
 

CourtClerk

Senior Member
Just let it alone. She's going to rationalize this in her favor until the cows come home. She's in LA, I have family there. I just hope none of them have to come in contact with her or her husband in the few days between the time when the insurance payment is due and her paycheck comes.

You know, you could pay it EARLY or double up on one payment so that you're always a month AHEAD... Yeah, that may mean that you have to do without something for a month, but sacrifice... you have heard of that word, haven't you?
 

dboismama

Member
Just let it alone. She's going to rationalize this in her favor until the cows come home. She's in LA, I have family there. I just hope none of them have to come in contact with her or her husband in the few days between the time when the insurance payment is due and her paycheck comes.

You know, you could pay it EARLY or double up on one payment so that you're always a month AHEAD... Yeah, that may mean that you have to do without something for a month, but sacrifice... you have heard of that word, haven't you?
I've had to sacrifice plenty in my life more than you could ever imagine and you all are gonna "rationalize" your points as well. Doesn't matter-I do have a really good attorney now who said I should have no problem.
 

dboismama

Member
You're assuming that the other person is going to ADMIT running the light or that there was a witness who saw him do it. If not, then it's your word vs his who had the red light and his insurance company isn't going to pay you anything.
I have names and numbers of 3 witness who said they would "testify" that she ran a light. Plus the lady did admit fault said she hasd no idea what she was doing, even came over to me afterwards and told me she was "so sorry". Not to mention she got a butt load of tickets!!
 

JustAPal00

Senior Member
The timing will be easy to calculate. When was the 911 call made vs when was the payment processed. It won't be splitting hairs, it will be what are the facts.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Find the Right Lawyer for Your Legal Issue!

Fast, Free, and Confidential
data-ad-format="auto">
Top