Statute of Limitation (California)

I was involved in a DUI & auto accident without insurance on 12/21/98 in Califonia.

City workers were cutting a tree that blocked all the lanes on the road and I fell asleep behind the wheel and hit the tree with a worker on top of it. The worker claimmed injuries to his insurance. I spoke to lawyers from his insurance and they determined at the time that I was unable to pay. Nearly 2 years later I get something in the mail from a collection agency for subrogation cases such as this stating that I owe $6000. This agency is willing to settle for the amount of $4200 outside of court.

My question is what is the statute of limitations for a case such as this and is it worthwhile for a huge insurance company to persue a $6000 lawsuit from a person unable to pay?

[HomeGuru]

Yes it is worthwhile. The large company can hire someone for minimum wage to call you and send you letters on occasion. Maybe thinking and hoping that one day soon you might win the lottery, inherit some property from a forgotten rich uncle, get a decent paying job**************....
Why is it that you can't pay? Are you incarcerated?

I'm not in jail. Just in a little bit of financial hardship at the moment.

What is the Statute of Limitations regarding this issue in the State of California? It's been 2 yrs and i've read somewhere that for injury cases in California that after 1 yr this case couldn't be persued. Am I mistaken?

I'm going to have to meet with people from that collection agency later today so your prompt response would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks in Advance.

And one more thing.

The collection agency had threatened that if i don't pay the amount the insurance company will bring me to court in order to collect. What is the likelyhood of the insurance company bringing me to court for $6000?

Thanks in Advance

[I AM ALWAYS LIABLE]

Originally posted by missing357
And one more thing.

The collection agency had threatened that if i don't pay the amount the insurance company will bring me to court in order to collect. What is the likelyhood of the insurance company bringing me to court for $6000?

Thanks in Advance

My response:

This is quite simple, since you insist on going to them (which you don't have to do). The first thing you do is be cordial, and shake the person's hand and sit down.

Then, the only words I want you to say is the following:

"Nice to meet you. Please let me see the Summons and Complaint you have filed against me."

If they say "No", get up and walk out.

If they say, "We don't have a copy", get up and walk out.

If they say, "We don't have to show you anything", get up and walk out.

However, if they show you a Summons and Complaint with your name on it as a named Defendant, look at the upper right corner to see the Court Filing Date. If it's been filed WITHIN one year after the incident, say nothing, except "I'll have my attorney call you." And then walk out. Of course, you have just been properly served with the Summons and Complaint; so, take it with you.

If the Summons and Complaint has been filed EVEN A SINGLE DAY after the ONE YEAR anniversary of the accident, begin to laugh at them, and walk out.

IAAL





[Edited by I AM ALWAYS LIABLE on 11-28-2000 at 02:05 PM]

I really appreciated the help provided from HomeGuru and IAMAlwaysLiable. Thanks so much!

However, I have one other matter regarding Statute of Limitations. I'm not exactly sure if this constitutes an injury case because when i spoke with the person at the collection agency he stated that the insurance company already paid the victom (the city worker cutting the tree). The insurance company wants to get reimbursed by me for the amount paid to their client (the city worker) of $6000.

So in the scenario, is it the same case or does the insurance company have to open a new case in order to collect from me? Also, since the accident happened nearly 2yrs ago does that mean i'm in the clear and I have no legal obligation to pay the insurance company?

[I AM ALWAYS LIABLE]

Originally posted by missing357
I really appreciated the help provided from HomeGuru and IAMAlwaysLiable. Thanks so much!

However, I have one other matter regarding Statute of Limitations. I'm not exactly sure if this constitutes an injury case because when i spoke with the person at the collection agency he stated that the insurance company already paid the victom (the city worker cutting the tree). The insurance company wants to get reimbursed by me for the amount paid to their client (the city worker) of $6000.

So in the scenario, is it the same case or does the insurance company have to open a new case in order to collect from me? Also, since the accident happened nearly 2yrs ago does that mean i'm in the clear and I have no legal obligation to pay the insurance company?

My response:

It's the same case. In a subrogation claim, the subrogee (the insurance company) takes over the same rights and duties of the subrogor (the injured party). All because they subrogated the claim, does not give them any more rights or extensions of the Statute of Limitations. They have one year to file their lawsuit for their money damages (excluding property damage which has a 3 year Statute of Limitations) - - just as if the guy in the tree came after you directly for the money he paid to his doctors.

As subrogee, an insurer has no greater rights than those of its insured. Thus, its claim against the tortfeasor who caused the loss is subject to whatever defenses that party could assert against the insured. [Commercial Union Assur. Co. v. City of San Jose (1982) 127 Cal.App.3d 730, 733, 179 Cal.Rptr. 814, 816]

"Under settled principles, an insurer in its role as subrogee has no greater rights than those possessed by its insured, and its claims are subject to the same defenses." [Liberty Mut. Ins. Co. v. Fales (1973) 8 Cal.3d 712, 717, 106 Cal.Rptr. 21, 24]

The statute of limitations on a subrogation action against the responsible party based on a first party loss is the same as for an action by the insured, regardless of the date the insurer pays the loss. [Commercial Union Assur. Co. v. City of San Jose (1982) 127 Cal.App.3d 730, 733, 179 Cal.Rptr. 814, 816]

The lawsuit could still have been "filed with the court" and has remained unserved. Unlikely, but it is possible. Therefore, if they filed their claim/lawsuit against you within one year, they are within their rights.

If they didn't file within one year, they are out of luck.

Please let us know what happens.

IAAL

[Edited by I AM ALWAYS LIABLE on 11-28-2000 at 07:15 PM]

Thanks I AM ALWAYS LIABLE!!

So does that mean I'm not obligated to pay this amount if the Summons and Complaint was dated after one year?

You guys are the best.

[I AM ALWAYS LIABLE]

Originally posted by missing357
Thanks I AM ALWAYS LIABLE!!

So does that mean I'm not obligated to pay this amount if the Summons and Complaint was dated after one year?

You guys are the best.

My response:

Gee, I thought my answer was clear. I'll spell it out for you then:

1. If they haven't filed a lawsuit within one year AFTER the accident, YOU DON'T HAVE TO PAY !!

2. There is no #2.


Tell me where the accident happened (Exactly where - streets and intersections and town) and I'll tell you which court to go to see the Clerk of the court to find out if there's been a lawsuit filed against you.

IAAL

[Edited by I AM ALWAYS LIABLE on 11-28-2000 at 07:26 PM]

Yeah you did spell it out clear**************Thanks!....just dbl checking.

The accident occurred in San Francisco, 38th Ave & Lincoln Way, area code 94122.

Thanks for all your help.

[I AM ALWAYS LIABLE]

Originally posted by missing357
Yeah you did spell it out clear**************Thanks!....just dbl checking.

The accident occurred in San Francisco, 38th Ave & Lincoln Way, area code 94122.

Thanks for all your help.

My response:

Go to the following courthouse:

Superior Court of California
400 McAllister St.
San Francisco, CA 94102
(415)554-4114

See the "Civil Filing Clerk". Tell the clerk your name to determine if any lawsuits have been filed against you.
If so, ask for a copy of the entire Complaint (there won't be a Summons in the court file), along with all other documents in the court's file.

Say "thank you."

You may send my $700.00 fee to me, care of FreeAdvice.Com.

IAAL

I went to the Superior Court to check if there were any lawsuits filed against me and there is not.

I called the collection agency to tell them that i refuse to pay since I'm not legally obligated to pay. They said the statute of limitations argument is invalid because the victom filed the claim within the year to his insurance company and insurance companies have a 4 yr statute**************is this true??

Hey I AM ALWAYS LIABLE are you a real lawyer?? If you are would you like to represent me if I do get a summons?? Not for the $700 but we can work somethin out

[I AM ALWAYS LIABLE]

Originally posted by missing357
I went to the Superior Court to check if there were any lawsuits filed against me and there is not.

I called the collection agency to tell them that i refuse to pay since I'm not legally obligated to pay. They said the statute of limitations argument is invalid because the victom filed the claim within the year to his insurance company and insurance companies have a 4 yr statute**************is this true??

Hey I AM ALWAYS LIABLE are you a real lawyer?? If you are would you like to represent me if I do get a summons?? Not for the $700 but we can work somethin out

My response:

Excellent. I had a feeling they didn't file a lawsuit against you. And now, you've got THEM on the defensive !! They now know, that YOU know. Good for you, too !! You stood up to them, and you stood up for yourself - - with a little help from the Grandmaster, good 'ol IAAL.

They're blowing smoke up your dress about the 4 years crap. As you know, it's not a matter of when the injured insured reported it to the insurance company, it's whether he, or the insurance company filed a LAWSUIT against you in a court of law. So, their argument is a load of CRAP. And, they didn't file a lawsuit, as you know.

You have already read my explanation and the case law. What did it say?

Read them again:

"As subrogee, an insurer has no greater rights than those of its insured. Thus, its claim against the tortfeasor (YOU) who caused the loss is subject to whatever defenses that party could assert against the insured. [Commercial Union Assur. Co. v. City of San Jose (1982) 127 Cal.App.3d 730, 733, 179 Cal.Rptr. 814, 816] "

"Under settled principles, an insurer in its role as subrogee has no greater rights than those possessed by its insured, and its claims are subject to the same defenses." [Liberty Mut. Ins. Co. v. Fales (1973) 8 Cal.3d 712, 717, 106 Cal.Rptr. 21, 24] "

"The STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS on a subrogation action against the responsible party based on a first party loss IS THE SAME as for an action by the insured, regardless of the date the insurer pays the loss. [Commercial Union Assur. Co. v. City of San Jose (1982) 127 Cal.App.3d 730, 733, 179 Cal.Rptr. 814, 816] "

IT'S A ONE YEAR STATUTE OF LIMITATIONS FOR INJURIES !!

That's right, they're blowing smoke up your dress.

Yes, I'm a real, honest to goodness, trial litigation attorney - - have been for nearly 21 years. I think you know I was only kidding with you about the $700.00. No, I can't - - rather I won't - - represent you. Not because you're not a nice person, or that you don't have a WONDERFUL defense to their claims, so don't get me wrong. I won't do it because:

1. You couldn't afford me.

2. It would be wrong for me to solicit business from these Boards.

3. My offices are in Los Angeles - - you're in San Francisco.

However, even a first year graduate, just starting out in a brand new lawfirm, could beat this matter with both hands tied behind his/her back.

If they do decide to sue you, take all of these posts to an insurance defense attorney and watch the collection agency get the crap beat out of them.

But, let me know what happens. And let me know if they call you or write to you again. I'll let you know when it's time for you to hire a defense attorney.

IAAL

[HomeGuru]

Terrfic IAAL. I could not have said it any better. Including the crap part.

I know this totally contradicts everything that has been stated earlier, but a representative from the collection agency called me again to issue me a final warning.

1.) She said that because it was an accident they will submit something to the DMV in order to revoke my license until the balance is paid off.

2.) She also said that the case is going to be submitted to the court as a "case summary" (i might have miss-quoted) and I won't be able to argue my case within the court system and i would be indefinitely found guilty.

3.) And lastely, since the victom had submitted a claim to the insurance company within 1 yr, the insurance company can exercise a "statute for recovery" that can be used within a 4 yr period.

Can this really happen??
I speculate that the 4 yr statute is bull (I ALWAYS AM LIABLE already informed me), but you guys absolutely sure?

Thanks Again