Sued For son's accident...

[JustJay]

I am in Texas. My girlfriend moved from Washington state, approximately 1 year ago and has purchased a home here. Her son had an accident about 2 years ago in Washington. She was just served by the person he hit, because his wife wanted more than what the insurance company was offering. The accident occured in a parking lot and no one was transported to the hospital or required medical attention at the time of the accident.
The suit states that they are seeking damages under the "Family Car Doctorine". The only problem is that he was driving his own car, purchased with his own money, and my girlfriend (his mother) had secured insurance with her agent, which required her to be listed on the title also. She had her own car, which no one else drove and her son was the only person that drove his car. Therefore, I don't think it qualifies as a "family car" as defined in the Act.
Our question is, worst case scenario, can they take her home ( mortgaged) or any amount of money she may have in the bank? The insurance company had made a previous offer of $38K, with max of $50K as per most standard policies. Does she need to protect herself from this possibility? She doesn't have alot, but she has worked hard for it and wants to keep it.What is the name of your state?

[stephenk]

did she inform her insurance company she was served with the lawsuit? If no, have her notify them ASAP. Then have her ask these same questions to the attorney that her carrier will hire to represent her. Since no one here knows what injuries are being claimed by the other person, no one can say what the case value is and if your girlfriend faces an excess judgment.

[ceara19]

Originally Posted by JustJay

I am in Texas. My girlfriend moved from Washington state, approximately 1 year ago and has purchased a home here. Her son had an accident about 2 years ago in Washington. She was just served by the person he hit, because his wife wanted more than what the insurance company was offering. The accident occured in a parking lot and no one was transported to the hospital or required medical attention at the time of the accident.
The suit states that they are seeking damages under the "Family Car Doctorine". The only problem is that he was driving his own car, purchased with his own money, and my girlfriend (his mother) had secured insurance with her agent, which required her to be listed on the title also. She had her own car, which no one else drove and her son was the only person that drove his car. Therefore, I don't think it qualifies as a "family car" as defined in the Act.
Our question is, worst case scenario, can they take her home ( mortgaged) or any amount of money she may have in the bank? The insurance company had made a previous offer of $38K, with max of $50K as per most standard policies. Does she need to protect herself from this possibility? She doesn't have alot, but she has worked hard for it and wants to keep it.What is the name of your state?

Anyone who's name is on the title can be sued in the event of an accident. What is the other party claiming that comes to ovre $50K is there were no injuries?

[JustJay]

Actually, her insurance company informed her that she would be sued, because they had been served already. They had also hired an attorney to represent her, but she was not helpful at all. She said "I don't know what the laws are in Texas, so I can't advise you." There are no specific injuries listed in the lawsuit, but among the general "pain and and suffering", they are claiming "loss of love", loss of consortium", "mental anguish", and "loss of wages". Now, this was a low speed impact that occurred in a shopping mall parking lot. I hope this helps and I appreciate the responses.

I do understand that her name was on the title also, but the lawsuit is clearly declaring it's jurisdiction under the Family Car Doctorine. Which, in this situation, cannot be applied because it was not a "family car" as defined by this Act.

[ceara19]

Originally Posted by JustJay

Actually, her insurance company informed her that she would be sued, because they had been served already. They had also hired an attorney to represent her, but she was not helpful at all. She said "I don't know what the laws are in Texas, so I can't advise you." There are no specific injuries listed in the lawsuit, but among the general "pain and and suffering", they are claiming "loss of love", loss of consortium", "mental anguish", and "loss of wages". Now, this was a low speed impact that occurred in a shopping mall parking lot. I hope this helps and I appreciate the responses.

I do understand that her name was on the title also, but the lawsuit is clearly declaring it's jurisdiction under the Family Car Doctorine. Which, in this situation, cannot be applied because it was not a "family car" as defined by this Act.

Even if they are using the Family Car Doctorine as the basis at thins time, they can always change it so that they are suing her because she is a registered owner of the vehicle. Instead of spending all that time and effort for something that may not have any effect on the outcome, she should be focusing on WHY they are asking for so much. There are no injuries, so "pain and suffering" is out, WTH is "loss of love", I've heard some pretty stupid things (like the man that sued McDonald's because his wife burned her lip on a pickle and couldn't perform her "wifely duties"), but "LOSS OF LOVE"!?!?! Actual repair costs for the car, maybe minimal loss of wages when they were getting estimates and dealing with repairs, maybe reimbursement for rental car costs if the rented a car while theirs was fixed, but that's going to be about it.

Since the suit is in Texas, these people should have taken the $50K and gone on their merry way. Unless they can PROVE all the BS claims in court, not only will they only receive ACTUAL monetary compensation, but the judge can decide the suit was frivilous and should have never been filed to begin with. If that happend, they will end up paying for ALL court related costs for ALL parties involved, which will most likely be a whole lot more then they get for damages. Texas has really cracked down on idiotic lawsuits like this.

[JustJay]

I thought the same thing when I read it! The whole suit is overly vague and does not give specifics on anything. There is one thing though, we live in Texas but the lawsuit is filed in Washington State. Will that make a significant diffrence?

[weenor]

Originally Posted by JustJay

I thought the same thing when I read it! The whole suit is overly vague and does not give specifics on anything. There is one thing though, we live in Texas but the lawsuit is filed in Washington State. Will that make a significant diffrence?

Yes-that is why your insurance carrier's counsel said she did not know Texas law...she is in Washington, Washington law applies to your liability and your case will be defended in Washington.

[ceara19]

Originally Posted by weenor

Yes-that is why your insurance carrier's counsel said she did not know Texas law...she is in Washington, Washington law applies to your liability and your case will be defended in Washington.

Does Washington have a "loss of love" law? I really want to know what that means.

[ceara19]

I couldn't stand it anymore. I had to look up "loss of love" in reference to lawsuits. I found both the "loss of love" and the "loss of consortium". The only references were in medical malpractice and wrongful death suits. So, I guess maybe these people are trying to say he damaged the relationship they had with the CAR when he accidentally bumped it in the parking lot?!?! ( aren't there laws about having a romatic relationship with ones car or does that only apply to livestock?)

[ecmst12]

The laws in TX should be irrelevant because the accident happened in Washington, right?

[ceara19]

Originally Posted by ecmst12

The laws in TX should be irrelevant because the accident happened in Washington, right?

That's right. So I don't know why the lawyer even brought it up in the first place. Even so, I think most, if not all, states would see this as a frivolous lawsuit from the start.

[fairisfair]

Originally Posted by ceara19

I couldn't stand it anymore. I had to look up "loss of love" in reference to lawsuits. I found both the "loss of love" and the "loss of consortium". The only references were in medical malpractice and wrongful death suits. So, I guess maybe these people are trying to say he damaged the relationship they had with the CAR when he accidentally bumped it in the parking lot?!?! ( aren't there laws about having a romatic relationship with ones car or does that only apply to livestock?)

Maybe they were making love in the car when he hit it

[stephenk]

loss of consortium is a term for damages suffered by the spouse of an injured party, for example, who is claiming they could not have sex as often as they did before the accident, or cannot hug, kiss, cuddle, etc. because of the injuries suffered to the spouse.

the value of a loss of consortium claim depends on the extent of injury to the spouse. Simple soft tissue injuries typically have no value in a LOC claim. Loss of limbs or being paralyzed obviously makes the claim more valuable.