Why am I not getting 100% reimbursed?

[treva]

What is the name of your state? Georgia
Two car accident
No one injured

Five weeks ago, a car made a left turn right in front of me (failure to yield). This was in the middle of a highway, not at any intersection. I slammed on the brakes and swerved to the right but couldn't help striking his car.

The subrogation unit of my insurance company, Progressive, just settled my claim 80/20 even though the my adjuster determined I was not at fault at all and even though the police report states that only the other driver was at fault, not me. So now I am only getting partially reimbursed for my deductible and car rental cost. The other party's insurance adjuster told me he believes I should have seen the other car in enough time to stop; therefore, I am partially responsible. He actually told me that I should have been "looking out" for this left turn scenario as a likely possibility. But this did not happen at an intersection! I was cruising along at 35-45 mph, and I did not see the other driver until he had crossed into my lane because, on his side of the highway, there was congested bumper-to-bumper traffic due to rush hour and due to construction. This traffic was blocking the restaurant driveway that he supposedly came out of. He would have had to have been let through two lanes of bumper-to bumper traffic before crossing center. There's no way I could have seen him for all the traffic on his side of the highway. I was told by the other party's insurance adjuster that there is a law stating that whenever you strike someone with the front of your vehicle, regardless of the circumstances, you are going to be partially at fault. Is that true?

[seniorjudge]

Sue the person who caused the damage in small claims court.

Deduct the amount you got.

[ecmst12]

I don't believe it's true in all cases, but it's possible there may be something to the other party's allegation. Does your insurance company believe that they can win if they go forward to arbitration or court? We haven't seen the scene photos or the specific circumstances. But there is something called "last chance to avoid". If you had the last chance to avoid the accident, and failed to do so, then a percentage of fault can be placed on you.

[seniorjudge]

Originally Posted by ecmst12

I don't believe it's true in all cases, but it's possible there may be something to the other party's allegation. Does your insurance company believe that they can win if they go forward to arbitration or court? We haven't seen the scene photos or the specific circumstances. But there is something called "last chance to avoid". If you had the last chance to avoid the accident, and failed to do so, then a percentage of fault can be placed on you.

I thought that went out with contributory negligence?!

Oh ... well.

[ecmst12]

Only five states follow contributory negligence. GA is not one of them. They are DC, MD, VA, NC, and I think AL. All other states follow some form of comparitive negligence doctrine.

[treva]

I slammed on my brakes and at the last moment swerved to my right, thus greatly reducing the impact, but not able to avoid hitting him altogether. My skid marks clearly showed this. I didn't have a camera to take pictures of them, but I pointed them out to the police officer. According to the adjuster at my insurance company, Progressive, these actions comply with "last chance to avoid." She agrees that I am 0% liable. I don't see how I could have done anything more to avoid this accident. The other insurance company, Ameriprise, is arguing that I should have seen it coming, and that's why I am partially liable. I am not telepathic! What do people do when subrogation is acting to quickly settle cases instead of fighting for what is fair? It wouldn't cost Progressive any court costs to go to arbitration. Am I left to live with whatever subrogration decides, even if decided wrongfully? I'm still wondering if Ameriprise's adjuster was telling the truth about hitting someone with the front of your car automatically makes you partially liable. I haven't been able to talk to anyone in Progressive's subrogation unit.

[ecmst12]

Ultimately it's progressive's choice whether to go to arb, because it's mostly their money at stake. It does cost money, I don't know whether there's a filing fee but there are additional costs involved in going through arb. If they think they can win though, I don't see why they wouldn't do it, unless it's really not enough money to quibble over.