Vehicle Claim

What is the name of your state (only U.S. law)? Texas

On August 20, 2010 someone stole my car in Corpus Christi, TX from a shopping center. My car was later recovered in a distant county burned. Going back, when I arrived to where my car should have been, it was missing and i did what most normal people would have done... I called the police and I called the insurance company. Unbeknownst to me, my husband now of alomost 2 years has a bad reputation with the insurance company which dates back to August 2006. Well, obviously they have recovered the information from his past and is using it against me. My husband is not insured with this company, he is insured elsewhere. Well we have now been told we have to do an Examination under oath. I did NOT do anything to my car; my entire world has been turned upside down at the lost of my car... I had to withdraw from school where I should have graduated this December, we are down to 1 vehicle with 3 children going into several different directions in the AM. What should we do? Should we hire an attorney and why are they using my husbands case in this situation? Does he have to do an examination under oath?

aerich said:

Does he have to do an examination under oath?

Click to expand...

You can comply with their requirements, or you can refuse and sue them for breach of contract.

If you sue, you can expect to go to court, and your husband may be called as a witness. In that case he will have to testify under oath.

Why not get it over with now?

What should we do?

Click to expand...

a rental or the purchase of another car would have been a reasonable action.

My husband is not insured with this company, he is insured elsewhere.

Click to expand...

, my husband now of alomost 2 years

Click to expand...

why does that not make sense? A married couple utilizing two different insurance companies? Since most insurers offer a multi-car discount, that just doesn't make any sense to me.



Your husband is not required to do anything in this case. He is not under their contract and not subject to anything your contract might require.

From my understanding, what they demand is not unusual. Your actions, as steve noted, are to either comply or refuse. The insurance company will do what they do and you will act as you see as needed in response.

Examination under oath is pretty standard for theft claims regardless. Yes, you need to jump through their hoops.

ecmst12 said:

Examination under oath is pretty standard for theft claims regardless. Yes, you need to jump through their hoops.

Click to expand...

its my understanding, to plead the fifth, would be a good idea. No hoop jumping needed.

Good thing your understanding is wrong then, huh?

That would be a great way to get your claim denied. This isn't a criminal trial and you have no right to "plead the fifth" and still get the claim paid.

ecmst12 said:

That would be a great way to get your claim denied. This isn't a criminal trial and you have no right to "plead the fifth" and still get the claim paid.

Click to expand...

Examination under oath is pretty standard for theft claims

sounds like it might lead to criminal charges, last time i checked theft was a crime.

first and fifth amendments would apply.

Dillon said:

Examination under oath is pretty standard for theft claims

sounds like it might lead to criminal charges, last time i checked theft was a crime.

first and fifth amendments would apply.

Click to expand...

Dillon, did you even READ the post?
OP is dealing with the insurance company. OP has a contractual obligation to cooperate in the investigation. You are correct that the OP has the right to refuse to cooperate, but the insurance company then also has the right to deny the claim.

Get it?

Zigner said:

You are correct that the OP has the right to refuse to cooperate, but the insurance company then also has the right to deny the claim.

Click to expand...

zigner, as you know, the insurance company wont pay unless ordered too and they are counting on the OP not wanting to sue.

if she were to sue, she might prevail, but it will cost her in time and money.

That is not at all true, not any of it. Seriously, stop posting, you have no clue.

Dillon said:

its my understanding, to plead the fifth, would be a good idea. No hoop jumping needed.

Click to expand...

and they wouldn't have to plead the 5th. They could simply refuse to answer. The insurance company cannot compel them to answer where a court could which is where you would invoke your 5th amend rights.


I don't disagree that answering all of their questions may not be the best thing to do, especially if the husband was involved with the theft and torching. His answers would be available to the state should they desire to make a case of arson.


Generally, most innocent people do not have anything to worry about. As long as you are truthful, insurance fraud is not possible. When people get real resistant to such an inquiry, the insurance company does take notice. That might even change their tack due to his resistance thinking maybe he did have something to do with this.