how to prove it was under $750 ?

[sukharev]

"I was not knowingly driving without insurance. The bike was supposed to be covered under my car insurance policy. (a newly acquired vehicle shall be covered for the first 30days after becoming the owner) . I had the bike for 1 week. As it turns out after 3 months, that would be "any vehicle EXCEPT motorcycles".

Weren't you curious on how much your rates would be when you were going to buy the bike? Didn't you call your carrier and ask about insuring the bike prior to purchase? If no, why didn't you call your carrier the day you bought the bike to add it to your policy? Why wait over a week and still not call?

Didn't he explain it in this quote you have? He thought he had 30 days to do this...

 

[stephenk]

Common sense would be that he would be curious about any rate difference between a car and a motorcycle, right? Common sense would be that he notify his carrier as soon as possible that he no longer had a car but a motorcycle to add to the policy.

 

[sukharev]

Common sense would be that he would be curious about any rate difference between a car and a motorcycle, right? Common sense would be that he notify his carrier as soon as possible that he no longer had a car but a motorcycle to add to the policy.

He clearly did not have common sense...

 

[JETX]

Didn't he explain it in this quote you have? He thought he had 30 days to do this...

And more idiocy from 'SuckHead'....
1) What he 'thought' means nothing.
2) Where in anyone's mind do they think that they have 30 days 'automatic' coverage to any vehicle.... and especially a MOTORCYCLE??
That is like saying... gee, I just bought a boat... I thought my car insurance would cover it.
Or, gee, I just bought a new Cessna Skymaster... and I thought my car insurance would cover it!!

Doesn't make sense... or even a valid feeble excuse.

 

[sukharev]

And more idiocy from 'SuckHead'....
1) What he 'thought' means nothing.
2) Where in anyone's mind do they think that they have 30 days 'automatic' coverage to any vehicle.... and especially a MOTORCYCLE??
That is like saying... gee, I just bought a boat... I thought my car insurance would cover it.
Or, gee, I just bought a new Cessna Skymaster... and I thought my car insurance would cover it!!

Doesn't make sense... or even a valid feeble excuse.

Your 60th birthday has come and gone
Your brain is smaller than the tip of a TRAFFIC cone
It's no longer amusing, so I'll let it pass
Cause all in all, you are just an A$$

 

[justalayman]

Here's an idea for the poster:

go and kick their car with you boot attempting to re-create the damage as accurately as possible.

If successful take pictures of it.

have them get estimates for "new" damage

go to court and while they are under oath ask them if this damage is similar, possibly exactly the same, as the damage you caused

since they are under oath and surely do not want to perjure themselves they will admit to such

now you have proof of the value of the damage.


you guys seem to have the rest well under control.

 

[hoflix]

how about if I pay the bill now, what happens? will it help in any way?

 

[sukharev]

how about if I pay the bill now, what happens? will it help in any way?

Anything you do to fix the problems may help. Getting insurance, paying the bill.

However, this lengthy thread seemed to miss one important aspect: insurance should have pictures of the car before the repairs started. It also should have a supplemental, description of any damage, witness reports and so on. So, if you wanted to prove insurance fraud, by all means, try it afterwards. You have police report that states minor rear bumper damage, and can use that as evidence, since front bumper, mirror and whatever else clearly was reported frodulently. But first, fix as many issues as you can, get the license taken care of, so you can drive to the lawyer's office to file the lawsuit.

 

[JETX]

how about if I pay the bill now, what happens? will it help in any way?

Ignore 'SuckHead's post. He is a legal idiot.
It might help your case if you were to show up with a paid 'signed release' from the damaged party AND a copy of your insurance... but it would be entirely up to the hearing officer as to the suspension or not.

 

[hoflix]

Sukharev, thanks for the tips! when the insurance company called me in the first place, (that was ~3 months after the incident) I did ask if they had pictures, and if so, to send me copies, but they did not, so I take it they dont't have any pictures. Also, the second day after the accident, I called the other driver, and and unsuccessfully offered fo fix the car.... But anyway, so far I am not aware of any lawsuit against me for that.

My main concern right now is the DL. Which, according to some people, here I don't have any chances of keeping, (because of the insurance thing, not of the 10 days to file SR-1 ??). OK, so if that happens, for how long it will be? I think I found some article in the vehicle code saying one year, but I can't tell 100%. AND: after that what? can I apply for a restricted license?

How about the "signed release"? Will the insurance company be willing to negociate, or give me a chance to show them that they "made an honest mistake", by by blaming me for some previous damage on the car? Will they be willing to settle for less? (ideally, under $750, so the 10 sr-1 days will be out of the question also)

=============================

Happy Holidays everybody!

Also, and thanks for the insults and any other actually usefull tips you might still have regarding this issue.. keep'em coming !

 

[sukharev]

Sorry, I cannot answer most of your questions, maybe someone else can. However, let me repeat what I have said before: fix as much as you can before the trial. You can ask the judge for leniency, and would have to take whatever punishment will be given, so try not to worry about it until you get it, just do everything you can to better your odds.

As for insurance, they already spent the money, now they want it back. It's unlikely they would negotiate with you to lower the payment. What I meant previously is that they do have pictures (standard procedure), and when required by law to provide them they will. Simply asking them would not work. You have to sue them to get it.

Then, again, if it would be me, I'd simply drop the matter, cut my losses and make sure I have learned the lesson for next time.

 

[hoflix]

hot update!

=== this will probably go for top10 post .. dumbest, funniest or whatever===


I just received a letter from DMV, in reply to a letter of mine... trying to clarify some things, and it goes like this: "the financial responsability law requires all persons involved in reportable accidents to have a form of liability coverage in effect for the accident" ... and after that they say they will suspend the licence for a year, and so on...

Again, that was "REPORTABLE ACCIDENTS" !! That is, more than $750.

So, in a way, this is a confirmation that I can actually DO something about it, and that would be to prove the accident was not reportable, as in under $750.
I applied for a DMV hearing, I am awaiting response.

Now again, --and this is the initial question of the whole post-- "how to prove it was under $750?".

So far I have thought about the following options:
1) visit the bodyshop, try to have them admit the "mistake" ---> not very likely
2) call the insurance company, try to convince them of the mistake, and negociate a lower settlement ---> not very likey either, but better than #1, I would say
3) sue the insurance company first and take them to court, where I stand a pretty good chance of winning, if the court will determine an actual lower cost for that repair. I don't believe they have pictures, and if they actually do, that will be to my advantage. Now since this will probably take place waaay AFTER the suspension taking effect, will it help me in any way?
4) this is kinda ... illegal, so if you didn't like my posts so far, stop reading right now . How about ... filing an SR-1 saying I was in an accident on the same date with my car (which was covered) and with my... roomate? (without claiming anything from the insurance company). DMV will then forward the sr-1 to my insurance company, will will say I was covered, for the accident on that date. DMV has no idea what the accident was all obout, they keep mentioning my CAR ! and also, MY insurance company initially thought it was about the car... till I told them. As for the settlement, we'll go to court and see from there. ------> you gotta love this one 4#). And I know the comments on the previous page still apply, so those of you who plan repeating themselves, don't bother.
5) even more illegal, it resembles something that was already suggested in here )))


- -------------------------
And if the suspension takes effect anyway -- which seems more and more plausible -- I understand I can apply for a restricted license, if I show SR22 or SR1P . This is also a little confusing: SR1P would apply in my case, so I will have to show proof on insurance for the bike... WHAT ABOUT THE CAR?

Again, many thanks to everybody, and I will appreciate ANY comments, usefull or not... and considering #4, most likely not usefull

happy holidays!

 

[JETX]

Now again, --and this is the initial question of the whole post-- "how to prove it was under $750?".

Remember WAY back in post #2 on this thread where someone said:
"Gee, I would start with providing SOME evidence of the value of the damage. The fact that you don't have the proof is something YOU are going to have to deal with."

 

[BelizeBreeze]

Remember WAY back in post #2 on this thread where someone said:
"Gee, I would start with providing SOME evidence of the value of the damage. The fact that you don't have the proof is something YOU are going to have to deal with."

geeeeee**************.....
I wonder who that could be????

 

[hoflix]

that's what I've been asking in the first place!!

WHAT DOES IT MEAN "SOME EVIDENCE OF THE VALUE OF THE DAMAGE" ?? I know I'll have to deal with it, and agaian, the only evidence I can provide or I can show then is the police report.

Are points 1-3 from my last post valid?
Or can you guys think of something else? I mean, besides just sitting around waiting the unavoidable to happen... Maybe there's some technicality I can use to delay this? (I only need the license for a few more months) Maybe I can file some form, sue someone, request something... )