3 car accident

[mach1maddie]

What is the name of your state? California

Car #1 slams on is rear ended by car #2. Car #3 slams on the brakes and rear end car #2. Car #1 leaves the scene of the accident and the police state that he probably had warrants out on him. Car #3 had let his insurance expire (which has since been reinstituted).

Car #3 is trying to pay his owed amount of damages that he caused. Problem: Insurance for car #2 is trying to get more than 50% from him.

Should Car #3 only be responsible for half the bills or specific charges for rear end damage and not more than 50%? It appears upon finally receiving bills that most of the damage went to the front end.

Also, insurance company wants 100% of the tow fee. Seems that both car 2 and car 3 caused the accident and should split this portion.

Any thoughts?

 

[Zigner]

What class is this for?

 

[mach1maddie]

...and here I was trying to be less wordy and get to the facts!

 

[ecmst12]

Car 3 is responsible for 100% of the damage to the rear of car 2 and 50% of the damage to the front of car 2. 50% of the tow bill sounds reasonable to me.

 

[mach1maddie]

Wow, I had'nt thought of the 50% owed on the front end of car #2 but that is assuming that the second impact (from car#3) added to those damages, right?

 

[ecmst12]

It's assuming that the impact from car 3 was enough to send 2 into 1 a second time. If the damage to car 3 and the rear of car 2 does not support an impact that hard, you MIGHT be able to argue that 3 is only responsible for the rear damage, but it would have had to be a very minor impact to successfully make that argument.

 

[mach1maddie]

Excellent. Thanks so much for your thoughts!