time frame for filing calif. uninsured motorists lawsuit

[tansocal]

Hello....question please. My estranged wife had a automobile accident here in calif. approx 4-29-99. I have received a lawsuit naming me as a defendant, even though I had no control of the vehicle, but because i am on the title. I was wonder...what is the statute of limitations on filing this lawsuit
for uninsured motorist,and personal injury.
Can't seem to get a straight answer....


thank you....
ps...you may e-mail me at [email protected]

 

[I AM ALWAYS LIABLE]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Arial, Helvetica, Verdana">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by tansocal:
Hello....question please. My estranged wife had a automobile accident here in calif. approx 4-29-99. I have received a lawsuit naming me as a defendant, even though I had no control of the vehicle, but because i am on the title. I was wonder...what is the statute of limitations on filing this lawsuit
for uninsured motorist,and personal injury.
Can't seem to get a straight answer....


thank you....
ps...you may e-mail me at [email protected]<HR></BLOCKQUOTE>


My response:

Who was uninsured? The other party or your ex-wife? If it was your EW that was uninsured, the statute is tolled while the other party exhausts their uninsured motorist claim through their own insurance company. Once their claim is settled, then their insurance company's subrogation rights are "Ripe" and a lawsuit can then be filed by them against you and your EW, for up to one year thereafter, despite the fact that it's now over the one year Statute of Limitations from the date of the original date of accident. They're suing you because you still owned the vehicle and, under California law, your direct liability as an uninvolved party in no more than $15,000.00. They are suing you under a theory or law called "Negligent Entrustment" - - that is, you are negligent to have "entrusted" your car to someone who you knew, or should and could have known, to be less than a terrific driver, or didn't have a license, or some other "malady" that would cause the EW to cause an accident.

IAAL

------------------
By reading the “Response” to your question or comment, you agree that: The opinions expressed herein by "I AM ALWAYS LIABLE" are designed to provide educational information only and are not intended to, nor do they, offer legal advice. Opinions expressed to you in this site are not intended to, nor does it, create an attorney-client relationship, nor does it constitute legal advice to any person reviewing such information. No electronic communication with "I AM ALWAYS LIABLE," on its own, will generate an attorney-client relationship, nor will it be considered an attorney-client privileged communication. You further agree that you will obtain your own attorney's advice and counsel for your questions responded to herein by "I AM ALWAYS LIABLE."



[This message has been edited by I AM ALWAYS LIABLE (edited July 25, 2000).]

 

[tansocal]

ok.....ty IAAL

But...I also heard that the insurance company.."also" has a timeframe in which to settle with its insured...which I heard was 60 days. If this is true...the accident happened 4-29-99...which would put the timeframe at 6-29-99...which in turn..would
only be ripe until 6-29-00. The lawsuit was not filed till 7-11-00.??? is this possible
.....?? I can't believe a insurance co. has all the time in the world to settle with its client..??? Also...another word on the accident...it was my ew...but I had also done
everything in my power to keep her from driving it. I took away the keys...I told her
that it was no longer insured....and I also
put the vehicle on non-op with calif DMV. Non-op is a way to legally keep your registration valid...to avoid paying penalties...but cannot be driven on a public road until the pro-rated fees are paid.

I welcome any advice to help me on this matter.

p.s. the lawsuit is for $18,000.00

 

[I AM ALWAYS LIABLE]

<BLOCKQUOTE><font size="1" face="Arial, Helvetica, Verdana">quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by tansocal:
ok.....ty IAAL

But...I also heard that the insurance company.."also" has a timeframe in which to settle with its insured...which I heard was 60 days. If this is true...the accident happened 4-29-99...which would put the timeframe at 6-29-99...which in turn..would
only be ripe until 6-29-00. The lawsuit was not filed till 7-11-00.??? is this possible
.....?? I can't believe a insurance co. has all the time in the world to settle with its client..??? Also...another word on the accident...it was my ew...but I had also done
everything in my power to keep her from driving it. I took away the keys...I told her
that it was no longer insured....and I also
put the vehicle on non-op with calif DMV. Non-op is a way to legally keep your registration valid...to avoid paying penalties...but cannot be driven on a public road until the pro-rated fees are paid.

I welcome any advice to help me on this matter.

p.s. the lawsuit is for $18,000.00 <HR></BLOCKQUOTE>

My response:

Your information is wrong. Although I'm no fan of insurance companies, in this instance however, it all depends upon how quickly the Plaintiff filed an uninsured motorist lawsuit or demanded arbitration; e.g., with $18,000.00 in damages, is sounds like the plaintiff couldn't file a lawsuit or demand arbitration earlier because the injury and property damages needed to be fully known - - and that could have taken an entire year itself.

To preserve the uninsured motorist claim, claimant must, within one year from the date of the accident, either:

· File suit for bodily injury against the uninsured motorist, in a court of competent jurisdiction; or

· Formally institute arbitration proceedings; or

· Agree upon a settlement of the uninsured motorist claim.

The car may have been garaged, pursuant to the Vehicle Code; however, now we're getting down to the knitty-gritty. You said you took away the keys, but guess what? Apparently you didn't take away ALL of the keys, nor did you take the AVAILABILITY of the car away either (for all I know, she may have "hotwired" the car). So, for these reasons, you're on the hook.

IAAL

------------------
By reading the “Response” to your question or comment, you agree that: The opinions expressed herein by "I AM ALWAYS LIABLE" are designed to provide educational information only and are not intended to, nor do they, offer legal advice. Opinions expressed to you in this site are not intended to, nor does it, create an attorney-client relationship, nor does it constitute legal advice to any person reviewing such information. No electronic communication with "I AM ALWAYS LIABLE," on its own, will generate an attorney-client relationship, nor will it be considered an attorney-client privileged communication. You further agree that you will obtain your own attorney's advice and counsel for your questions responded to herein by "I AM ALWAYS LIABLE."