AHHHH that isn't how it came across. I take it back. Unfortunately many here would like to go to the American type system since they can not see the benefits of the no fault method. In most cases here insurance claims are fast , easy and painless. In the few exceptions there is usually some factor thrown in by the insured that messes with the system. We can of course also sue for some things but the courts do not deal well with frivol suits and they generally don't go far.

Well that puts things into a whole new light.

If you did not sign for it or you were not served there is no proof that you ever received it. If they have called you they will have that recorded for proof. Anything you say on the phone will be recorded. If they call do not talk about anything. Tell them you are represented by your insurance company and call them, or your lawyer if you get one.

The OP may have worked out another alternative to save the day. Use the last remaining $100 in his bank account to play roulette at the casino. Perhaps he can then win enough to pay back the insurance company and the repairs on his car. :drool:

He spent $13,000 repairing his own car already.

that's kinda questionable too.. Why spend 13k at that point? Is the car considered salvage too?

No because it did not go thru an insurance company.

I hope there were some hookers involved!

That’s not what I mean, though.

At that point you might as well sell what’s left, especially if repairing it is going to (apparently) make OP basically broke.

It is already spent so the point is moot really. Not salvage but depreciated value. The sad part is that since his did not go through insurance there will be no record of the damage while the guy he hit will have it on his car.

He'd have to win 9k first to win back what he lost the last go around. Then he may be able to get that 13k back for his own car's repairs and another 8k for this payment letter to the insurance company.

It's quite an uphill battle and there has to be a leprechauns pot of gold worth of horseshoes hidden somewhere up his butt.

There will be no doubt if it is a certified letter. If you get it then pay close attention to what it says. It will probably give you a deadline to contact them (with or without legal) that you do not want to miss! You want to try to avoid it going to court at all costs.

Can you send a certified letter to the casino? Do you address it to "blackjack table #5"?

If you could my wife would have done it many times over the years!

As has been said by others, you are seeing first hand the downside of being underinsured. At least where I am, the incremental cost to get to 500k or 1m coverage is pretty small, maybe $10-20 per month more than state minimums.

At this point you need to figure out how you will be able to tackle the debt you will likely owe if the claim goes to judgment. Savings is out, so maybe a second job? Sell your car and buy a $3k beater and roll the excess proceeds into the judgment debt?

Either way, keep trying to contact your insurance. They may still be obligated to provide legal defense even if policy limits are already exhausted.

Once a judgement is made, the decision of whether to sell the car is out of the OP's control. They will go after all assets under his name which I assume the car is one of them. So that alone may be used to pay off the debt owing.

Primary vehicles, primary residences, work tools, necessities of life, etc., are often exempt from seizure for civil judgments. Varies by state, of course.

But honestly, the credit and public record penalty for a judgment is something to be avoided. I’d want to square up well prior to court action being filed. $5k lump sum and a release affirming that the lump sum settles all claims by the ins co and/or other driver would be a good goal to pursue.

While I may complain about the cost of insurance here in NY we have high minimum coverages, no fault and uninsured motorist coverage on every policy. When things go wrong it's nice to know that you're mostly covered depending on how high a limit you've purchased. At worst you have to pay the deductible and that varies depending on how much you want to spend.

Most states have gotten rid of no fault insurance because it was a nightmare that made everything more difficult, increased suing and cost everybody more. No fault will always fail because it ignores the principles of economics.

Florida is still a no fault state for personal injury, and it illustrates the problems perfectly. We have some of the highest insurance premiums in the country and a proliferation of personal injury lawsuits because of the no fault personal injury scam.

You have to carry a minimum amount of coverage for you and the people in your own vehicle.

In an at fault state, causing an accident that results in a claim causes your rates to go up in order to apply the insurer's cost where it belongs, with the riskier driver.

But it's not fair to raise your rates when it was someone else's fault, so state law says the insurance company can't hike your rates for a no fault claim.

What happens instead is that since the insurance company can't hike your rates and can't hike the other guy's rates if he's with another insurer, they just raise everybody's rates across the entire state to remain profitable.

Since drivers in general know their own rates won't go up because of an accident but their liability is still covered to some extent, there is less apparent incentive to drive carefully to avoid financial ruin. They have less skin in the game. People drive like maniacs down here. Why not? If they hurt someone, it's no fault baby!

Accident rates statewide go up as a result. That causes more claims. That causes rates to rise even more.

Since the rates are higher, people reduce their coverage to the minimums to actually be able to afford their insurance. For my four cars, carrying the coverage level and deductibles I had in Texas was going to cost me more than $4000 per year year, as opposed to around $1600 per year there.

When drivers here have a no fault accident after reducing their coverage to an affordable level, the insurance isn't sufficient to cover their own or their passengers' injuries. That's the point where the lawyers get involved.

First, passengers in the car that didn't cause the accident sue that driver and his insurer, because that's the insurer from whom they have to recover first.

When that tap runs dry, the passengers sue the other driver and his insurance, even though that insurer isn't actually liable for those claims. They're not supposed to, but they do, because most insurers will squeeze out some settlement money to stay out of court.

Then the driver that wasn't at fault sues the other driver's insurance and the other driver himself. That's a legitimate suit, since his own coverage ran out but there are still medical bills to be paid.

Meanwhile the driver who caused the accident lawyers up, and he sues the driver who didn't cause the accident, trying to claim comparative negligence on the other guy's part contributed to the accident. In other words, I caused the accident, but it wouldn't have happened if you weren't there for me to hit, so it's your fault. This actually works in many cases, because the insurers will settle rather than go to court and risk the money on a confused jury or judge.

And all these lawsuits and claims cost the insurance companies even more money, which they pass on to all their customers all across the state, resulting in some of the highest, most ridiculous rates in the country.

Not too long ago there was an idiotic story all over the news that illustrated why no fault is bullshit. A bunch of 14 to 16 year old teenagers stole a couple of cars and took them out on Highway 19, where they played tag with a cop. This is a "thing" among young gang bangers. What they do is one takes off at a high rate of speed where they know there's a cop, with the other one hanging back. When the cop gives chase, the other car races up from behind and tries to get the cop to chase him instead. Then the two cars take turns playing tag to make an idiot of the cop. When it gets too hot, they crash the car in a neighborhood and bail out on foot. If they get caught, it's no big deal because they're juveniles.

But this time one of these kids playing chicken ran a red light and smashed a guy who did absolutely nothing wrong.

The car thief had three other kids in the car with him, all of whom ended up in the hospital. Since that kid didn't even have a driver's license, much less personal injury insurance, those kids lawyered up and sued not only the insurer of the stolen car, but also the victim they hit. Everybody involved got sued except the piece of shit who caused the accident in the first place.

The victim's insurance company paid off the kids. I think they got $30K each if I remember correctly.

And now I'm paying for those fuckers with my higher rates.

Every year or two one house of the Florida legislature passes a bill to get rid of no fault. Every time the goddamned trial lawyers lobby the shit out of the other house or the governor to kill it. The insurers and consumers want it gone, but no fault supports an entire industry of ambulance chasers here in Florida who donate a lot of money to political campaigns. They pull out all the stops to keep it.

Sorry OP, you need to figure this out yourself.

If you can lose $9000 at a casino you can afford to pay the other person back, especially since you are at fault. The more people try to run from valid insurance claims, the more it impacts the rest of us via rate increases down the road.

If you only have $100 in your bank account, where did the $9000 come from? A loan shark? If it's not your money to lose then you have larger issues that none of us can offer meaningful advice on.

All this info is really helpful if OP was living in Australia like you.

But as mentioned already with others, the US is not like other places. Each state has their own requirement for insurance minimums, so having a "I have this type of insurance" conversation when you don't live in the same area as the person asking the question is pointless.

Plus, $2000 AUD a year? should we bring in exchange rates and make this a bigger mess of a conversation?

Although our insurance is called "no fault" it doesn't work at all as you described. There is still "fault" assigned and the at "fault" drivers rates will go up. The other driver's will not. So really ours is an at fault no fault system. It has worked very, very well here for a long time.

This ^

If you don't live in EXACTLY the same area, have EXACTLY the same driving record, Are EXACTLY the same age and sex, have EXACTLY the same credit rating, etc. In fact unless you are exactly the same person comparing rates is meaningless at best and totally deceiving at worst.
I have had my rates drop by $200 a year just by moving a block away into a "different" zone.

Wow, tough crowd

My post was about the amount of third party, as states, I'm covered for $20 million.

I agree the rest was fluff though

$2000 AUD = $1351.40 at this point in time, simples.

:popcorn:

You could have stopped right there.

You essentially said that we need tort reform. I agree.

You also said Flordians are fucking horrible. I agree.

With tort reform, all insurance rates would drop. With a civil society, all insurance rates would drop.

No I didn't, because that term is generally meaningless. What torts would you reform to make the system fair?

Liability law needs an enema. IANAL. I just see a lot of idiotic injustices.

How does that work? All I know is I border a no fault state and to insure my wife's vehicle in it cost the same per month as all three of our cars across the border... actually slightly more. We settled in the state with the better benefits, and insurance costs was one large factor in that.

Jesus OP. Sorry to hear about your financial situation, but you really suck at financial decisions.

LOL found a good explanation and they even used the quotation marks around no fault just like I did! As you see "no fault" is not really an accurate name for it.

https://mitchellandabbott.com/no-fault-insurance.php

Don't worry, he knows it all...you'll never please him :cheers:

That sounds exactly like what it is here and what the poster from Florida was describing.

I agree.

This thread makes me feel better about my financial mistakes lol I’ve made a few and learned a lot from them. I’m not stupid enough to put myself in a super bad situation. Just gotta take the hit and keep it moving. Live and learn right?

OP I’d definitely be looking at selling the car if I were you. Pay off all your debts, put money in your account for ACTUAL necessities like food, gas, bills etc. A $500 civic can get you around town, anything more expensive is just an unnecessary luxury. I know you might not want to lose your car, but I know you also won’t want to deal with this BS. Good luck

and I'm just responding with a "insurance varies wildly based on geography" response.

simples.

Cost of insurance varying I get

Amount of cover is the issue here

OP said he had a certain amount of cover, had used it and may be out of pocket.

What happens if he hits a Lambo and does 50k dollars damage, the car hits a telegraph pole and the fix is 20k dollars, he hits a pedestrian who become a quadriplegic which costs $5 million dollars and medical bills.

Do you have some other cover for these things that I'm not understanding?

Not really. He made a big deal about how the not at fault driver would be penalized with rate increases. There has to be a very obvious contribution to the accident for both drivers to be found at partial fault here so it is rare that that both would se any sort of increase. Just the at fault one.

You still go through your own insurance. That was his point.
It's a rate increase across the board for all users.

Don't know how you figure that. The no fault system came into effect in 1989. Everybody I knew including myself had the rates go down by about 10% when it did. There is obviously something different between the two systems.
His big concern was that in the event of an accident both parties rate went up. That just isn't accurate here except in very special circumstances where the blame is shared.

You use your own insurance to fix your car in the case of you getting hit by someone else. That person is 100% to blame. Your insurance has now paid out to fix your car and deal with any of your injuries. You're telling me your rates stay the same or decrease when your policy renews?