Legal Help

[Reroka]

Hey all, I need some advice,

As you all know I posted I was in an accident in April, I was driving a passenger for lyft. Lyft insurance deductible is 2500.00 and since I had a passenger my insurance will not come into play.

I am going to take the driver to court and ask for 10,000.00, that amount included the damage to my car, lost wages, court fees, and car depreciation. My questing is may I include the owner of the car in my lawsuit? The driver and the owner are two different people.

[DJ's left nut]

Originally Posted by KCUnited

Quick Google search seems to indicate the drivers insurance could be used to cover damages if they're driving someone's car and the owner either doesn't have insurance or the damage exceeds their limits.

Sorry, off on my own tangent learning something new.

Best of luck.

Yeah, every state is a little different.

But typically the driver's insurance is primary and the owners can be used as secondary if necessary. Some states utilize a strict pro-rata breakdown but even that gets to be a pain in the ass to deal with.

[Reroka]

Originally Posted by DJ's left nut

So if your insurance is willing to stand in as secondary and reimburse your deductible, why bother with suing the guy?

Even if you get the judgment, he doesn't have to pay it. You've gotta figure out a way to get it paid. So then you have the headache of a garnishment action or some sort of hearing in aid of execution.

Are you concerned about your rates if your policy kicks in as secondary? If so, talk to your agent/adjuster and ask if it would be considered a chargeable event. It really shouldn't be, but I'm not up to speed on the intricacies of ride-share stuff.

I want to be reimbursed for what I am spending for his mistake.

He is at fault, he needs to pay me what I pay in order to get my car fixed. the amount of money I lost during the time my car could not be used, court fees and etc.

[DJ's left nut]

Originally Posted by scho63

Why would your insurance policy NOT pay for getting hit by an uninsured motorist?

Whether you were hauling lumber or driving a passenger, that does NOT alleviate the guilt of the 3rd party who hit you.

If your insurance company then drops you or jacks up your premium later, that is a separate issue.

Policy exclusions.

For instance, if I took on Mr. Reroka's case here and ****ed it all up, it may be the same kind of case I've done under my policy 100 different times, but I'm not operating within the course of my duties for my law firm and as such, if Reroka's sues me, my malpractice carrier won't stand in because I was out there freelancing and have policy exclusions that specifically prohibit it.

And let me tell you how much I enjoy those exclusions every time I have a family member or friend (or family member's friend) say "Hey, you're a lawyer - can you...."?

[Reroka]

Originally Posted by DJ's left nut

Policy exclusions.

For instance, if I took on Mr. Reroka's case here and ****ed it all up, it may be the same kind of case I've done under my policy 100 different times, but I'm not operating within the course of my duties for my law firm and as such, if Reroka's sues me, my malpractice carrier won't stand in because I was out there freelancing and have policy exclusions that specifically prohibit it.

And let me tell you how much I enjoy those exclusions every time I have a family member or friend (or family member's friend) say "Hey, you're a lawyer - can you...."?

DING, DING

[DJ's left nut]

Originally Posted by Reroka

I want to be reimbursed for what I am spending for his mistake.

He is at fault, he needs to pay me what I pay in order to get my car fixed. the amount of money I lost during the time my car could not be used, court fees and etc.

But if your policy is standing in as secondarily liable, you're only out $250.

Then it's your CARRIER who is subrogated to your interests and can hold him liable for THEIR right of reimbursement. Any sums they paid to you pursuant to a valid pre-existing contractual obligation essentially 'transfer' to them as the new real party in interest.

It's a little more complicated than that - your policy probably allows directly for it so there's probably straight up assignment/contractual subrogation language that would kick in. But even if not, plain ol' doctrines of equitable subrogation are going to be effective enough.

And again 'he needs to pay me' will get you a court order saying it's owed and maybe a nice little investment mechanism since judgments in Missouri run at 9.0%. But it won't actually get you PAID unless/until you're able to take the necessary steps to get that money out of him. And that's often more difficult than securing the judgment itself.

[DJ's left nut]

Originally Posted by Detoxing

Lookin' sharp in that suit, DJ.

I actually own that suit. Or something as near as makes no difference. It's my 'flashy' suit for using in St. Louis if I'm trying to pretend to be high falutin'.

I actually like it quite a bit. Nice cut; has the hand stitching at the edges (pin stiches or some shit like that). Kinda fun peacocking here and there.

I don't have that orange tie, though. Kinda feel like I need it now...

[Reroka]

Originally Posted by DJ's left nut

But if your policy is standing in as secondarily liable, you're only out $250.

Then it's your CARRIER who is subrogated to your interests and can hold him liable for THEIR right of reimbursement. Any sums they paid to you pursuant to a valid pre-existing contractual obligation essentially 'transfer' to them as the new real party in interest.

It's a little more complicated than that - your policy probably allows directly for it so there's probably straight up assignment/contractual subrogation language that would kick in. But even if not, plain ol' doctrines of equitable subrogation are going to be effective enough.

And again 'he needs to pay me' will get you a court order saying it's owed and maybe a nice little investment mechanism since judgments in Missouri run at 9.0%. But it won't actually get you PAID unless/until you're able to take the necessary steps to get that money out of him. And that's often more difficult than securing the judgment itself.

Policy exclusion,

My insurance wont stand as secondary in this case, cause I had a passenger.

My would only act as secondary for period 1 and 2, I was in 3.

[Reroka]

Originally Posted by DJ's left nut

But if your policy is standing in as secondarily liable, you're only out $250.

Then it's your CARRIER who is subrogated to your interests and can hold him liable for THEIR right of reimbursement. Any sums they paid to you pursuant to a valid pre-existing contractual obligation essentially 'transfer' to them as the new real party in interest.

It's a little more complicated than that - your policy probably allows directly for it so there's probably straight up assignment/contractual subrogation language that would kick in. But even if not, plain ol' doctrines of equitable subrogation are going to be effective enough.

And again 'he needs to pay me' will get you a court order saying it's owed and maybe a nice little investment mechanism since judgments in Missouri run at 9.0%. But it won't actually get you PAID unless/until you're able to take the necessary steps to get that money out of him. And that's often more difficult than securing the judgment itself.

IF the amount is under 10k, go to small claims court.
which is what I am speaking about right now.

[DJ's left nut]

Originally Posted by Reroka

Policy exclusion,

My insurance wont stand as secondary in this case, cause I had a passenger.

My would only act as secondary for period 1 and 2, I was in 3.

So then I am confused.

Was this:

Originally Posted by Reroka

The link below explains it, My insurance would kick in as a secondary insurance and would reimburse me 2,250.00 because my ded is only 250.0 or in this case of UM, I would get 2400.00 back from my insurance.

Mostly a tangent then? I'm guessing I lost track of your train of thought in there somewhere.

Eh, do what you will with it. I'll simply reiterate that collecting on judgments is a pain in the ass.

[Reroka]

Originally Posted by DJ's left nut

So then I am confused.

Was this:



Mostly a tangent then? I'm guessing I lost track of your train of thought in there somewhere.

Eh, do what you will with it. I'll simply reiterate that collecting on judgments is a pain in the ass.

I hear ya,

So, the less pain in the ass move would be to just pay it myself and move on.

Thought this would be the case.

[Demonpenz]

Originally Posted by Detoxing

Lookin' sharp in that suit, DJ.

That guy drives a Camaro

[Reroka]

The person who hit me accepted my offer to settle out of court. I pick up a check Saturday for 5k. A threat of me suing was enough to get a settlement.

[DJ's left nut]

Originally Posted by Reroka

The person who hit me accepted my offer to settle out of court. I pick up a check Saturday for 5k. A threat of me suing was enough to get a settlement.

Be careful.

You do anything to dick up your carriers rights to subrogation and they could come after you for it. But if the $5k keeps your carrier out of it altogether, that’s safe enough.

[PunkinDrublic]

Antifreeze

[Sassy Squatch]

Lol nice.