From: briang@bari.Eng.Sun.COM (Brian Gordon)
Newsgroups: ca.driving,sun.junk,misc.legal
Subject: Traffic accident -- Small Claims Court case?
Date: 18 Nov 92 19:09:11 GMT
Followup-To: poster
Distribution: ba
Organization: Sun Microsystems Inc., Mountain View, CA
NNTP-Posting-Host: bari

What, if anything, to do ...

A vehicle I own was hit by a driver making a U-turn.  It all seemed cut and
dried until the investigator/adjuster from the other driver's insurance company
called to say they were only willing to pay 50% of the damage ...

            |    |    |
	    |         |
	    |    |    |
	    |         |
  ----------+         +-----------------------

  - - - - - -         - - - - - - - - - - - - 

  ----------+         +-----------------------
	    |    |   x|
	    |        x|
	    |    |   x|
	    |        x|
	    |   1|   x|
	    |  |1     |
	    |  v1|   *|
	    |   1   12+-----------------------
	    |    111 2
	    |        2+----------------------
	    |    |   2|
	    |      ^2 |
	    |    | |2 |
	    |       2 |
	    |    |    |
	    |         |

Traffic was backed up on that vertical street all the way off the bottom of the
drawing.  Car #2, intending to make a right turn from the right turn only lane
(xxxx), pulled as far right as possible and traveled, slowly, through the
side-street intersection towards the major intersection.  Car #1 signaled a
left turn, stopped at the median, noted that the opposing traffic had (miracle
of miracles) not blocked the intersection while waiting for their light, and
proceeded to make his (legal) U-turn.  When his turn was almost complete, he
ran smack into the side of Car #2 (at *), which was heading into that right
turn only lane.  The angle of impact was virtually a "T", with the front of Car
#1 perpendicular to the side of Car #2 behind the driver's door.

The police appeared, gathered licenses and registration, measured stuff, etc.,
and issued a ticket to driver #1 for failing to yield to through traffic.  The
accident report agrees with the description above.  The report lists one
witness, who was in the car right in front of the point of impact.  His
statement agrees with the description above, except for one strange phrasing --
when he said that Car #2 "collided with" Car #1.  Unless it was traveling
sideways, it could not have "collided with" the other car, but had to have been
hit by it.

The adjuster is arguing that his driver had no reason to expect Car #2 to
"come out of nowhere" like it did, since it was "being driven in the parking
lane".  Note, by the way, that there is "no parking" in the last block, where
the actual collision occurred, but that parking is allowed in that first
block.  They have advised their insured to both fight the ticket and to contest
the accuracy of the accident report.

Since they won't budge from their 50% offer, it appears that we have to take
some kind of action against them -- or, technically, against the other driver.
It also appears that, under current court rulings, there is no way to "sue" for
damages _and_ legal fees, so if you go the lawsuit route, you lose 1/3 of your
award to the lawyer, and end up with not much more than the 1/2 they are
offering.

That seems to mean that Small Claims Court is the only way to go.  Any opinions
on whether it is worth it?  The damages are about $2,000, so the amount in
dispute is around $1,000.  When/if the other driver loses, I would expect that
his insurance company has to pay for him.  Otherwise, it would be up to him to
sue them, in turn, to collect for the loss for which he is paying to be
insured.
--
:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:-:
| Brian G. Gordon	briang@Sun.COM    		briang@netcom.COM     |
| B.GORDON2 on GENie	70243,3012 on CompuServe	BGordon on AOL	      |
:-:- Hi! I am a .signature virus. Copy me into your .signature to join in! -:-: