• Go to page :
  • 1 2
  • Text Only
jaytrader said:   Random: I don't get why anyone would call their insurance company when they're 100% not at-fault. I ALWAYS have called the at-fault driver's insurance and filed a claim that way. I know that your insurance, no matter the fault, is supposed to know...but why even bother getting them involved?

Jaytrader in this particular case (in a 3 car accident) where our car was pushed into the car in front, it probably does make sense to involve our insurer in case the car in front of us decides to sue. That car's behavior has been shady to begin with and as SIS and BEEFJerkay said my insurer may be better prepared to defend me if that driver play's games aka sue or anything more.

Also I think beef mentioned something in our policy documents that binds us to report these to the insurer so that they can act accordingly and appropriately, would hate to see Geico hold it against me for not reporting it if a year from now the shady guy decides to sue.

joshuasachs said:   RE: replacing seat belts.
Any time you are in an accident serious enough to deploy the airbags any seatbelts that were in use need to be replaced. Modern cars contain a sensor that detects sudden loss of momentum. When this sensor is tripped there are explosives in the base of the seatbelt housing that act to forcibly retract the seatbelt and hopefully keep the occupants in the car and not going through the windshield. Obviously this is a one time action.


Hi Joshua the air bag(s) didn't deploy in our accident but Geico did ask us to get a new replacement car seat.

When the Body Shop takes a look at the vehicle I will ask them about getting the seat belts replced.

ankitgu said:   At the end of the day, you did nothing wrong, and the impact on insurance is out of your hand. I wouldn't think twice about it for that reason. If rates go up, it's not anything you can do something about. If they don't go up, you still can't do anything. That is, can't do anything apart from shopping around. I wouldn't worry about it for that reason.

Agreed, after 24 hours of turmoil and some emotional stress (mainly due to the child being in the car at the time of the accident) I think I am a little more relaxed now and perhaps in a more accepting frame of mind in case our rates do go up in the future.

ankitgu said:   burgerwars said:   About three years ago I was rear ended in a parking lot. Not my fault. Other party's insurance paid all costs (my trunk lid needed replacing plus some other minor damage). My insurance didn't care.
10 months later I was hit by a drunk driver. He had no insurance. Major incident. Demolished my car, injuries, etc. I collected nearly $100,000 from my own uninsured motorist coverage. Maybe my insurance cared about their losses, but my rate didn't go up.
I'm thinking if one keeps getting into not at fault accidents there will be issues with your coverage. They'll wonder why you're accident prone. Still it's better to be not at fault than at fault (not taking into account injuries).

That's what I would assume. After a certain amount, it would become a statistical anomaly, and they might begin to check out the claims a little bit more to make sure there's no fraud going on.


Yes this is a good point, and fortunately not applicable in either of our accidents so we have nothing to worry about or hide. Sure if they want they can investigate the two claims, but they will not find any wrong doing aka fraud on our part.

ankitgu said:   snork615 said:   Warren Buffett's insurance will really screw you over next year. Time to start searching for a new carrier before you you get blackballed into the risk pool, we agree that you are the victim but Geico underwriters will get you.
Lol - please explain this. They're bound to filing rates that are compatible/accepted by the state. Geico is not the toughest underwriter around - I would say Progressive is the best pricer in general for risk.

And look - because these are not at fault, companies will take that into consideration. Buffett, of all people, understands the difference between process and outcome. Just because someone got into a not-at-fault accident doesn't mean they caused it, and their actual risk profile may have not changed. In fact, 50% of most car accidents are likely not at fault, so you'd imagine that this is a routine item for them. If Geico is incorrectly viewing this risk, then it's to their own fault, not the consumer. Someone else can easily step in and properly write the risk.


Ankit I think you are guilty (like me ) of applying logic to a situation/industry that probably has no logic. Ultimately the Geico's and others are all in this business for the money and we are merely a number in their database that has a risk quotient attached to each of us, who knows what formula they will use to raise or keep or drop rates.

riznick said:    Was the impact strong enough for the possibility of damage? That $200 could go towards something else if you are confident that the seats were not harmed. In my experience, they give you a check up front and don't ask for a receipt.

Hmm I am not sure to be honest if the car seat is still good or not safe for use (visually it looks ok), fortunately Geico wants it back with the car and so I don't have to decide what to do

I will be getting a new car seat today and installing it, and they did ask for the receipt to be sent to them also. Probably better to be safe than sorry when the child is in the equation. And they are picking up the full tab anyway.

newbietx said:   Jaytrader in this particular case (in a 3 car accident) where our car was pushed into the car in front, it probably does make sense to involve our insurer in case the car in front of us decides to sue.

Yup. Shadiness not being so much a factor as the facts.

All that car C knows for certain is that car B ran into car C. Did something outside car B's control cause that to happen? Yeah, probably. But the only verifiable fact -- from car C's insurer's perspective -- is that car B crashed into car C.

For all car C's insurer might initially know, there may never have been a car A at all. Some might say eye witnesses are notoriously unreliable. Greg House might say, "Everybody lies." Regardless, the place to start is with the verifiable facts and work from there.

In the end, it all gets sorted out.

newbietx said:   jaytrader said:   Random: I don't get why anyone would call their insurance company when they're 100% not at-fault. I ALWAYS have called the at-fault driver's insurance and filed a claim that way. I know that your insurance, no matter the fault, is supposed to know...but why even bother getting them involved?

Jaytrader in this particular case (in a 3 car accident) where our car was pushed into the car in front, it probably does make sense to involve our insurer in case the car in front of us decides to sue. That car's behavior has been shady to begin with and as SIS and BEEFJerkay said my insurer may be better prepared to defend me if that driver play's games aka sue or anything more.

Also I think beef mentioned something in our policy documents that binds us to report these to the insurer so that they can act accordingly and appropriately, would hate to see Geico hold it against me for not reporting it if a year from now the shady guy decides to sue.

Let me share a story that doesn't even involve getting hit - I bought a car on the Internet and as it was being shipped to me it caught fire on the transport truck . I should have immediately notified my insurer , but instead figured I'd go through the transporters insurer since they were a licensed , insured legit company. Well they decided to close shop after the fire and not cooperate with their insurer, so their insurer wouldn't pay .

So then I turned to my insurer to file a claim. Well they saw this whole situation as suspicious and looked for ways they could deny coverage . One of those reasons was failing to report the fire to them when ii learned of it. Now that rule is nowhere in their policy, but full disclosure is part of california insurance regulations- so we had to file a bad faith lawsuit against them. While the common saying is not to report things to your insurer to keep your rates low, it's much simpler to just report it when it happens than risk denial later.

SUCKISSTAPLES said:   I bought a car on the Internet and as it was being shipped to me it caught fire on the transport truck .

Having worked with SiS on this one, I can only testify that the full story is not just true, but even more bizarre.

Nothing SiS does is common or easy.

SUCKISSTAPLES said:   Inform your insurer.

I hope the cop put car c ran from the scene then came back in his report

They were likely changing drivers or dumping contraband , and the only reason they came back is they intend to make a claim against you


Or getting more people in the car to make personal injury claims.

Or just young, stupid and scared.

jaytrader said:   Random: I don't get why anyone would call their insurance company when they're 100% not at-fault. I ALWAYS have called the at-fault driver's insurance and filed a claim that way. I know that your insurance, no matter the fault, is supposed to know...but why even bother getting them involved?

Because the at-fault driver may not have adequate insurance to cover the damage. I felt the exact same way as you, when my car was totaled earlier this year, along with five other vehicles. At-fault insurer was covered with the state min liability, which in TX is $25K. 5 of the 6 vehicles in this accident were totaled, $25K wasn't going to cut it. My insurer, Geico, filed it as uninsured/under-insured on my policy, which reimbursed me for my vehicle. Still working out all the personal injury details, which will be filed against the at-fault insurer (my lawyer is handling the claim, once I complete treatment).

LorenPechtel said:   SUCKISSTAPLES said:   Inform your insurer.

I hope the cop put car c ran from the scene then came back in his report

They were likely changing drivers or dumping contraband , and the only reason they came back is they intend to make a claim against you


Or getting more people in the car to make personal injury claims.


When the vehicle came back to the scene it was only the driver (no other occupants).

BEEFjerKAY said:   Or just young, stupid and scared.

As per the DOB on the incident report this man (W/M) is in his 50's (I would have guessed as much also).

The driver who started it all was young (teen) and was certainly scared (and disoriented also) but cooperated fully and was extremely sorry and kept apologizing all the more given that there was a child in our car.

SUCKISSTAPLES said:   Let me share a story that doesn't even involve getting hit - I bought a car on the Internet and as it was being shipped to me it caught fire on the transport truck . I should have immediately notified my insurer , but instead figured I'd go through the transporters insurer since they were a licensed , insured legit company. Well they decided to close shop after the fire and not cooperate with their insurer, so their insurer wouldn't pay .

So then I turned to my insurer to file a claim. Well they saw this whole situation as suspicious and looked for ways they could deny coverage . One of those reasons was failing to report the fire to them when ii learned of it. Now that rule is nowhere in their policy, but full disclosure is part of california insurance regulations- so we had to file a bad faith lawsuit against them. While the common saying is not to report things to your insurer to keep your rates low, it's much simpler to just report it when it happens than risk denial later.


SIS I remember reading about this in some other thread you had posted in. So how did this end or is it still in litigation?

Still in litigation - ill update when I am able with a cautionary tale for other fwfers

newbietx said:   riznick said:    Was the impact strong enough for the possibility of damage? That $200 could go towards something else if you are confident that the seats were not harmed. In my experience, they give you a check up front and don't ask for a receipt.

Hmm I am not sure to be honest if the car seat is still good or not safe for use (visually it looks ok), fortunately Geico wants it back with the car and so I don't have to decide what to do

I will be getting a new car seat today and installing it, and they did ask for the receipt to be sent to them also. Probably better to be safe than sorry when the child is in the equation. And they are picking up the full tab anyway.


Even if it looks visually ok, there may be cracks developing. Most car seat manufacturers recommend replacing the car seat if the car was involved in an accident even if the car seat itself is not damaged (I believe NHTSA recommends replacement even if the seat was unoccupied at the time of the accident but i'm not 100% sure on that). Do yourself a favor and go replace the car seat even if its coming out of your pocket. Remember that your most precious cargo is occupying that seat.

If hypothetically, car b is at fault for hitting car c, then at what point can you still claim you were a reasonable distance? A full size truck has more inertia than a little car, so depending on what speed any given vehicle is going in that sort of situation, how do you know? You just stop a full block away if you drive a car incase a semitruck smashes into you at 50mph?

TheWalL said:   newbietx said:   riznick said:    Was the impact strong enough for the possibility of damage? That $200 could go towards something else if you are confident that the seats were not harmed. In my experience, they give you a check up front and don't ask for a receipt.

Hmm I am not sure to be honest if the car seat is still good or not safe for use (visually it looks ok), fortunately Geico wants it back with the car and so I don't have to decide what to do

I will be getting a new car seat today and installing it, and they did ask for the receipt to be sent to them also. Probably better to be safe than sorry when the child is in the equation. And they are picking up the full tab anyway.


Even if it looks visually ok, there may be cracks developing. Most car seat manufacturers recommend replacing the car seat if the car was involved in an accident even if the car seat itself is not damaged (I believe NHTSA recommends replacement even if the seat was unoccupied at the time of the accident but i'm not 100% sure on that). Do yourself a favor and go replace the car seat even if its coming out of your pocket. Remember that your most precious cargo is occupying that seat.


I agree and to be honest I was at no time debating whether to keep the same car seat or buy a new one. We were going to get a new one no matter what.

thumpergeek said:   If hypothetically, car b is at fault for hitting car c, then at what point can you still claim you were a reasonable distance? A full size truck has more inertia than a little car, so depending on what speed any given vehicle is going in that sort of situation, how do you know? You just stop a full block away if you drive a car incase a semitruck smashes into you at 50mph?

Yes this is a good point. My wife did have a safe distance, she could see the tires of the vehicle in front, yet the impact from behind was so great that it moved our car into the one in front. I wonder how they deem in such cases that a safe distance had not been maintained.

I don't know why anyone would let their insurance company pay a claim that was not their fault if the other driver had valid insurance. As a courtesy your insurance company can initiate the claim for you with the other insurance company , but you shouldn't collect the benefits from your own policy and then let them recoup their loss. You can also do it yourself without the help of your insurance company.

I live in Pa, had a guy hit me in the rear. I called his insurance company, then called mine. Mine said OK, let us know if you need anything from us. When I got a letter informing me that his policy was not valid at the time of the accident, I called my insurance and then they handled everything, including the suit against the driver.

Never give them any amunition
source
8. Is it legal for my insurance company to non-renew my auto insurance because I have too many claims?
An insurance company may non-renew a policy for two or more accidents of certain types within 36 months, when the amount paid in claims for both accidents exceeds the current threshold amount after the insured pays any applicable deductible.

newbietx said:   thumpergeek said:   If hypothetically, car b is at fault for hitting car c, then at what point can you still claim you were a reasonable distance? A full size truck has more inertia than a little car, so depending on what speed any given vehicle is going in that sort of situation, how do you know? You just stop a full block away if you drive a car incase a semitruck smashes into you at 50mph?

Yes this is a good point. My wife did have a safe distance, she could see the tires of the vehicle in front, yet the impact from behind was so great that it moved our car into the one in front. I wonder how they deem in such cases that a safe distance had not been maintained.
I was stopped at a light and saw the driver coming that hit me in the rear. I was standing on the brake of my minivan when the small chevy blazer hit the rear corner. The impact forced my van into the vehicle in front of me. We don't go around anticipating rear end collision and leaving full car lenght gaps between every car ar traffic lights. That would take up too much room and traffic would never get anywhere.

jimates said:   I don't know why anyone would let their insurance company pay a claim that was not their fault if the other driver had valid insurance. As a courtesy your insurance company can initiate the claim for you with the other insurance company , but you shouldn't collect the benefits from your own policy and then let them recoup their loss. You can also do it yourself without the help of your insurance company.

I live in Pa, had a guy hit me in the rear. I called his insurance company, then called mine. Mine said OK, let us know if you need anything from us. When I got a letter informing me that his policy was not valid at the time of the accident, I called my insurance and then they handled everything, including the suit against the driver.

Never give them any amunition
source
8. Is it legal for my insurance company to non-renew my auto insurance because I have too many claims?
An insurance company may non-renew a policy for two or more accidents of certain types within 36 months, when the amount paid in claims for both accidents exceeds the current threshold amount after the insured pays any applicable deductible.


Thanks for the information and the link.

jimates said:   I don't know why anyone would let their insurance company pay a claim that was not their fault if the other driver had valid insurance.

That's not what anyone is suggesting here.

jaytrader said:   Random: I don't get why anyone would call their insurance company when they're 100% not at-fault. I ALWAYS have called the at-fault driver's insurance and filed a claim that way. I know that your insurance, no matter the fault, is supposed to know...but why even bother getting them involved?

Because once the teen talks to mommie and daddy and they decide it couldn't possibly have been their princess's fault, they will call your insurance for you. This has happened to me. You are better off informing your insurance and immediately calling their insurance to give your side of the story to both. This happened to me a few years ago, the teen admitted fault at the site. By the time I got to my destination 2 hours later and called my insurance, her dad had already called my insurance to file a claim.

thumpergeek said:   If hypothetically, car b is at fault for hitting car c, then at what point can you still claim you were a reasonable distance? A full size truck has more inertia than a little car, so depending on what speed any given vehicle is going in that sort of situation, how do you know? You just stop a full block away if you drive a car incase a semitruck smashes into you at 50mph?

Yeah, some of the traffic laws appear to be made by people more interested in having a clear target to blame rather than blaming the right target.

SUCKISSTAPLES said:   Let me share a story that doesn't even involve getting hit - I bought a car on the Internet and as it was being shipped to me it caught fire on the transport truck . I should have immediately notified my insurer , but instead figured I'd go through the transporters insurer since they were a licensed , insured legit company. Well they decided to close shop after the fire and not cooperate with their insurer, so their insurer wouldn't pay .

So then I turned to my insurer to file a claim. Well they saw this whole situation as suspicious and looked for ways they could deny coverage . One of those reasons was failing to report the fire to them when ii learned of it. Now that rule is nowhere in their policy, but full disclosure is part of california insurance regulations- so we had to file a bad faith lawsuit against them. While the common saying is not to report things to your insurer to keep your rates low, it's much simpler to just report it when it happens than risk denial later.


I didn't think a $1000 crown Vic was worth all that effort -- shipping, insurance claims, etc.

I actually saw a white crown Vic with German plates flying down the Autobahn last week and had to wonder if it was the Fatwallet effect.

chuzzlewit said:   jaytrader said:   Random: I don't get why anyone would call their insurance company when they're 100% not at-fault. I ALWAYS have called the at-fault driver's insurance and filed a claim that way. I know that your insurance, no matter the fault, is supposed to know...but why even bother getting them involved?

Because once the teen talks to mommie and daddy and they decide it couldn't possibly have been their princess's fault, they will call your insurance for you. This has happened to me. You are better off informing your insurance and immediately calling their insurance to give your side of the story to both. This happened to me a few years ago, the teen admitted fault at the site. By the time I got to my destination 2 hours later and called my insurance, her dad had already called my insurance to file a claim.


Yes this happens more often than not. One way to protect yourself is to always call 911 and get a cop to document a report (that way even if the other party changes their story, you got the truth (or as close to it) in the report). I understand that in some parts of the country (or depending on lack of free squad cars at that time) 911 doesn't always dispatch a cop, in such cases, try to persuade the 911 operator to send a cop by stating that you feel the other driver may not be in their full senses (impaired in some way), chances are you will get a cop on the spot.

Luckily everything is still holding in our case. As I said the teen's insurance called us and admitted liability. But we are going through our insurance.

My wife was hit from behind at a stop light. We filed with Geico and they dealt with his insurance. Less than two years later. I was hit from behind by a women who claimed her child had gotten out of his safety seat and when she looked back to get him to sit down, she plowed into me at 45mph. The light was green, but traffic was stopped. She had no insurance.

I filed a claim with Geico and my rates did go up. When I shopped for other insurance, my low quote would always jump dramatically when I went to make the purchase. Turns out Geico had me listed as at fault in my claim on the CLUE report.

I can't tell you if it was a simple mistake or intentional, but it made my decision to never do business with them again.

You can get that changed , and you should

riznick said:   
Someone hit us at like 5 mph. Insurance company said that they were required to compensate us for new car seats even if there was no possibility of damage.

They will give you something like $120 per car seat. I see no reason to replace the car seats.

Since our car seat model in the $200+ range, we had to tell our insurance what car seat we had. They compensated us $200+ for retail on a new car seat for that model.


If it were me, I'd replace the seats unless you have some way of certifying that there is no damage. If you get in another accident and your child is hurt, you would be giving the insurance company an out on paying a claim. If they ask for a receipt on the replacement seats and you don't have one, they could claim you kept using a damaged seat they paid you to replace, causing your child's injury.

chibimike said:   riznick said:   
Someone hit us at like 5 mph. Insurance company said that they were required to compensate us for new car seats even if there was no possibility of damage.

They will give you something like $120 per car seat. I see no reason to replace the car seats.

Since our car seat model in the $200+ range, we had to tell our insurance what car seat we had. They compensated us $200+ for retail on a new car seat for that model.


If it were me, I'd replace the seats unless you have some way of certifying that there is no damage. If you get in another accident and your child is hurt, you would be giving the insurance company an out on paying a claim. If they ask for a receipt on the replacement seats and you don't have one, they could claim you kept using a damaged seat they paid you to replace, causing your child's injury.

I'm sure that there are some gray areas where one wouldn't know. I know the seats were not damaged. My SUV didn't even move. Some car backed into my drivers side door. The person was a complete ahole about it. I backed out and was about to go forward. He then backed out and hit my door while I was stopped and hitting the horn. He then gets out his car and blames it on me. His insurance company put me at fault, my insurance company put him at fault. If it happened locally, I would have pursued it. Unfortunately, it happened in a border town far away from anything while we were on a road trip, so I let the insurance companies handle it.

I did actually use the money to buy another car seat to put in another car to make things more convenient.

As for another insurance company asking for a receipt: They can't expect someone to keep their receipts.

I got it changed, but it took awhile.

riznick said:   As for another insurance company asking for a receipt: They can't expect someone to keep their receipts.

Uh, yes they can.

So for reasons unknown the vehicle (after being repaired) came back with the car seat in it. I thought Geico would have retained it to destroy.

If I cut the seat belts and dump the car seat is that good enough or can someone still try to put it back into circulation if they retrieve it from the dumpster?

Update - Just got the policy renewal notice for the next 6 months.

For the same coverage the rate went down a couple of bucks



Disclaimer: By providing links to other sites, FatWallet.com does not guarantee, approve or endorse the information or products available at these sites, nor does a link indicate any association with or endorsement by the linked site to FatWallet.com.

Thanks for visiting FatWallet.com. Join for free to remove this ad.

TRUSTe online privacy certification

While FatWallet makes every effort to post correct information, offers are subject to change without notice.
Some exclusions may apply based upon merchant policies.
© 1999-2014