Is their a law saying that I have to pay the insurance company of an auto accident of another partly?

Question

I hard an auto accident on March 07.
I made a left turn at a Intersection at 10 mph and hit a 2007
Audi that is slightly damage to my 94 Caprice Chevy more damage was done to her Audi. No one was hurt. Police was notify. She had a witness. Now my insurance company say it was my fault also her insurance company since I have only 10,000 dollars in liability my insurance already paid her. Her insurance paid the other 15,000 which cover the total cost of 25,000 dollars. Her insurance company want to collect the other 15,000 from me. Then was her insurance for ? This sounds like extortion with her carrier. Is there a law saying I have to pay her insurance costs it was a dam accident. Since when and where does it say I have to pay for an accident that was pay by her insurance company. This is Extortion at the highest level.
Also at the intersection when it happen on her side of the road the stop sign was taken down. I was makin a left turn.

[Update] This happen in the state of New Jesey. My insurance is Liberty Mutual. I have photos of the accident. I hope I have a case with my lawyer.

Check for you to see ;

Her Audi : http://tinyurl.com/yvyu8f

The missing stop sign : http://tinyurl.com/26xh5o

Explanation : http://tinyurl.com/293l8b

My view make a left turn : http://tinyurl.com/28a6l7

Answer 1

Not exactly.

Let's break this down into parts:

First of all, the law. There are two types of law - statutes, and case law. Statutes are the laws on the books. Case laws are they way they get interpreted, in courts. Generally, there are "standards of fault" for an accident. One typical standard of fault is making a left hand turn. If she was going straight, and you were making the left, you're at fault.

Clearly, fault is not at issue here, as both your insurer and her insurer agreed that YOU are fully at fault in accordance with your state law.

Now, insurance. If you were UNINSURED, you'd be just as at fault, just as responsible, as you are with insurance. Unfortunately, you are UNDERINSURED. You don't have very much coverage. Sorry, $10,000 won't fix MOST cars on the road today. Just because you carry a small amount of insurance, that doesn't mean the REST is forgiven.

Now, her insurance. When HER policy pays out, in exchange for them paying her, she automatically gives up the right to sue you - passes it on to them. Just like they would with an UNINSURED driver, they will go after you for what you are responsible for - the $15,000 difference. Plus her deductible. After all, this accident is YOUR fault, it's not fair that SHE has to pay a deductible, or that HER INSURANCE has to pay anything at all.

It's not extortion. You are responsible for $25,000 of damages. Your insurance paid some, YOU will end up paying the rest. The law isn't on the books. If you don't come to a payment arrangement with them, they will sue you in court. AND WIN. Then they will slap on interest charges and legal fees, and garnish your wages. It's pretty cut and dried. You caused the accident. You need to pay for the damages that your insurance doesn't cover.

And then you need to raise your property damage limit to AT LEAST $50,000, and your bodily injury limit to AT LEAST $50,000/$100,000. At the very minimum.

Answer 2

you neglect to mention where this happened, so we do not know if the laws there might be a bit different ["No Fault" laws make a huge difference].

that said, if you made a left turn and hit someone, no matter the speed, a jury would likely find you liable. In non-No Fault states, that means you pay.

your insurance already paid the maximum amount on your policy, 10k. Thus, you get to pay the rest.

Her insurance company, by paying the 15k remaind, takes over her legal position of being able to sue the person who caused the accident -- you.

since you were not paying her insurance bills, her insurance company does not protect you -- only her. And it gets to take over any claims she has against you when it pays.

the issue of the stop sign that was down is immaterial. you may only turn left when there is no opposing traffic.

pay or be sued.

if you are sued, be assured that it will appear on your credit report for the next seven to ten years.

***
in retrospect, it is obvious that you were not carrying enough insurance. i suggest you increase your coverage to at least 50k, if not 100k.

***
i'm not familiar with Audis. I find it difficult to believe that a 10 mph accident caused 25k in damage. And, perhaps she was making 40 mph, which would make it entirely possible or even likely.

if you are sued, you have the right to be represented by counsel at your own expense [this is a civil case, not a criminal case]. Perhaps a good attorney would be able to show some reason why you shouldn't be liable and she should be instead. {speeding on her part, for example.}

however, you'd have to prove this court by a preponderance of the evidence, and, as you say, she has a witness.


ouch ... hard lesson

Answer 3

She has insurance in case she causes an accident, not to help you if you cause an accident. This is not an insurance cost. You have to pay $15,000 because you caused $25,000 in damages and only had $10,000 in insurance. This is the same amount that you would have to pay to her if her insurance had not paid you. Either way, you end up with $10,000 less, she ends up with $25,000 more, and her insurer ends up where it started. Her insurance is not costing you any extra; you just have to pay her insurance instead of paying her the exact same amount. If you do not want to have to pay when you cause an accident, get more insurance yourself; do not expect hers to help you unless she is at fault. I have $100,000 for property damage and $300,000 for injuries.

By the way, at 10 MPH, you should have been able to stop in time to avoid hitting the other car.

Also, I usually stop (even if there is not a stop sign) if I am turning left and there are other cars, unless there is a traffic light with a green left arrow.

You might be able to sue whoever took down the stop sign, both for the $15,000 and for the damage to your car. If an individual stole the sign, you would have to determine who that was. If the government decided to remove the sign for some reason, that is a more complex case; ask a lawyer.

Answer 4

Normally, if you cause someone to suffer, for example, $25,000 in property damage based on your negligence, they have a legal claim against you. They could sue you for that amount.

An insurance company simply steps in the shoes of the injured party. The insurance company covers the costs of the injured party's damage, necessary repairs etc. In exchange, the injured party assigns their right to sue to the insurance company. So when an insurance company demands that you pay a certain amount, it is just as if the demand were coming from the injured party.

If you don't want to pay the requested amount, you don't "legally"have to pay it when the request is initially made (unless what you received was a court order).

They will sue you to get it though.

And the court case will decide whether, (and to what extent) you were negligent. Many states have comparative fault statutes. In these states, for example--if you were 10% to blame, and the other driver 90% to blame, you may only have to pay 10% of the total damage that resulted. Other states have different rules (if you were the responsible for most of the damage, you receive nothing regardless.)

Once the award has been decided, however, then you must pay it unless it can be overturned on appeal, which doesn't ordinarily happen.

I don't think it's extortion to be forced to pay what you actually owe. But if you think you don't actually owe it; then fight it out, but keep in mind your attorney costs. If you ultimately save yourself $3000 by winning the case, but the attorney's bill is $3500, you are coming out worse than had you just paid the money.

It also sounds to me that your own insurance company is no longer part of this proceeding. They've looked at it, they've decided your at fault, they've paid the maximum amount according to your policy, and now their washing their hands clean of it.

I would bet that they have no more contractual obligations to you at this point. You would be going on your own.

However, remember that the fact that your own insurance company settled is inadmissible evidence in court.

Answer 5

I would like to throw in my 1.5 cents on this one.

If possible edit your post to let us know what state the accident happened in and what insurance company insures the Audi.

I own a subrogation vendor company that represents insurance companies in claims like the one against you.

As you have already been informed your limits were way too low. You're agent, if you had one, should be shot for letting you walk out the door with 10K in property damage coverage, even if that is the amount you wanted.

Do you know if your company tried to settle with the other for your limits. Your company has a duty to do everything they can to settle the claim against you at or below your policy limit. Normally, they would offer the 10k in exchange for a release of any additional claims against you. Make sure they tried this.

Even though they don't have to, some of our insurance company clients, in the position of the Audi's company, would not pursue the at-fault party for anything above their low policy limits. You had legal liability coverage and some companies don't punish people who bought the state mandated minimum coverage even if it is a horribly low amount.

Make no mistake about it the Audi's company has the legal right to come after you. I'm just saying many companies wouldn't. If they pursue the matter via a lawsuit. Ask your company if they provide you with a lawyer. Odds are that they don't have to but I would ask them any way.

If you do end up paying this most companies will let you make monthly payments. Not that this will make the whole thing wonderful for you but it does ease the bite a little bit.

Good Luck

Answer 6

Yes, you owe her company the money they paid back. You caused injury/damage to her or her vehicle. You are an adult and you are legally responsible for your actions and the consequence of those actions. You chose to drive with only 10,000 pd limits - you chose to take the risk that you would cause more than 10,000 worth of damage and be held liable for the rest.

Let me guess, when you talked to your agent all you cared about was how much premium you paid and not the amount of your coverage or even what your coverage was. Sorry, I'm not going to blame your agent for your choice to carry low limits. Since agents are paid on commission, they would rather have you pay more premium for higher limits then just give you state minimums.

Her company will pursue legal action against you, or they may turn you over to collections or they may write into the state where you live and have your drivers licenses suspended.

However, you do not have to pay 15,000 all at once. Contact her company and offer to pay them 100.00 per month until the debt is paid in full. They will not charge you interest. As long as you make your monthly payments, they will not take your drivers license or sue you.

Or if you are able to pay a lump sum (say 7500) - offer to pay them the lump sum of 7500 as payment in full. The insurance company would rather get 7500 now (in hand) and call it even then get 100 per month for the next 12-13 years.

Answer 7

Basically yes. Tort law says that you have to compensate those whom you injure.

Had you had sufficient liability coverage you would not have to pay. You should NEVER drive with just minimum liability coverage, and now you have received an object lesson as to why. Plenty of vehicles on the road cost over $50,000 and if you're found at fault in damaging one of them you'll be out of pocket for the damages that exceed you insurance coverage as you have learned.

The at-fault party's insurance company will pay up to the policy limits. If the damages are more than the policy provides for then the owner is personally liable for the excess. Sorry, but that's the way that the system works.

Excess liability coverage is cheap compared to the cost of basic liability. I carry $100k in property damage coverage and my 300/500/100 coverage is only about 20% more expensive than my state's minimum 25/50/10 liability coverage requirement.

Answer 8

Let me see if I get your description properly. There are two lanes. She's stopped in the middle of BOTH lanes. To me, that means she's straddling the dividing line. Then you added "slightly more to the other lane". As we drive on the right, I'll assume she's slightly more into the left lane? Say, 2/3 in left lane, 1/3 in right lane? Then you decided that she's not moving, so you then proceed to pass her on the right, even though she has 1/3 of the car hanging in your lane. Is that correct? Then as you pass her on the right, she turned right and right into you. Is that correct? Technically speaking, you *did* make an unsafe pass. In CA, the law basically says that "You can pass on the right when the car in front of you is making a left turn. When there is unobstructed pavement with the width of two or more lines going in the same direction. If not, you are going to have to wait." I don't know if you're in CA or not, so this may or may not apply to you. But basically, you don't know which way that lady is turning, and you don't have a full lane to yourself. Thus, you really should NOT have gone ahead and try to pass her unless you've ascertained that she's NOT going to move. In your specific case, I'd suggest you involve your own insurance company (you are insured, right?) and see if they can negotiate 75%/25% (basically, you bear 75% of fault for the pass, but they bear 25% for not signalling and holding up traffic) That pretty much means you'll only be compensated for $300, if you even get that much. They may even sue you for damage to her vehicle (scratch on the bumper).

Answer 9

you were responsible, so you have to pay. If you don't have a lot money/income you can usually work out a payment plan with the other driver's insurance company.
Look at it this way, if she hadn't had insurance you would have to pay her right ?
Your insurance agent isn't too great if he let you drive around with only 10k in liability coverage. Even a modest car these days costs over that. Get higher limits.

Answer 10

It's simple.

You made a choice when you bought the insurance. You felt the extra cost for additional liability was too high. You were happy because you "saved" money.

It comes down to taking responsibility for your decisions. You put yourself in this jeopardy. Admit it. Grow by it.