Back in December, during a holiday party, the door was left open and my dog got out, ran into the busy street outside, and was killed. Heck of a way to end a party.
Fast forward to about 3 weeks ago. We get a call, out of the blue, from an insurance company. Seems that the person who hit our dog put in an insurance claim. The company wanted to reimburse us for the loss of our dog. I’d never heard of such a thing - it was surreal, but I went ahead and worked with the guy and we received a check for just about what we had paid for our poor puppy - $700.00.
Yesterday, we get a bill in the mail for $1100, from the same insurance company. Seems that they figure that we oughta pay for damages to the car that hit him.
This whole thing is getting increasingly surreal.
So, what’s the deal on this? First off, Mr. Athena is have a hard time believing that our 35 pound dog did $1100 in damage to a car. Me, I dunno, I’ve paid a lot of money for body work before. Regardless, I’m pretty sure Michigan is a no-fault state. I’ve never heard of a situation where the other person had to pay for damages to a car.
So what do we do? Pay the bill? Give it to our homeowner’s insurance? If we do that, will our homeowner’s go up? Ignore the bill?
Michigan is a no fault state, but deep down, that just means the insurance companies fight it out among themselves. This is something that you probably ought to pass off to your homeowners policy (if you have one). They may pay rather than fight it due to the relatively small quantity.
The thing is, though, you’re probably not wrong. What if it were a child instead of a dog? It’s the child’s fault? Hell no; the driver is always at fault. Does this apply to a dog legally? I don’t know, but the risk of hitting animals is an assumed risk of driving.
Note that this probably isn’t the driver that’s causing the problem, but rather the insurance company. Maybe before dragging in your own insurance company, you can work this out with the one that’s sending you a bill.
Also if this had involved your car, your personal liability would only be $500; that’s the maximum one can sue for (without having the case thrown out) in Michigan. Maybe, maybe, this can apply here.
So, try fighting it amicably, but if it comes to lawyers, it’s better of having your insurance company pay it if possible.
My first reaction is to just ignore the thing. Perhaps they’ll go away if I just don’t respond.
I don’t particularly like the idea of my insurance paying for it, even if it’s no cost to me. I don’t see how this company can, at the same time, reimburse me for the cost of the dog, and also try to squeeze money from me for the damage to the car. Isn’t that sort of saying that both we and the person who hit the dog are at fault? Either the guy who hit the dog is at fault - in which case he’s responsible for destroying my property (the dog) and damaging the car - or I’m at fault for allowing my dog to run loose (even though it was a mistake) and I’m out a dog and the cost of his car.
Of course, neither of those conditions matter at all, since we are, as you verified, a no-fault state.
This is not true, especially when dealing with a dog. The owner of the dog is responsible for the actions of the dog at all times. This happens to be in Maryland, but it wouldn’t suprise me if it was the same in most places. Dogs are not supposed to be free at any time here.