A few years ago a guy ran into the rear of my Audi and caused significant damage, Instead of contacting his insurance he wanted to resolve the damage between us. His suggestion was that we split the cost, and he would pay his half in small monthly payments.
Yeah right! His insurance did wind up paying the full damages, but even they suggested mediation and asked (accusingly) what “problem” I had with his offer.
A friend of mine recently suffered damage to his car at a dealership. They too fought him for weeks to accept an offer to pay for part of the repairs. They didn’t deny that the damage happened at their facility. I think because his car had swapped paint with the other car they had hit.
He did prevail, but not without some struggle.
I hear about similar occurances often, where the entity who is at fault tries to pass off at least part of the responsibility to the victim.
Where do they get off with this, and is there any basis in law that allows such an outcome where the victim does nothing to cause the damage? I just heard a contractor on Judge Judy the other day singing a similar song about some damage he’d done to a client’s home. I got distracted and didn’t head the “verdict”.
Am I wrong here? I feel that if you do damage, you should rectify that damage.
Peace,
mangeorge
They do it because at least in some of the cases it works, and i assume if the victim “agrees” then its perfectly legal.
Often times people who have been in many accidents would rather deal with it without going through insurance so that they don’t have anything extra on their record with the company, whether or not they were at fault. Sometimes if you hit someone and they are an illegal alien or have warrants out for their arrest or something rather than going through the police report and the insurance claim they would rather get cash from you than chance getting caught with whatever issues they have going on in their lives. To someone who knows that this will increase their insurance premiums significantly it might be worth a shot to see if the victim would be willing to work around the system.
Why would anyone agree to share the cost? I wouldn’t, except in very rare circumstances.
That’s kinda what I’m wondering, am I chickenshit? I’m generous in most things.
I had this happen to me once - a guy hit my car while it was parked at a gas station. He said he didn’t want another claim on his insurance, and could we “sort of, you know, work it out with cash?”
He wanted to pay two-thirds of the cost, but backed down when I pointed out that he was 100% at fault. (He tried: “Well, if you hadn’t been parked there …” but I didn’t bite on that.)
I told him that I’d take it to a nearby shop and get an estimate that day; if he paid me cash within 24 hours, fine - otherwise I’d go to his insurance company (whose info I had obtained). He thought the estimate I got was way high, and grumbled about my trying to gouge him on the cost.
So I called his insurance company and, though it took a while (always does, IME), they settled for the full amount. Indeed, they told me their estimate was a bit higher than mine.
It’s a mystery to me why anyone would agree to share the cost when they were not at fault.
I guess some folks’ balls really are that big.
When my very recent model pickup was rear-ended, the other guy’s (parents’) insurance company proposed getting me a replacement bed from a parts yard. You know, the one he wrecked didn’t come from a parts yard, now did it?
Chickenshit? No. You’re logical. Scammers have existed before eBay, and this is an example of one.
I also wonder what rare circumstances there would be to accept a scam like that.
The only people who would take an offer like that are generally illegal aliens or have warrants out for their arrest and don’t want to deal with filing police reports. If this person who hit you has another accident on his record or something it might be worth it to him to see if you are in a situation (warrant or something) where working with him would be of benefit to you too.
We humans have amazing imaginations. Some people could run into a bridge abutment that hasn’t moved in 50 years and still figure a way why it’s not their fault, and the bridge contributed to the accident.
If you hadn’t been there to be hit, that accident wouldn’t have happened. Clearly, you contributed at least half the blame. Further, your car was obstructing his path, so there’s some moore blame. Finally, you failed to warn him or avoid him.
You’re lucky not to be arresed for attempted vehicular homicide. :smack:
For car wrecks in general, sometimes taking less than 100% is better than having to get in a legal dispute. Sure plaintiff attorneys work on contingency, but there are lots of indirect costs (loss of time and privacy are the top two) to being in a lawsuit.
Of course in easy cases where fault is obvious, and there’s only property damage, talking directly to the insurance company, although tedious in itself, will usually work.
But those folks are in the mindset of serious cases where settling for less is actually rational, so they propose it, unthinkingly, even in circumstances where it’s not.
I did that with a kid who rear ended me. He was only 16 or 17 and had been taking care of his two younger siblings in the back seat and just kinda rolled into me while stopped at a light. It was only a light tap and caused only minor damage to my bumper. I talked to his parents on the cell phone and I agreed to leave the insurance out of it, if they paid within a week. I gave them 2 estimates and they cut us a check. I had their insurance info and if they hadn’t paid or if the estimate had been too much we would have just gone through their insurance. I don’t see what’s wrong with that.
That would be one example of a “rare circumstance” I alluded to in post #4. And you did get full damages, not some percentage.
There’s a world of difference between being generous and allowing yourself to be taken advantage of. Generosity feels good. Being taken hurts.
I think most of the people who would make a request like the example in the OP do it, because sometimes it works. And if it doesn’t work, well, you’ve lost nothing in the asking. I’m not defending the behavior. If I’m 100% at fault for something, I’m damned well paying 100%. But that’s why people do that.