I think you would be wise to consult a lawyer immediately, just to figure out what your rights and options are. If you deal directly with the other driver’s insurance company, you may run the risk of unknowingly waiving some rights or undervaluing the compensation to which you are legally entitled. Conceivably, after consulting a lawyer, you may ultimately decide for some philosophical or other reason that you do not wish to pursue all of the rights or compensation that are available to you, but at least you will be doing so on the basis of full knowledge.
Disclaimer: I am not your lawyer. Nothing written here is intended, or should be inferred, to give rise to an attorney-client relationship. Do not rely on anything written here when evaluating any claims or defenses you might have. This is not legal advice; this is just anonymous chat.
This. You don’t necessarily have to sue. But you do need to make sure that the driver’s insurance compensates you for any losses that you incur as a result of the accident, which getting an attorney will help you do. Remember, going to a lawyer and suing the guy are not the same thing. The real question you are asking is: “Should I retain an attorney to represent me against this guy’s insurance company?” The response to which is “absolutely.”
Just keep in mind that if you do retain an attorney that they take their cut off the top. In my experience that is usually around a third of the settlement amount.
My wife got hit (in a car) by a red light runner. Even with this open and shut case, the insurance company was less than willing to pay. Their object is to minimize their cost, not to make the victim whole. Plus. our insurance health insurance and car insurance wanted their money back. A lawyer can also negotiate payments for ongoing treatment, like physical therapy. In this case we never got near a lawsuit. It is very often helpful to have a third party do the negotiating.
I don’t doubt that one is not required in property only accidents, but anything with an injury is different.
Thank you all so much for the many detailed responses in this thread. I have cut and pasted the most informative ones. We intend to talk to whoever can possibly help us.
I am waiting to hear from the police further about this matter and how it will proceed. Unfortunately we were quickly ushered out of an incompetent orthopedist’s office this afternoon when he decided that my husband’s injuries were too complicated for him to treat and then decided he didn’t like our insurance. My husband has another appointment tomorrow with a doctor who is hopefully less of a jerk.
I just want to see that a) my husband receives the best possible medical care and b) the person who did this to him bears the financial consequences and legal consequences of the mess he made for us. There is no constutitional right to drive especially when you have shown that you fracture people’s bones in the process.
I have a question. If I am injured in this kind of situation, should I use my health insurance? Bills wouldn’t “rack up” that way, but who then arranges for the health insurance folks to be reimbursed by the auto insurance folks? Or how does that work?
I’m sure he’ll pay a fine and his license will take a point hit. His insurance will pay for your husband’s bills. He will not lose his license unless he’s a habitual pedestrian hitter. I can almost guarantee it. Good luck with the next ortho dude.
GAH!! I was starting to feel some sympathy for you and admired the solid advice/opinions that the other posters were offering - then you drop this little gem. There is no evidence of intent or malice on the part of the driver, and you are waiving the Constitution in his face? Pul-leaze.
I’ll restate - you had best hope you never, ever, ever make any sort of unintentional mistake that causes any sort of harm to anyone. Karma’s a bitch at the best of times, and loathes irony.
I am going to report the ortho dude to our insurance company. He’s listed as a participating provider. It isn’t fair to make my husband walk on a leg that’s in complete agony only to essentially tell him you can’t treat him at all. I could have easily made another appointment in the time it took to get this one. Now my husband has to wait because the earliest appointment I can get is tomorrow.
How do you know any of this? And why do you assume this was unintentional rather than driver’s error? My husband tells me he was in the crosswalk with the light at his back. He tells me he completely had the right of way. He says the driver ignored this fact and hit him. At this point in time no one has any idea of the man in question did this because he wasn’t paying attention to the road on his cellphone or he’s just a jerk.
The only thing I’ve heard from the police is that they are investigating the matter and the guy was repentant.
The evidence I have is the one I value most so far: my husband’s words. He says at the very least the guy should have seen him and stopped. My husband is over six feet tall and not skinny. He’s quite visible. Whether or not he did this because he was listening to a cellphone or eating or tired or merely accidentally I have no way of knowing right now. I have no goddamned idea if this was intentional or unintentional.
As a normal human being (let alone one seeing her dearest friend suffering) I honestly don’t care about the driver other than to make sure that my family is financially protected from the consequences of his actions and if he really did this maliciously he is prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law. So should you frankly.
It depends on the circumstances. Broken bones, such as the OP describes, I would definitely seek compensation for. If it wasn’t covered (or adequately covered) by insurance, I would take action.
I was, in fact, hit by a car as I was riding back from work. Since, however, I wasn’t hurt, I didn’t do anything. My bike was damaged, but I found out when I took it into the shop that I couldn’t really blame the accident for that (it would’ve broken by itself soon enough), so I didn’t ask for damages to the bike, either.
And if some broken bones, some mostly covered medical bills, and hospital visits are the biggest “mess” you have to suffer in your time here on Earth…well…good as heck for you.
Remember, accidents happen. You are attributing malicious intent without a shred of evidence. For all you know, the driver could be wallowing in a pool of guilt and 'how could I do that!?!" Try not to assume the worst from the start.
If the driver got a ticket, I can’t see how it would be more than driver inattention; he’ll pay the fine, and be done with it. His insurance will take care of the rest.
Of course if he was drunk, then bring on the tar and feathers.
How do you know any of this? Based on what knowledge of this person are you making him the murderous serial pedestrian smasher?
It probably was both.
Or he dropped something on the floor, or he was fiddling with the radio, or checking his hair, or looking at a map. Clearly he wasn’t looking where he was going, or he wouldn’t have hit your husband. That doesn’t mean he did it on purpose. Obviously he should have seen your husband and stopped. That doesn’t mean it wasn’t an accident. You have been told the guy is repentant – he’s probably horrified – but you don’t seem to give him much credit for that.
You are entitled to full financial compensation (or, your husband is); as you have repeatedly been told, you can probably achieve that without suing anyone. Even if suit becomes necessary down the road, it is clearly premature to be considering it at this point. And, yes, he should be prosecuted if he did it maliciously – but that’s a mighty big “IF.” So why are you assuming his actions were malicious, when you have no evidence that they were?
And just FYI, your best friend the lawyer is not giving you good advice by encouraging you to sue at this point. It sounds to me like she doesn’t really know how the process of recovering for an insured loss works. So if you do decide to consult a lawyer, I hope you’ll consult a more experienced one.
I’m sorry for your husband’s situation, but you’re coming across as more interesting in vindictively nailing the other driver to the wall, than you are in reespecting your husband’s preferences.
I am loathe to disagree with Jodi on legal matters, but she has given you two concrete pieces of advice which are demonstrably unwise.
First, Jodi’s advice for you to consult a different lawyer based on your summarized conversation with your friend is overly hasty. If it’s true that your friend jumped immediately to lawsuit, that’s one thing. But I’m guessing that your summary of the conversation doesn’t reflect the full nuance of what your friend said or what your friend would say upon deciding to formally represent you. If you have someone knowledgeable who will help you out in these initial stages for free, don’t give that up based on a how some message board poster interprets your own one-line summary of a conversation.
Second Jodi is also wrong to tell you that it’s premature to think about legal remedies. What you are entitled to under the law is one part of what you should assess when deciding whether a proposed settlement is one you should accept. You should know before you are offered a settlement the range of offers you’re willing to accept, and that range should partly be determined by your legal rights.
There is potentially a lot at stake here. If you have any doubt about the right course of action, get a consultation from a knowledgeable lawyer and go from there. I’m sure you know this, but it’s worth saying again: don’t make any judgments about your legal rights–including settlement–based on what you read on a message board.
[And, FWIW, I don’t think you’re coming across at all as others have described you.]
Three things: First, we only know what we are told by the poster. On what basis do you assume a more nuanced conversation that was conveyed to us? On what basis to you assume that the OP’er is being inaccurate or untruthful in stating, in the very first post, “one of my best friend IRL is a lawyer. She thinks we should sue the guy who did it”? Second, the friend in question is almost certainly not going to formally represent them, since she works as a clerk or staff attorney for a judge (“court counsel,” as the OP’er descirbe her). These are generally jobs held by newer, comparatively inexperienced lawyers. They are almost always held by lawyers with a limited background in actual practice. Third, if, as you say, she is unwise to make decisions “based on how some message board poster interprets” the situation, then she is equally as unwise to listen to you. Free advice is worth what you pay for it.
I never said it was “premature to think about legal remedies.” My position is that it is premature to contemplate intituting legal process – i.e., a lawsuit – to obtain them. Knowing your legal rights and contemplating suing to obtain them are not the same thing, nor do you have to be actively doing the latter in order to accomplish the former. Filing suit is step 25 in a process of extracting what her husband is justly entitled to in order to compensate him fully for this ordeal. Right now, they are on step one.
But your absolutely right: She shouldn’t pay any attention to advice or opinions from a message board, and she should consult a knowledgeable lawyer if she has questions. But just because her friend’s advice is free doesn’t mean it’s good. To me, hearing that the first thing a lawyer says when being told of a car accident is “You should sue!” – that puts up all kinds of red flags. It it an ambulance-chasing small-potatoes plaintiff’s lawyer, looking for a quick and easy case? Or is it a lawyer who doesn’t know how insurance claims work?
I dunno - how do you know it was intentional? I’m basing my assumption on the statistical fact that there are significantly more people on this earth who would do just about anything possible to avoid hitting a person than there are people who consider Carmageddon to be a driving simulator.
“Fullest extent of the law”? Wow - you are going to be one sad little kid on Christmas morning when this is all said and done.
My thoughts exactly. Especially when that laywer is putting a value on the settlement the same day it happens. It really is amazing how many laywers (including those that work these kind of cases) know very little about insurance claims. It was downright scary sometimes.
