To sue or not to sue

njisamess · Sep 30, 2008, 08:42 AM

I was in an auto accident where I was hit,the other partys insurance has denied the claim.stating that I am more than 50%at fault.but if you see where and how I wa... you can totally see who was at fault.. I have hired a traffic lawyer because the officer gave 2 "careless driving" tickets to both parties... the officer wasn't there to see the accident occur... so this is why I have a lawyer... I am fighting the ticket... after I fight the ticket... I plan to sue the other partys insurance and/or the other party for the cost of repair or replacement of my vehicle(I wasn't injured but my passenger was)... who can I sue in small claims court?

LisaB4657 · Sep 30, 2008, 08:44 AM

Before you start suing anyone... have you filed a claim with your insurance company?

njisamess · Sep 30, 2008, 09:01 AM

Yes, but I only had liability insurance(because of year of my vehicle)... I reported the day it occurred... my battle is with the other partys insurance

LisaB4657 · Sep 30, 2008, 09:07 AM

Ok... if you're sure that your repair/replacement costs will be within the limit for small claims, then... sue everyone. You sue the other party for hitting you and you sue their insurance company for their bad faith refusal to reimburse you.

njisamess · Sep 30, 2008, 10:09 AM

The other partys insurance company already had me go to their "claim center" who said my car was a "total loss", sent an adjuster to see the vehicle also... I feel very strongly about this accident and I know I can win...

LisaB4657 · Sep 30, 2008, 10:13 AM

Rather than trying to do this yourself in small claims, have you considered retaining an attorney on a contingency basis? If an insurance company acts in bad faith then a judge is entitled to award substantial damages. If your case is that good then an attorney would probably be very interested in taking it on and you would only have to pay the attorney a percentage of your award.

Why not sit down with a few attorneys for free consultations before taking any action?

njisamess · Sep 30, 2008, 10:25 AM

True

njisamess · Sep 30, 2008, 10:59 AM

Another question- (does anyone know?)... if the person who was driving of the vehicle is different from the insured and the owner of the vehicle? Who would I sue in small claims? The driver? The owner of the vehicle? Or the insured?

LisaB4657 · Sep 30, 2008, 11:01 AM

Always sue everyone. The court will sort it out.

njisamess · Sep 30, 2008, 11:17 AM

Ha hah ahha... I will have 4 people in my case (that I am suing)... its going to be a circus...

JudyKayTee · Sep 30, 2008, 11:37 AM

Originally Posted by njisamess

the other partys insurance company already had me go to their "claim center" who said my car was a "total loss", sent an adjuster to see the vehicle also...................I feel very strongly about this accident and I know I can win..................

Why/how did the insurance company determine the percentage of fault?

njisamess · Sep 30, 2008, 12:22 PM

Pictures, statements(both mine & their insured)... you know insurance companys don't want to pay any claims

traceyrco · Oct 3, 2008, 08:43 PM

Okay - are you ready for this? A car was speeding (per witness) and was found 30% at fault for the accident because of that - the rest of the fault was the lady driving the other car. The speeding car owner had an old vehicle and of course it ran better than the $1,500 the other car's insurance gave him to buy a new used vehicle with.

So, the 70% fault car got sued by the other driver. The insurance company paid for the lawyer to defend her. They went to small claims court because the man needed another $3000 for a car.

They get to small claims court and the speeding car guy says, "it may have been old and not worth much, but it ran great and I need a vehicle as dependable as it was and $1,500 won't get me that.

So the jury gave him the judgement for $3,000. Small claims court can be such a beautiful thing.

JudyKayTee · Oct 4, 2008, 06:26 AM

Originally Posted by traceyrco

Okay - are you ready for this? A car was speeding (per witness) and was found 30% at fault for the accident because of that - the rest of the fault was the lady driving the other car. The speeding car owner had an old vehicle and of course it ran better than the $1,500 the other car's insurance gave him to buy a new used vehicle with.

So, the 70% fault car got sued by the other driver. The insurance company paid for the lawyer to defend her. They went to small claims court because the man needed another $3000 for a car.

They get to small claims court and the speeding car guy says, "it may have been old and not worth much, but it ran great and I need a vehicle as dependable as it was and $1,500 won't get me that.

So the jury gave him the judgement for $3,000. Small claims court can be such a beautiful thing.

This is why I advise people not to request a jury trial when it's a Small Claims Court matter. In many jurisdictions the request for a jury trial is refused anyway - or the case is put on the calendar many months ahead and people don't want to or can't wait.

Did Small Claims also find this person 70% at fault, reducing the potential verdict by that percentage?

Some Courts won't allow an Attorney to represent either side.

What you have described is grounds for appeal - the legal system makes people whole, not enriched.

Add your answer here.