[sideoutshu]

Hello side:

Sounds like the insurance companies ought to beef up their fraud departments instead of laying down and passing the costs on. Who knows? It might actually reduce fraud.

No, I'm not a fan of insurance companies.

excon

They work pretty hard in my experience actually. Some (Geico, State Farm, etc) even have defense lawyers asking questions at depositions now aimed at nailing unethical plaintiff's firms. The "how were you referred to your attorney" question is becoming commonplace. It is of course looking to get the firms who dispatch runners to hospitals and accident scenes with business cards to solicit cases, which is a violation of the disciplinary rules.

[AK lawyer]

Where did "Passenger" get injured if not in this particular accident?

... if he showed up at a medical treatment facility, claiming to be injured in an auto accident while a passenger and his injuries are consistent with that type of accident - where did he get those injuries?

Otherwise your sarcasm is unwarranted.

Otherwise than what?

The thing is, I can't understand your point. You seemed to be suggesting that injuries wouldn't be likely unless the so-called passenger was in the particular accident (and thus the insurance company would be inclined to pay a no-fault medical claim). If in fact the "passenger" has visible injuries, yes. But it seems more likely that the "passenger" is saying "my neck hurts", and acertaining the fact of injury might be more trouble than it's worth.

[JudyKayTee]

This is a claim filed with the insurance company. I realize you can't understand my point.

I am saying that if a person is listed on a PAR and presents medical bills which are consistent with "that type" of auto accident an insurance company is going to believe that person was, in fact, a passenger in the automobile.

Maybe it's different in your area but where I am the Police ASK the driver who was in the car. People can't come out from the bushes and claim they were passengers. This isn't NYC and this isn't a bus.

[AK lawyer]

... where I am the Police ASK the driver who was in the car. ...

That would be the obvious thing to do. Or at least ask each witness where he/she was when the accident happened. Either way would tend to end in the same information being reported.

But it is interesting that we still don't know what the police report says about the witness who is claiming to be injured. I hope the OP hasn't gotten us all curious about this and then forgotten us. :)

Perhaps our witness, upon realizing that he/she would need medical bills (and couldn't recover extra cash), just decided to forget the whole thing.

[ScottGem]

Well, just to put your mind at ease, all you really need to do is call and tell your insurance company that the guy wasn't in your car and your involvement should be done.

This is what I was saying. If the claimant was not a passenger in the daughter's car and the police report confirms she was stopped and rammed, then she has no liability. If her carrier decides to pay rather than pay to fight, that's their choice.

[sideoutshu]

This is what I was saying. If the claimant was not a passenger in the daughter's car and the police report confirms she was stopped and rammed, then she has no liability. If her carrier decides to pay rather than pay to fight, that's their choice.

I get what you are saying, and you are right MOST of the time, but getting hit in the rear isn't a hard and fast rule of liability.

The rule in New York regarding a hit in the rear is not prima facie liability, but a burden shift to the defendant. Normally the burden is on a plaintiff to prove negligence of a defendant, however a hit in the rear case carries a rebuttable presumption of liability on the part of the rear car.

The reason I say it isn't a given is the existence of often used but seldom successful defenses such as "stopping short", emergency doctrine, etc.

[twinkiedooter]

I thought the OP said the other car left the scene. Then just who would pay for this guy's imaginary injuries - certainly not the other car who caused the accident as no information was gathered regarding it other than a wrong license plate number.

[sideoutshu]

I thought the OP said the other car left the scene. Then just who would pay for this guy's imaginary injuries - certainly not the other car who caused the accident as no information was gathered regarding it other than a wrong license plate number.

Well in New York, the no-fault insurance for the car you occupy pays for medical and economic loss. So that would be the OP's car.

If you are speaking about an action to recover for pain and suffering, the passenger would attempt to recover under MVAIC. I have explained what it is in other posts, if you are interested, just search for it.

[ScottGem]

I get what you are saying, and you are right MOST of the time, but getting hit in the rear isn't a hard and fast rule of liability.

The rule in New York regarding a hit in the rear is not prima facie liability, but a burden shift to the defendant. Normally the burden is on a plaintiff to prove negligence of a defendant, however a hit in the rear case carries a rebuttable presumption of liability on the part of the rear car.

The reason I say it isn't a given is the existance of often used but seldom successful defenses such as "stopping short", emergency doctrine, etc.

I don't disagree with you, but my comments are based on the facts as presented by the OP. Her statement was that her daughter was stopped for a light. If I understand her correctly, the daughter stopped on a yellow that the driver in the rear felt she could have gone through. AFTER she was stopped, the driver went into a rage which included ramming her car. Given THOSE circumstances, especially since there appear to be witnesses to confirm those circumstances. Then she has no liability.

Well in New York, the no-fault insurance for the car you occupy pays for medical and economic loss. So that would be the OP's car.

If you are speaking about an action to recover for pain and suffering, the passenger would attempt to recover under MVAIC. I have explained what it is in other posts, if you are interested, just search for it.

I just re-read what the OP said. I'm assuming the claimant was a complete stranger. So I wonder how they can get away with claiming he was a passenger in the daughter's car. The police report is going to be an issue here to see what the police recording the witness as saying. If he did claim to be a passenger, then the daughter is going to have to prove he wasn't.

[sideoutshu]

You need to reread what the OP has said. The claimant was not a passenger of the daughter's car but of the car that fled.

Uhm, I just re-read it. That is exactly what she said.

[ScottGem]

Uhm, I just re-read it. That is exactly what she said.

Yes I reread it to, and edited my post. My bad!

[violval11]

I appreciate everyone who answered. I probably was not very clear explaining the whole thing (English is my second language). Below is the letter that I sent to my insurance company with all the details. I changed the names of people involved as well as actual intersection of the accident.


To Whom It May Concerns,

This letter is to notify xxxxxx Insurance Company that the claim opened by John Doe is fraudulent.
Mr. Doe was never a passenger in my car and he was not involved in the car accident.

Sequence of events:
I had a car accident on Feb 2, 2010, at 15:35.
I was proceeding in the car (2007 Toyota RAV-4, Plate# XXXXXXX) on Street N, Brooklyn NY. On the intersection of Street N and Park Ave the light changed from green to yellow and I have stopped. The car that was immediately behind mine drove parallel to me on my right side. The driver opened his window, yelled curses, spit on my car; apparently he was upset that I did not proceed on yellow light. After that he backed off and intentionally hit the back of my car. After that he left the scene. The cars description is black, old model W/V.
At the same time a person (male, approximately 35-40 y.o) called 911, ran to me saying that he saw what happened and recorded the license plate of the car. He stayed at the scene until police arrived (approximately 1, 5 hours). Another person came offering a repair to the car. He said that he owns a shop and can fix the damage. He was hanging out with the witness. I have his card.

Police arrived at approximately 17:00. There were two police officers (one of the officers examined the car, questioned the witness and me, second officer never left the car). I explained what happened to the Officer. After that Police Officer interviewed the witness, and recorded his info. After speaking with the witness Officer came back to me and asked if I had a passenger with me. I confirmed again that I was alone in the car. Police checked the license plate of the assaulting car that the witness recorded and stated that it is not identical to what I described. Police left.

I was not injured in the accident; the car damaged was not extensive. I decided that there is no point to contact insurance company and open the claim. I just went to car repair shop and fixed my car.

On March 9, 2010 I’ve got a call from my insurance company that they want to discuss an open claim for accident that happened on Feb 2, 2010. I called examiner on the claim and found out that the claim was made by the doctor office on behalf of John Doe. He claims he was a passenger in my car and was injured in the accident. Next day I went to police precinct to pick up the accident police report and was stunned to find out Mr. Doe listed as passenger in my car. Mr. Doe was the witness who called the police when accident occurred and who waited for police to arrive. It never occurred to me that he can claim he was in the car. He is complete stranger; the first time I ever saw him was when he saw an accident and started to call 911. I relay this story in police precinct to Officer XXXX (Precinct XX, Brooklyn NY). His response was that if officers at the scene listed Mr. Doe as passenger then this is what happened. He actually suggested that because I am 18 years old I cannot be trusted and lying. I demanded that police notify Fraud Unit about this intended fraud.

[ScottGem]

The letter is good except I would change the last part:

I relay this story in police precinct to Officer XXXX (Precinct XX, Brooklyn NY). His response was that was what the report showed. I asked that police notify Fraud Unit about this intended fraud.

You do not want to attack the police. Your daughter just needs to state unequivocally, that she was alone in the car and had never laid eyes on Mr Doe prior to the accident. Your carrier will then interview Mr Doe and try to get proof that he was a passenger. Do not worry too much about the police report. The police officer did not witness the accident and only took down what the witness told him. So the bottom line is that he is going to have show that he was in your daughter's car.

[JudyKayTee]

Everyone is weighing in (presumably) from his/her own experience - all of which is different - as I am. I am assigned these "phantom passenger" cases. In my experience the insured tells the insurance company there was no passenger, the Police Report is incorrect. The insurance company then takes a SWORN STATEMENT from the driver of the car and the insured (if they are different people), a statement under oath, admissible in Court, available for cross examination if that time ever comes.

If he/she is willing to cooperate I take a statement from the injured "passenger." I have seen companies demand a statement from the "passenger" before making payment; I have also seen insurance companies simply pay the claim.

An insured cannot keep an insurance company from paying a claim. Everyone either knows someone or has experienced the payment of an "unfair" claim.

I think the OP is going about this the wrong way - a simple letter without all of this info is all that is necessary. "So and so made a claim. So and so was not a passenger. I would like to give a sworn statement."

As I said, everyone has a different experience and this is mine, based on field work.

Will the Police file an amended report? I rather doubt it. Does it matter? I rather doubt it.

[ScottGem]

An insured cannot keep an insurance company from paying a claim. Everyone either knows someone or has experienced the payment of an "unfair" claim.

I agree with Judy. But I wanted to relate my unfair claim story. My wife was parallel parked in front of our bank. There was a car behind her. She was backing up to exit the spot when she bumped the car behind her. The problem was two fold. The damage was to the passenger side hood of the vehicle she bumped. When you are backing up the exit a curb spot, you would have to be at a very steep angle to the curb for your rear driver's side to hit the passenger side. In addition, the height of the bumpers of the respective cars, would not allow our car to hit the hood of the other car. Ergo it was physically impossible for our car to do the damage they were claiming. Our carrier paid the claim rather than fight it, even though the evidence was against the other driver.

[violval11]

Here is latest update: Special Investigator from our insurance company came to interview my daughter. She told her side of the story. Also we gave him a printout of the telephone bill with all the calls. BTW, there were no communication between my daughter and the "witness" (aka passenger) before or on a day of accident. Today this guy had an appointment in regional office of our insurance company for interview under oath. He has to come with his lawyer and also bring a copy of his telephone bill. Tomorrow I'll call the investigator to find out if there are any news on the case.

[twinkiedooter]

In your original OP you didn't mention the guy who owned the body shop mysteriously arriving at the accident. You said "I have his card". Bet he doesn't live in that area or his shop is nowhere closeby either for that matter. Mr. Passenger called him up to come to the latest accident. I'll bet it's scam that the mysterious passenger/witness and body shop owner have pulled many times before. And being Brooklyn I'll easily win that bet. And the older "crash" car is probably used in many such contrived accidents on young, unsuspecting drivers. Don't you find it odd that the "witness" got the wrong license plate number as well? How convenient of him. Also in your OP you mentioned THREE witnesses waiting for the police to show up. Who was the other witness?

Years ago in Florida the staged accidents were quite popular as a great way to make money. I'll also wager that the doctor/clinic where his injuries were "treated" also also in on this scam.

Be sure to tell your insurance company about the body shop owner's involvement in this scenerio of scamming as I'm sure other insurance companies have inadvertently used his services. The insurance companies do "talk" to each other about this stuff in their data banks. Same goes for doctors/clinics being in on scams as well.

Face it. If your daughter was not driving a rather new 2007 Toyota SUV that costs an arm and a leg this "accident" would never have happened. Had it been a "beater" car or junker the accident would never have happened. The high dollar vehicle was just screaming "money" with a bullhorn. And the crash car was probably cruising that neighborhood/corner with the "witness" conviently nearby.

[twinkiedooter]

Many years ago in Florida my late husband dented another car's hubcap in a minor incident when the other car stopped in front of him sideways. No other damage to the other car or my car period. Years later I found out from my insurance company that the other driver had put in a physical injury claim for this dent in the hub cap and my insurance company paid him thousands and NEVER contacted me about this accident! I was floored. And the other driver was a MiddleEastern person who could barely speak English according to my husband. A dented hub cap caused all that damage? I don't think so. It was obviously a scam but my insurance company just paid anyway. I think it was State Farm. Apparently they didn't care to investigate or call me or write to me about this. I handled all the insurance for the household and the car and insurance were in my name.