Top | Newest First | Oldest First
Robin2005 · 61-69, M
All I can say is when someone runs a red light and hits your car and then says it was YOU that ran the light and no one stops to say what really happened. Remember what you did.
View 1 more replies »
Robin2005 · 61-69, M
They may have tried to say that someone forced them into the other car. The point is, YOU saw it happen and did NOTHING. In my book, no different than seeing someone robbing a bank and then just say you saw nothing.
What I am saying is thing of what it would mean to you if the shoe was on the other foot.
If you were the owner of the other car would you not appreciate it if someone was to stop and make sure that everything was reported right.
What if the person in car need help. What if they had some medical problem. I only hope someone else did what you didn't,
Think about it next time.
It may not have made any difference in this case but you will never know if you could have helped or not because you could not take a few moments to even stop and find out.
What I am saying is thing of what it would mean to you if the shoe was on the other foot.
If you were the owner of the other car would you not appreciate it if someone was to stop and make sure that everything was reported right.
What if the person in car need help. What if they had some medical problem. I only hope someone else did what you didn't,
Think about it next time.
It may not have made any difference in this case but you will never know if you could have helped or not because you could not take a few moments to even stop and find out.
edistoflyer · 46-50, M
Folks, particularly with harsh reactions (shared and withheld), I have to give D credit for something, and it's important. He had some twinge of uncertainty. Instead of ignoring that twinge, he in this public forum shared it.
If more people would pause and ask for directions or correction as D did, fewer people would be lost in the world.
With the one vehicle being parked and apparently unoccupied, here's another facet. First, the concept of insurance is to transfer risk of a significant financial catastrophe (the surprise of thousands of dollars in repairs bills in this case) from one individual to everyone "pooling" their money together, the policy holders.
Insurance is not intended to be a means of transferring the consequences of one's carelessness, foolishness, inattention, impaired or otherwise incorrect judgments to others.
Scenario:
You return to your vehicle that you had legally parked and left to find that it has been damaged by another vehicle.
If you have no collision coverage on that vehicle, you either pay for the repairs yourself or file a claim with your carrier, assuming you have valid UMPD (uninsured motorist property damage) coverage and assuming you meet all the requirements for a claim to be paid.
Let's say you file and your insurance company pays the claim. Great. Who's really paying? You and other policy holders have paid and will pay because the driver of the vehicle who caused the damage is unknown.
Enter a third-party witness who reports what he knows, license plate number and maybe any other identifyers. When the insurance adjuster accurately concludes who caused the H&R, P&U (hit and run, parked and unoccupied) collision, then it is no longer you and your fellow policy holders paying to repair the damages. The driver of the other vehicle, whether through his insurance policy or on his own, will pay and should pay for the repairs.
Of course, had you stayed at the scene, would the driver have stopped? Would there have been an interaction that could have posed a threat to you? If the driver left the scene with no interaction with you, would you have waited a short or a long while until the owner of the vehicle or the police showed up? Would a reasonably prudent person have waited in sweltering heat, the snow, torrential downpour or late-night hours?
All excellent reasons to be ready for contingencies like small note pad and pen in your own glove box, maybe a plastic zip bag if you have to leave a note under a parked and now-damaged car's windshield wiper.
Thanks again, D, for being wise enough to through out there the genuine doubt you had for not stopping at the scene.
If more people would pause and ask for directions or correction as D did, fewer people would be lost in the world.
With the one vehicle being parked and apparently unoccupied, here's another facet. First, the concept of insurance is to transfer risk of a significant financial catastrophe (the surprise of thousands of dollars in repairs bills in this case) from one individual to everyone "pooling" their money together, the policy holders.
Insurance is not intended to be a means of transferring the consequences of one's carelessness, foolishness, inattention, impaired or otherwise incorrect judgments to others.
Scenario:
You return to your vehicle that you had legally parked and left to find that it has been damaged by another vehicle.
If you have no collision coverage on that vehicle, you either pay for the repairs yourself or file a claim with your carrier, assuming you have valid UMPD (uninsured motorist property damage) coverage and assuming you meet all the requirements for a claim to be paid.
Let's say you file and your insurance company pays the claim. Great. Who's really paying? You and other policy holders have paid and will pay because the driver of the vehicle who caused the damage is unknown.
Enter a third-party witness who reports what he knows, license plate number and maybe any other identifyers. When the insurance adjuster accurately concludes who caused the H&R, P&U (hit and run, parked and unoccupied) collision, then it is no longer you and your fellow policy holders paying to repair the damages. The driver of the other vehicle, whether through his insurance policy or on his own, will pay and should pay for the repairs.
Of course, had you stayed at the scene, would the driver have stopped? Would there have been an interaction that could have posed a threat to you? If the driver left the scene with no interaction with you, would you have waited a short or a long while until the owner of the vehicle or the police showed up? Would a reasonably prudent person have waited in sweltering heat, the snow, torrential downpour or late-night hours?
All excellent reasons to be ready for contingencies like small note pad and pen in your own glove box, maybe a plastic zip bag if you have to leave a note under a parked and now-damaged car's windshield wiper.
Thanks again, D, for being wise enough to through out there the genuine doubt you had for not stopping at the scene.
Spoiledbrat · F
I would take a pic of both cars and get driver’s license numbers & leave a note on the windshield. Problem solved. 🙂@edistoflyer
edistoflyer · 46-50, M
D, you did not realize how seriously important you were as a third-party witness. Staying would have been the most correct, neighborly and compassionate thing you could and should have done. What if one driver was 100% at fault and had collided into the other vehicle with your grandmother or another loved one of yours?
Give thought here, please, D, and thank you very much for posting such an important question -- the best I have ever seen on SW.
When a claims adjuster interviews the parties involved in a collision, the objective is to determine who is at fault, only one party or more than one party.
An unintentionally wrong answer by one participant (who likely was rattled to some degree or a great degree by the experience) can lead to the wrong conclusion, as can a lie. Then there's human memory, which is not infallible.
Eyewitness testimony can be invaluable to a claims investigation by an adjuster, as the "uninvolved" witness stands to lose or gain nothing from the adjuster's decisions (like if he'll authorize whatever payment for loss(es) or deny payment).
I hope the circumstances of the collision are straightforward, all occupants were candid and clearheaded enough that the adjuster's decisions are sound and true and that your abandoning the people involved has not denied any wronged persons compensation and restoration for whatever their damages/injuries they suffered as a result of an accident someone else caused.
D, again, thank you for your powerful inquiry on this. I can't speak to the non-issue of accident witnesses "feeling" obligated to stay, and I won't speak to the non-issue of not wanting to be inconvenienced.
I can however speak to the actual issue, which is a better framework for situational questions for everyone choosing to live in a society (as opposed to going back to swinging in trees or living in caves).
If you're choosing to live in a society, the framework/mindset/question for any given situation, is simple: "What's the right thing to do?" "What's the best thing to do?" "What's the wisest thing to do?" You'll generally know that the right thing, the best thing, the wisest thing is rarely the easy thing to do.
Give thought here, please, D, and thank you very much for posting such an important question -- the best I have ever seen on SW.
When a claims adjuster interviews the parties involved in a collision, the objective is to determine who is at fault, only one party or more than one party.
An unintentionally wrong answer by one participant (who likely was rattled to some degree or a great degree by the experience) can lead to the wrong conclusion, as can a lie. Then there's human memory, which is not infallible.
Eyewitness testimony can be invaluable to a claims investigation by an adjuster, as the "uninvolved" witness stands to lose or gain nothing from the adjuster's decisions (like if he'll authorize whatever payment for loss(es) or deny payment).
I hope the circumstances of the collision are straightforward, all occupants were candid and clearheaded enough that the adjuster's decisions are sound and true and that your abandoning the people involved has not denied any wronged persons compensation and restoration for whatever their damages/injuries they suffered as a result of an accident someone else caused.
D, again, thank you for your powerful inquiry on this. I can't speak to the non-issue of accident witnesses "feeling" obligated to stay, and I won't speak to the non-issue of not wanting to be inconvenienced.
I can however speak to the actual issue, which is a better framework for situational questions for everyone choosing to live in a society (as opposed to going back to swinging in trees or living in caves).
If you're choosing to live in a society, the framework/mindset/question for any given situation, is simple: "What's the right thing to do?" "What's the best thing to do?" "What's the wisest thing to do?" You'll generally know that the right thing, the best thing, the wisest thing is rarely the easy thing to do.
The car was parked and empty when the other driver backed into it pretty hard. I just assumed I was not necessary. @edistoflyer
Spoiledbrat · F