Driver T-bones Father and has no valid insurance.

[reborn_euro]

Seems Im using this section of beyond quite often these days...

Here is the situation and as always past experiences/ advice is greatly appreciated.

Last week as some of you may have heard on the radio, during afternoon traffic a car was t-boned heavily by another car that was speeding and ran/didn't even notice his stop sign. This happened right before getting onto barlow from the Honda building (dont remember the street, its were the auction place is?). The victim in this crash was my father, the kid that t-boned him is completely at fault via dozens of witnesses and the police report. Thankfully my father escaped being t-boned on the the drivers side without any life threatening injuries (I rather not elaborate on the injuries he did suffer). Now the police officer made an accident statement and took down both parties info and insurance info.

Heres the kicker, when my father's insurance tried to contact the kids insurance, they said that his insurance was expired since July.
The car itself is not under his name but his mothers. The address provided is however valid. The officer that wrote the accident, went to contact the kid to see if maybe he gave his "old" information by accident, he found out that he was driving without valid insurance and contacted my father to inform him. Now the officer ticketed the kid further for driving without insurance. however from what he told us, thats all the CPS can do. (Cant take his car since its a total frontal wreck)

As it stands I've advised my father to sue the kid and his mother for the damages (my dads mercedez is a total loss), and also for the medical/ time spent away from work because of the kids careless/retardedly dumb driving.

The advice I require on this matter, first is this the appropriate course of action.

And also if you have had similar experiences, and you can recommend a strong lawyer for this (eventhough its an increadibly easy case by most standards) I will greatly appreciate it.

I use the term "kid" loosely since he was some guy in his early twenties.

As always thank you for all the help you can provide.

[Masked Bandit]

Assuming your Dad had full coverage he has nothing to worry about with regards to the vehicle.

Your Dad's insurance company will take care of his car less the collision deductible (probably $500). Then they will deal with chasing down the kid and the kid's mother (registered owner of the vehicle).

As for your suing for injuries, that will be tougher but not impossible. Have you Dad's adjuster explain the function of the SEF 44 to him.

There are a few actual adjusters on the board here as well, hopefully one of them will chime in.

[reborn_euro]

Bandit while you are right, unfortunately my father only had what I believe is called 3rd party coverage, which means that he is covered for damages caused by him to others, not vice versa. This is a case were the other is completely at fault and needs to pay for the damages, this is why the law suit seems like the best course of action.

[Masked Bandit]

When you said Mercedes Benz I assumed it was full coverage.

How old is the car?

[Jetta-2.0]

Originally posted by Masked Bandit
When you said Mercedes Benz I assumed it was full coverage.

How old is the car?

good luck OP and sorry for u and ur dads luck, try to sue them for the damages if ur dad isnt that hurt dont go any further as some say if u get greedy karma will catch up

[interlude]

if he (your dad) doesn't have full coverage, you are pretty much SOL. Trying to sue a lowlife that probably has no money will be a long battle, only costing your dad more for legal fees. Good luck though, shitty position to be in for sure

[JRSC00LUDE]

The lack of full coverage......I have never understood it.

The simple fact that you are here asking these questions says that you (your dad) were not capable of accepting the potential financial risks and obligations inherent with choosing to opt out of full coverage.

[reborn_euro]

His merc is an 06 so not that old by my standards, and yes in no way is my father going to be greedy, his going for the vehicle damages and the week he spent home. As it stands a low life is a low life, however since the mother was the registered owner of the car I would assume she is also responsible for the damages caused by the vehicle. She cant really pull a well he took my car, or my car was stolen card on us since she came to pick up the kid from the accident site as I did for my father.

What actually pissed me off, is that I just got off the phone with my father for an update, and apperently he called the kids house number and when my father tried to discuss this with him his response was "what accident" "oh that one" "yea my mom will call you later about it"

[reborn_euro]

JRSC00LUDE while I agree, since I have full coverage on my vehicle, the facts remain the same, the other person should be covered and in no way should my ability or my fathers ability to replace the car be of any consequence. The line "you did the crime, you do the time" comes to mind, you chose to drive without any coverage, you should expect serious penalties.

[lil*tymer]

Here's an idea, how about the proceeds from the no insurance fines go into a fund for these victims. It's bullshit that you have to go through this.

[Masked Bandit]

He's driving a 2006 MB with no collision?

What's done is done and nothing can change that I think it's pretty obvious now to your Dad how poor of a decision this was. If you've got the money to drive the MB but not the money to insure it properly then you probably shouldn't have been driving the MB in the first place.

However...

As mentioned before with his mother as the registred owner SHE will be liable for all damages. Assuming she has some sort of financial capacity the damages should be covered EVENTUALLY but it's going to take quite some time.

I bet your Dad saving that $297 a year on collision coverage doesn't look like such a deal now, does it. I'm not trying to pile on here man but it's usually only kids I deal with that can't see the big picture and the value of the right coverage.

[JRSC00LUDE]

Originally posted by reborn_euro
JRSC00LUDE while I agree, since I have full coverage on my vehicle, the facts remain the same, the other person should be covered and in no way should my ability or my fathers ability to replace the car be of any consequence. The line "you did the crime, you do the time" comes to mind, you chose to drive without any coverage, you should expect serious penalties.

I'm not trying to be a dick (no, really!) but by the same token then, he chose to drive without the proper coverage and should expect potentially serious penalties too.....would the appropriate coverage not have protected him from this type of situation or am I misunderstanding something? Gambling is gambling, it doesn't just happen at the casino...

[dimi]

All I can say is best of luck man, that's a very nice car to take a total loss on.

This is why I have full coverage on my $1000 beater. The savings are just not worth the potential hassle.

[clem24]

Weird... Why would your dad cheap out on full coverage since it's such an inexpensive option? While I wouldn't go as far as having full coverage on a $1000 beater but definitely worth it if you at least care about the car or is worth at least a few k.

In any case, sounds like a shitty situation to be in. Good luck. It's so unfortunate that the CPS can't help out further either. What kind of car was the kid driving? Just curious as to what losses the mother is experiencing from pretty much writing off her car and her ability to pay even if you guys did win a lawsuit.

[ZeeZee]

I was hit by an uninsured motorist about 20 years ago. It will take time, but you will get your money through the uninsured motorist fund.

Some info here.

http://justice.alberta.ca/programs_s...s/default.aspx

I was young so used a lawyer, you might not really need one, but it helped.

[Toma]

Originally posted by ZeeZee
I was hit by an uninsured motorist about 20 years ago. It will take time, but you will get your money through the uninsured motorist fund.

Some info here.

http://justice.alberta.ca/programs_s...s/default.aspx

I was young so used a lawyer, you might not really need one, but it helped.

[codetrap]

It never ceases to amaze me that people don't buy collision/comprehensive to cover their own asses, instead of just the basic coverage to cover someone else's ass.

Same with tenant/content insurance. There are so many news stories where hundreds of people are screwed, crying to the government for help etc.. when for the cost of a latte a month they would be totally covered.

On one hand, I feel bad that your father is having an expensive lesson, on the other, I don't think the rest of us should have to pay for it out of tax dollars or any special fund.

[reborn_euro]

Thanks for all the good remarks and really big help with the link, much appreciated. And to say the least, I completely do agree on the full coverage, frankly I was shocked when he told me.
The reason not being the best but his reason non the less was that his insurance was ridiculously high because of the MANY fuck ups my brother had done while being under my fathers insurance, it really got near the point were my father could barely get any company to insure him, completely based on all the crap my brother had done and none of his own, some he didn't even tell me father about..... And yes I do realise my brother is a complete fucktard for that... But the consequences still fell on my father.
Just putting that out there so that alil more understanding can be put towards the no comprehensive coverage. Like I said the risk was still my fathers to take, but I can appreciate the reasoning behind it as having the money for a merc doesn't necessarily mean access to infinite amounts of funds for insurance.

Back on topic, the kid was driving some old pontiac LS2 or something in that nature, his mother came to get him in a SUV Lexus so I believe she atleast is still descently off to answer the other post. Any other helpful articles/stories/or general knowledge will continually be greatly appreciated as we have yet to select a lawyer.

[dexlargo]

What was the MB worth just prior to the accident?

What medical expenses did your dad actually pay for? (i.e. not covered by Alberta Health or Blue Cross, etc.)

Why did he miss work and for how long?

Also, Bandit, why do you say that since the mother is the RO, she will be liable?

I'm not saying you're wrong, I just want to know where that comes from. I don't see how a person could prove she was negligent in some way which caused or contributed to these damages. Is there a law that makes the RO liable for actions of people that they allow to drive their vehicle?

[Masked Bandit]

Originally posted by dexlargo
What was the MB worth just prior to the accident?

What medical expenses did your dad actually pay for? (i.e. not covered by Alberta Health or Blue Cross, etc.)

Why did he miss work and for how long?

Also, Bandit, why do you say that since the mother is the RO, she will be liable?

I'm not saying you're wrong, I just want to know where that comes from. I don't see how a person could prove she was negligent in some way which caused or contributed to these damages. Is there a law that makes the RO liable for actions of people that they allow to drive their vehicle?

Same reason why a parking ticket or photo ticket goes against the RO. In the end they are ultimately liable. Assuming this gets to the point of a lawsuit the defendant will be dipshit kid & the mother.