I don't know when I have ever been so angry.
State Farm has sent a letter saying that I have been judged "at least 51% responsible" for a collision where the other driver pulled out from behind another vehicle after I was already in the street, gunned his engine while looking down (the sun was shining toward him and I never saw his face, just the top of his head) and hit me at a speed well in excess of the speed limit (even after hitting me and spinning me around he still had enough momentum to go over the curb, rip up a tree, go over the retaining wall of our garden, and stop only when he finally hit the car in the neighbor's driveway).
And since State Farm also decided in 2000 to settle with a woman who had made an obviously fraudulent claim, I have come to an ugly surmise:
It's cheaper to let people with the youth and strength to lie and keep lying cheat ill, older customers than it is to fight false claims.
PLEASE REPOST THIS. VALERIE AND I CANNOT BE THE ONLY VICTIMS OF THIS ABUSE, AND THE ONLY HOPE WE HAVE OF REDRESS IS A CLASS-ACTION SUIT.
Previous links:
accident: harvey-rrit.livejournal.com/154847.html
first update: harvey-rrit.livejournal.com/167370.html
Matthew Joseph Harrington
San Jose,#2Author of original report
Sat, June 14, 2014
If I had not seen it and started to avoid it, I would not have been hit on the side of the rear end; I would have been T-boned, and probably killed by the airbag since my head was turned.
My car was spun around about eighty degrees by the impact. Even after losing the momentum from that, the truck continued, plowing through a tree and ripping it out of the ground, until it hit another car. Most sports cars would have remained nearby after impact, by the bye; they seldom have engines as powerful as are found in a blue-collar pickup truck, built for carrying loads up to the weight of, say, a sports car.
The other driver did not begin moving until I was already in the street. I saw the top of his head as he was accelerating; I don't know if he was texting, or just really proud of himself, but he was not looking forward at all.
Aristotle was very big on making assumptions based on no observations, then reasoning from those assumptions.
His legacy lives on.
Robert
Irvine,#3Consumer Comment
Fri, May 30, 2014
You do have Recourse. Their "letter" is not some magical legal statement of fact. You can go after the driver of the other vehicle directly for your damage. While it is impossible to tell the damage, it appears minor and probably something you could do in Small Claims court for a very low cost. If the case is as much of a "slam dunk" as you seem to think if you prevail you can even get the court costs back.
However, there are a few things in your report(well one thing) that actually brings doubt on your claim.
You state(from your link) that the other car was going 40-45 MPH. However, unless that person was in some super high performance sports car. It is basically impossible for a car to pull out from behind another vehicle and then "gun" it too hit that speed in a distance short enough that it would have been impossible for you to avoid it.
Notice, I am not saying that the other car wasn't speeding..nor that the other driver is innocent. I am just saying that based on the speed and situation you are claiming it could be seen that you may be at fault as you would have had time to see the car.