It is causing me physical pain and depression knowing that people can cash in like this to the tune of higher premiums for the rest of us.
I deserve to be compensated for my injuries because Wagner-Ellsworth’s policy requires payment for damages that an insured person is legally obligated to pay because of bodily injury sustained by *any person* in a covered accident, whether to the claimant directly or to another.
I’ll get in line for that check as well.
Right now, I am waiting for three insurance companies to decide which one
should pay for my son’s injuries from an
accident that occurred last year. He was
thrown from a vehicle and landed face first in the road. He’s okay now. But the
medical bills are well more than I can pay. The problem is this…
The driver was not given permission to drive vehicle and was not on parent’s policy.
The owner of the vehicle gave permission to other passenger in the vehicle to drive (who gave permission to other).
The driver’s parents insurance company
said they have no obligation to pay.
The owner’s insurance company said that
because owner did not give permission to
on driving to drive vehicle, they are not
obligated to pay.
My own insurance company says, you can
file a claim on Underinsured/Uninsured
Motorist coverage, we’ll pay if the other
won’t, but we believe they should pay.
I am and have been emotionally tramatized
from my son’s injury–I was second on the
scene and had to keep him still and talking while waiting for rescue to come.
I had blood all over me. I still have nightmares and feel a sense of dread everytime my son drives off from home.
I just want the bills paid, my pain and
suffering is par for the course of being a MOM.
Here we go again, extending the boundaries of liability. (More correctly interpreted as wealth transfer.) Once again, attorneys are loading more and more people onto the bus (or into the cars).
Next thing we’ll see are claims from everyone within earshot of a collision claiming they were traumatized by the sound of cars crashing and/or screams of injured people, maybe even the sirens, too. Think of the multitudes of people lining up to collect under an auto liability policy. Since no one could afford to buy the limits that would be needed, I guess settlements would be on a first come, first served basis-sort of like a sale at Macy’s. Unfortunately, those most directly injured in a collision might end up with less than what they might otherwise be entitled to.
It’s really sad that our society has allowed such perversion of our justice system as we are seeing today. (Oh, I just remembered: maybe that’s because most judges and lawmakers were, or are, lawyers themselves.)
The most backward thing about this article is that the policy limits were already exhausted, making it glaringly obvious that this case wasnt at all about the “injuries suffered by the client”.
Question is: Since the at-fault’s policy limits were exhausted, does the Claimant now have a UIM claim against her own Auto Insurance Policy? Is there UIM coverage and definition of Bodily Injury clearly defined to exclude such claim?
As a claims adjustor myself, I hear some of the dumbest, um how do I say it nicely, “facts of loss” that even hollywood writers would be proud of. BI for seeing an accident? maybe I will file a claim for BI for listening to our insureds stories. I could claim “their ridiculousness made me dumber”. apparently all i need is an accident and a physical manifestation. I could easily start missing my mouth at the water fountain. Show me the money!
so, if my son was hurt while playing on the high school, but i have a heart attack because of the trauma it caused me. does that mean the school would have to pay for my trauma? i think the judge went to broad in this case. we hear sirens everyday why does that make it any different. i would appeal this ruling.
A state supreme court decision can still be appealed to the US Supreme court. In this case, the SCOTUS is supposed to make its decision based on their reading of the State’s law.
We have updated our privacy policy to be more clear and meet the new requirements of the GDPR. By continuing to use our site, you accept our revised Privacy Policy.
It is causing me physical pain and depression knowing that people can cash in like this to the tune of higher premiums for the rest of us.
I deserve to be compensated for my injuries because Wagner-Ellsworth’s policy requires payment for damages that an insured person is legally obligated to pay because of bodily injury sustained by *any person* in a covered accident, whether to the claimant directly or to another.
When can I expect to receive my check?
KLS,
I’ll get in line for that check as well.
Right now, I am waiting for three insurance companies to decide which one
should pay for my son’s injuries from an
accident that occurred last year. He was
thrown from a vehicle and landed face first in the road. He’s okay now. But the
medical bills are well more than I can pay. The problem is this…
The driver was not given permission to drive vehicle and was not on parent’s policy.
The owner of the vehicle gave permission to other passenger in the vehicle to drive (who gave permission to other).
The driver’s parents insurance company
said they have no obligation to pay.
The owner’s insurance company said that
because owner did not give permission to
on driving to drive vehicle, they are not
obligated to pay.
My own insurance company says, you can
file a claim on Underinsured/Uninsured
Motorist coverage, we’ll pay if the other
won’t, but we believe they should pay.
I am and have been emotionally tramatized
from my son’s injury–I was second on the
scene and had to keep him still and talking while waiting for rescue to come.
I had blood all over me. I still have nightmares and feel a sense of dread everytime my son drives off from home.
I just want the bills paid, my pain and
suffering is par for the course of being a MOM.
Here we go again, extending the boundaries of liability. (More correctly interpreted as wealth transfer.) Once again, attorneys are loading more and more people onto the bus (or into the cars).
Next thing we’ll see are claims from everyone within earshot of a collision claiming they were traumatized by the sound of cars crashing and/or screams of injured people, maybe even the sirens, too. Think of the multitudes of people lining up to collect under an auto liability policy. Since no one could afford to buy the limits that would be needed, I guess settlements would be on a first come, first served basis-sort of like a sale at Macy’s. Unfortunately, those most directly injured in a collision might end up with less than what they might otherwise be entitled to.
It’s really sad that our society has allowed such perversion of our justice system as we are seeing today. (Oh, I just remembered: maybe that’s because most judges and lawmakers were, or are, lawyers themselves.)
The most backward thing about this article is that the policy limits were already exhausted, making it glaringly obvious that this case wasnt at all about the “injuries suffered by the client”.
Question is: Since the at-fault’s policy limits were exhausted, does the Claimant now have a UIM claim against her own Auto Insurance Policy? Is there UIM coverage and definition of Bodily Injury clearly defined to exclude such claim?
As a claims adjustor myself, I hear some of the dumbest, um how do I say it nicely, “facts of loss” that even hollywood writers would be proud of. BI for seeing an accident? maybe I will file a claim for BI for listening to our insureds stories. I could claim “their ridiculousness made me dumber”. apparently all i need is an accident and a physical manifestation. I could easily start missing my mouth at the water fountain. Show me the money!
so, if my son was hurt while playing on the high school, but i have a heart attack because of the trauma it caused me. does that mean the school would have to pay for my trauma? i think the judge went to broad in this case. we hear sirens everyday why does that make it any different. i would appeal this ruling.
This is the “Montana” Supreme Court!
This was the state supreme court decision.
A state supreme court decision can still be appealed to the US Supreme court. In this case, the SCOTUS is supposed to make its decision based on their reading of the State’s law.