Re: Re: Weird auto insurance collection Read the original post, which I quoted a few posts ago. He got a letter from an insurance company and decided to treat it like a CA.
Re: Re: Weird auto insurance collection He originally got a letter from an insurance company. He ignored all calls and letters from them since (BIG mistake), so they assumed he was dodging his responsibility and sent (or had a CA send) a letter requesting reimbursement of the $10K that they (the insurance company) had paid. Let me explain how subrogation works. The other party was involved in an accident. They reported his plate as the other car involved. The insurance company paid their insured. Now they go after the person at fault. If he had gone to his insurance company as soon as he got the first letter from an insurance company, and told his insurance company the whole story, they would have taken care of the matter. His silence was paramount to him admitting he had no insurance. After all, if he did, he would have (properly) turned it over to them to investigate. Since he didn't reply, they placed it with someone (probably within their company) to collect. After many more requests (unanswered) for his insurance information, they can only assume that he has none and is therefore responsible himself to repay the $10K. They probably have enough to get a judgment against him, believe it or not! As several other people have said, this happens all the time when someone isn't insured. If they're insured, they have a DUTY to notify their insurance company. This is not the normal credit card turned over for collections. Again, DON'T IGNORE communications from an insurance company saying you have damaged their insured. The longer you wait, the worse off you are.
Re: Re: Weird auto insurance collection Hedwig is correct, insurance is public information, when you renew your plates, you sign an affadavit that says you are insured. The DMV does know whether or not your insured until someone reports you as not being insured, and that is by someone filing a claim against you and you not reporting it. Also the police may not be involved because it may be private property. I forsee fds losing his lisence, but now im betting that he's not even valid to drive at all. Let alone being insured.
Re: Re: Re: Weird auto insurance collection You mean all I have to do is contact the DMV and say sahlegian don't have insurance and you're in hot water because the DMV will accept what I said without question????? ><- <>- ><- <> ~~~ ><- <>- ><- <> ><- <>- ><- <> ~~~ ><- <>- ><- <
Re: Re: Re: Weird auto insurance collection Actually yes but not without question , the DMV would send me a form in the mail that i had to send back proving i had insurance. And if i didnt prove i was insured on the date they sent the form, the state of Ohio automatically revokes my liscense , it goes into the BMV computer, so if a police officer gets behind you and runs your plate, he will see that the owner operator is under an FR suspension. Insurance is absolutely public knowledge. Thats why its so damn important that he reports it to his insurance. If they investigate, see that its bogus the collection will stop. But like i said im guessing that he is not valid, or was under a FR suspension already.
Re: Re: Re: Weird auto insurance collection And another thing, if that car was anywhere but in his driveway, and he is the listed owner/operater. He better be able to prove that he's got FR. Because this is not an unsecured debt. FR is so that if you accidentally kill or cripple someone or smash their car, your can pay back the damage. Phantom accident or not, it was alleged his car was involved in an accident, now he must prove he had FR at the time of the allegation. Even if he proves that his car was in another state at the time the allegation was made, and he doesnt have FR anyhow he's gonna lose his liscense.
Re: Re: Re: Weird auto insurance collection It's not public (do you think insurance companies want to have more of a poaching war for policyholders than they've already got?), and FR law doesn't kick in for a tort victim until after they're holding an unpaid judgment. Then they garner the right to go after your license. But, your insurance company can report you to the state for not having paid on your policy, or if they cancel it (and at that point, you'd better have picked up a new policy).
Re: Re: Re: Weird auto insurance collection But like i said im guessing that fds is not valid, or was under a FR suspension already. sahlegian ================ FDS is sahlegian right about this?? L B 7283
Re: Re: Re: Weird auto insurance collection Phantom accident or not, it was alleged his car was involved in an accident, now he must prove he had FR at the time of the allegation. Even if he proves that his car was in another state at the time the allegation was made, and he doesn't have FR anyhow he's gonna lose his licensee. But like I said I'm guessing that he is not valid, or was under a FR suspension already. sahlegian ====================== I get what you're saying but I still can't translate that into it being an admission that FDS is guilty of an alleged hit and run. Does one forfeit their rights to dispute the allegations made against him simply because he doesn't have insurance? L B 7283
Re: Re: Re: Weird auto insurance collection Not at all, just remember that insurance is like a lawyer for you when driving. They defend you in the case of an accident. Or if someone accuses you of some misdoing. They represent you in court. If he doesnt have insurance he has to go it on his own... thats why if he had insurance he should have reported it. So they can start defending him.. See where im taking this...
Attn. FDS Attn. FDS I just read up on the terms for liability coverage in my auto policy. Some Of Them Are: 1*We will pay for damage of property arising out of the ownership of the insureds auto. 2*We will defend you against any suit. 3*We may investigate any claim. 4*We will pay all investigative & legal cost. 5*All court cost charged to the insured in a covered law suit. 6*All interest on the amount of a judgment. 7*premiums for appeal and bail bonds and release attachments. 8*Loss of earnings for attending hearings. <<<<<< Actions against us the insurer >>>>> 9*No claim will apply against us unless the insured has fully complied with the termes & conditions of this policy. 10*Until the claim against the insured has been finally determined by a final judgment against the insured after a trail, or by a written agreement between the insured the claimant and us the insurer. -----------------CONDITIONS============ 11*As soon as possible after an occurrence the insured shall notify us in writing giving time place and details. 12*Name & address of the person making the claim. 13*The name of the owner (and the location) of the damaged auto and a description of the damages to it. ><- <>- ><- <> ~~~ ><- <>- ><- <> ><- <>- ><- I strongly suggest you read over your policy and if it states any thing similar to this you had better notify them about what's going on other wise you are in breach of your policy contract with your insurance company by not informing them of this incident.. If you don't inform them of this they just may not be there for you later on down the line when SAFECO sues you and takes you to court where this is certainly headed if you don't pay the $10,000.oo
Attn. FDS And EXACTLY WHAT have those of us who know been telling him for well over a month now? GET TO YOUR INSURANCE COMPANY NOW! It may already be too late. If people would yield to those who know the subject we'd be better off, and fds would have done the right thing about six weeks ago.
Attn. FDS Ok so a police officer, an insurance agent, and now the credit guru, has told him what to do. Lets see if he does it.
I advise the poster to also find out who notified their insurance company that he hit their car sahlegian ><- <>- ><- <> ~~~ ><- <>- ><- <> ><- <>- ><- <> ~~~ ><- <>- ><- <> Once he finds that out he can demand that person show him proof of their insurance and if they don't or won't fds would have them in the same position they have him in on the insurance issue. Correct me if I'm wrong but don't fds have the same rights to exchange of insurance info. as the other party? ><- <>- ><- <> ~~~ ><- <>- ><- <> ><- <>- ><- <> ~~~ ><- <>- ><- <>
He has it!! Who do you think was the insurance company that called him that he blew off for over a year?
How could he when he refused to communicate with them? But it doesn't matter, because his obligation was to report it to HIS insurance company, and they would have it shortly. The main purpose of exchanging information is so that you can notify your company. In this case, his company would have gotten all of the information they needed from the other company, and would give him whatever information he needed if he had a requirement for it.
