My Prius is probably totalled :(

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(DaveLeePrius @ Dec 26 2006, 12:03 PM) [snapback]366793[/snapback]</div>

Sorry, Dave, but that conclusion isn't really logical. Yes, they have pain. Yes, they didn't see a chiropractor. But one does not necessarily follow the other. You can't assume that they would be pain-free had they seen a chiropractor.

This isn't meant to diminish your point about chiropractic's value. Just your logic.

I am male. I have a beard. Therefore all males have beards.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Rick Auricchio @ Dec 26 2006, 04:02 PM) [snapback]366812[/snapback]</div>

Well who gives a f*#% anyway

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(DaveLeePrius @ Dec 26 2006, 01:13 PM) [snapback]366823[/snapback]</div>

You lost the argument when you resorted to using profanity.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(IsrAmeriPrius @ Dec 26 2006, 04:53 PM) [snapback]366849[/snapback]</div>

that was my point, I wasn't trying to argue, I was saying that anyone who gets hit, should get a lawyer and see a chiropractor and get x-rays. This other poster doesn't have first hand experience and was a troll, really. So my response was, and is again, who gives a f$% anyway.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(DaveLeePrius @ Dec 26 2006, 03:03 PM) [snapback]366793[/snapback]</div>

What is with your attitude?

Anyways, I'm not saying anything negative about chiropractors, I am however saying that the professional opinion of a chiropractor isn't going to hold any weight in a legal dispute with an insurance company, the professional opinion of an orthopedist will.

Unfortunately the opinion of chiropractors are about as respected as those of acupuncturists and social workers. Not going to hold any weight in court.

I'm not sure who you're calling a troll here but if its Rick, he's one of the most respected people on here so far as I can tell, if its me I fail to see anyone else who has offered more, or even as much sound advice to this member as I have, including you.

My suggestion is to get over yourself and stop calling people names. You're the one who has trolled and pulled this thread off course.

 

No, Dave, I felt was just keeping things sensible. Flawed logic is just that...flawed.

I did say that I wasn't attacking your point about chiropractic. Since I have no experience with chiropractic medicine, I certainly have nothing to say about its value in injury cases. It would be irresponsible of me to have said anything there.

But I didn't feel it was right to leave that conclusion as it was.

Steve, thanks for the kind words.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(Rick Auricchio @ Dec 26 2006, 10:54 PM) [snapback]367000[/snapback]</div>

No problem. I don't see how we could have been clearer as to our intentions not being to knock chiropractors...

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(DaveinOlyWA @ Dec 26 2006, 01:34 PM) [snapback]366761[/snapback]</div>

When I mentioned cancelling the warranty I said he "may" have 30 days, but wasn't sure. Since you brought it up as being always prorated, I decided to check it out more. Below is a quote from another site:


CANCELLATION:

Within thirty (30) days of the Agreement Application Date, if no benefits have been paid, You many cancel this Agreement and we will refund the Agreement Purchase Price minus a $25 processing fee.

In all other cases, we will pay a pro rata refund based on elapsed time from the Agreement Application Date or elapsed mileage from the Agreement Application Mileage (whichever refund dollar amount is less), minus a $25 porcessing fee. All such refunds will be computed based upon the date the Administrator receives notice of the cancellation request.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(jmann @ Dec 25 2006, 10:33 PM) [snapback]366596[/snapback]</div>

You might be right. But the Warranty used to have a clause that said:

EXCLUSIONS AND RESTRICTIONS

This Agreement covers repairs to covered components, which have mechanically failed, as determined by the Administrator. This Agreement does not cover any breakdown, mechanical failure or expenses, which are due to, result from, or are caused by any of the following:

Abuse, or damage by collision, upset or falling objects, larceny or attempted larceny, theft or attempted theft, fire, explosion, or negligence.

 

Several points:

From looking at the pictures, I don't believe the car is totalled.

You do have insurance, right? If you finance a car, you can't drive it off the lot without it being insured. It's your insurance company's job to handle getting your car fixed. That's why we all pay $$$ for car insurance.

Two errors resulted in that accident: the SUV driver running a red light, the legal cause of the accident, and your failure to drive defensively, to see her coming at you, and your decision to turn left anyway. You can't learn from accidents unless you analyze what went wrong, and what you could do next time to prevent a similar accident. You won't learn a thing by blaming others.

I ride a motorcycle, and have for the last 12 years. In a car/bike accident, it doesn't matter in the slightest whose fault it was. I have to avoid all accidents, and so far I have. Driving defensively is mandatory for me, and should be for everyone.

Will you lose money on the deal? If the car is totalled, you probably will lose money. Otherwise, the most you should lose is your deductible, but if the circumstances of the accident are as you described, and the other driver agrees, or there is a witness to backup your version, then you won't pay anything, assuming the car is not totalled.

Harry

 

But Harry makes a good point that you should not forfeit your deductible, because the other driver was in fact at fault.

 

I've heard that AAA insurance is fairly aggressive (perhaps proactive would be a better choice?) when it comes to not paying out in potential contributory negligence cases...so I'd say that having them on your side is prob'ly a point in your favor, for sure.

I'm currently considering circumstances in my life, and my responses to them...not to place blame, but to learn...and I think in case like this it is worthwhile to ask oneself...

...how was I feeling just prior to the accident?

...was I in the kind of mood that tends to encourages one to "take" the right of way, or was I in a more defensive stance emotionally?

The reason why I suggest this is that I've been finding myself more angry and aggressive than I'm comfortable with (due I think, primarily, to the circimstances which I mentioned), and it's definitely placed me in one or two marginal situations in traffic.

And, while one might look at my actions objectively and determine that I wasn't in the wrong, perhaps my *mindset* might have contributed to the impulse to "go" when I should have waited a few more seconds 'till that last car passed...

Just a thought. I'm re-learning how important intentions are.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(YodaddyAlex @ Dec 24 2006, 12:03 PM) [snapback]366303[/snapback]</div>

Just beware: The insurance company will try one of the following tactics, both you need to fight:

1) They will give you a depreciated value for the car (they will claim it lost thousands of dollars when it left the lot), and be done.
2) They will offer to repair it so it is "like new"-- that is, there is no change in performance. The caviat here is that if/when you want to sell the car, and a buyer looks it up on Carfax, it will show that the car was in a major accident, and that the frame may be weakened.

 

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE(YodaddyAlex @ Dec 27 2006, 04:08 PM) [snapback]367430[/snapback]</div>

The car is the collateral for the loan. Most lenders will object to an insurance payoff being made directly to the borrower thus leaving the lender without any security for the repayment of the debt. The check will most likely be made out to both you and the lien holder.

 

Alex, I think they're flimflamming you about why they waived your deductible.

When you're not at fault:

1) Your insurance company pays you, no deductible;

2) They get paid back in full by the at-fault driver's insurance company.

It should have nothing to do with the other driver being carried by the same company as you.

I agree with IsrAmeri; the insurance would pay off the loan directly (so that they can have the pink slip for the salvage vehicle), and pay you what's left. You'd basically have your down payment back and can then buy another car.

As for the aftermarket items (LoJack etc), your insurance should include that in the value of the car, so your payment should include the cost for those items.

I would think you'd have to cancel the extended warranty, since it seems unlikely you can transfer it to a different VIN. You'd buy a new EW for the new car.

We're keepin' the fingers crossed for you.

Disclaimer: I haven't had a car totaled, so I'm just using common sense here. I could be all wet.

 

Good luck! I really think, and hope for your sake, that the car is totalled. Stay firm and calm and you'll eventually get whats fair.

As for those telling you that the accident was partially your fault, it is possible to do everything right, and still be involved in an accident. Thats why they call them accidents. It sounds to me like you creeped out to look down the intersection and saw her right at the last minute. Not much else you could have done there, especially since she didn't take the initiative and try to avoid you once she saw you. She zoned out, thats how she missed the light and how she missed you. There's no doubt who was at fault here. Can you learn from the accident? Absolutely, but I don't see how you could have avoided it with all the variables being the same. Sometimes s**t just happens...