Southern auto owners

[1930]

Recently a vehicle crossed the median, drove through 2 of my fences ( one inside the other ) flattened a picnic table and knocked over some trees.
He was evidently not the at fault driver, ( even though he had to have his vehicle towed off our property)
At fault fled the scene.
Southern auto owners was the insurance carrier of the vehicle which came through the fence and have told us that they are not responsible and will not pay out for our damages.
It’s a nearly vacant lot with only a fruit stand pavilion on it.
Roughly 4500-6000 in damages in my guestimation.
Florida, anyone been in similar predicament?

 

[Redlands Okie]

Sounds like time for a lawyer or let your insurance company handle it. Either will be a toss up in the result

 

[Jstpssng]

Don't let them get away with it. Laws vary from state to state to province, but here the insurance company of the car which went through the fence would pay, then go after the at fault driver.
Or at least that's what happened when a friend was on the front of a 4 car chain reaction crash. The driver behind him paid, the insurer of the second car back paid my friend and that if the car in back of him; while the insurer for the guy who initially caused it had to pay full damage to the car he hit.
I dont know how it works in a no fault state. All that I know is my GL insurance more than tripled when they found out I was working in New York.

 

[paulsharvey]

My understanding, is, the vehicle to cause the damage would be at fault, regardless of who started the chain. IE, someone rear ends you, you hit car in front of you, your at fault for car 3's damage.

 

[CADplans]

I was gonna mention "no fault"
My SIL lived in Florida in the mid-late 1970's,,
She talked a LOT about how FL was a NO-FAULT insurance state.
No matter what the accident, your own insurance paid,, PERIOD.
She talked about it a lot,, supposedly it was a good thing.

I wonder if that is still the method of insurance in FL,,
the answer from the insurance company sure sounds like it,,

 

[paulsharvey]

Well, I know recently, unless there is a ticket issued, then your responsible for your vehicle. They don't often investigate much, and it's he said she said, and both parts insurance are responsible.

About 2 months ago, I was stopped, 3 cars back, at a red light, truck bumps me (I mean bump, not Hit) me from behind, but its a company vehicle, so regardless of damage or not, need police report. Guy who bumped me wanted to make a big deal about no damage, and he wasn't staying. I photo'd his license plate, and told him, if he leaves I'm reporting as a hit and run. Cop (PSA) shows up and basically just enforces exchange of info. Looking at the police report, after I left; My VIN and DL# are in driver 1 and driver 2 info slot, but his name under driver 2...

 

[Jstpssng]

^^^^
A woman at a local convenience store had her parked pickup run into while she was working, totaling the vehicle. It was a Canadian trucker that hit her and the cop messed up the paperwork; wrong VIN, or some dumb thing. Once he crossed the border there was nothing they could do, and she didn't have collision insurance.

 

[two_bit_score]

My understanding, is, the vehicle to cause the damage would be at fault, regardless of who started the chain. IE, someone rear ends you, you hit car in front of you, your at fault for car 3's damage.

Basically backwards.

The party who started the ball rolling by committing the first tort is the one who is primarily 'liable' for resulting damages. There can be, of course, subsuquent intervening causes of damages down the line for which the original tortfeasor is not fully liable.

 

[paulsharvey]

Basically backwards.

The party who started the ball rolling by committing the first tort is the one who is primarily 'liable' for resulting damages. There can be, of course, subsuquent intervening causes of damages down the line for which the original tortfeasor is not fully liable.

I could 100% be wrong, and it wouldn't be the first or last time. My understanding was your insurance would be on the hook, and then either you, or your insurance would be able to try to sue car 1 for the fault, but you or your insurance would make car 3 whole, and then it would be on you to go after car 1? I could be completely wrong.

 

[paulsharvey]

On the no-fault; I belive (once again, sure could be wrong); each vehicles insurance is responsible for the injury of its occupants; but a ticketed, at fault accident, vehicle damage would be on the ticketed party.

They don't do much for accident investigation anymore; because, at least around here; unless it is Very obvious one party is 100% wrong, and other is 100% right, it's basically seen as a civil problem.