|
Yea, so a motorbike crashed into me last night (pg. 6)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| Misanthrope |
| quote: | Originally posted by VERTiG0
It's times like this I'm glad that if somebody hits my car |
I hope not!
yack to car collusions. |
|
|
| magikb |
taken from the "I am now a blondie!" thread..
| quote: | Originally posted by rabbitjoker
"I'm Detective John Kimble!"
|
| quote: | Originally posted by d!abolic
i'm a cop you idiot!!! :eek: |
so what was your main post about? u-turns? cops charging who? the max amount of time before a collision is reported??
if you are a cop, should you not already be aware of all this?? or was that a bunch of too?
ty luck or full of .. or maybe a little bit of both
:rolleyes: |
|
|
| ChemEnhanced |
| quote: | Originally posted by geroin
sue/charge them, unless they a have hospital report proving that they attended with broken bones they cant do . |
you can't do about it....unfortunately Diabolic's insurance company is going to be paying through the roof for this. I figure by the time the loss transfer claim is submitted and the tort action is completed the insurance company will have paid well over $500,000.00.
If the injuries are catastrophic in nature then we could be looking at millions.....diabolic better talk to a good lawyer if that is the case....or maybe he is a lawyer...he seems to be in every profession. |
|
|
| ChemEnhanced |
| quote: | Originally posted by j_spot
In fact the only way I can see you not being @ fault is if the driver was heading teh same direction as you, and you were turning from the correct lane, which would mean that the bike hit you on the inside of the turn as he was coming up the inside/outside, and if thats the case, he deserves to be hit.
|
even in the above scenario the bike would have to be passing one or more vehicles in order for him not to be liable. If the bike is just trying to pass him then the liability would be 50/50. Truth is...we don't have the full details of the loss in order to properly assess liability. |
|
|
| ChemEnhanced |
| quote: | Originally posted by Misanthrope
Dude.
I wasn't thinking logically rather emotionally. Car collusions suck ass - whether it's your fault or not
- dealing with insurance people are a bitch. |
:whip: :whip: :whip: :whip: :whip: :whip: :whip: :whip: :whip: :whip: :whip: :whip: :whip: :whip: :whip: :whip: :whip: :whip: :whip:
Insurance people rawk.....you just don't understand the system. |
|
|
| Moral Hazard |
| quote: | Originally posted by d!abolic
Bull. Two cops as witnesses that there were no injuries. Plus i bet 911 has a copy of the call they made. And uh... xrays? Hospital reports? Is he gonna pull that out of his ass? |
Injury claims are 90% of what I do, trust me, saying they weren't injured at the scene means exactly sweet all. Most auto accident injuries (especially the soft tissue and straight/hair line fractures of non-weight supporting bones) don't manifest symptoms until several hours following the collision. Now, with respect to fractures, they will be very easy to prove or disprove through x-rays. Soft tissue injuries on the other hand are very difficult to disprove (btw, all one needs to do to "prove" a ST injury is make consistant complaints about pain and be willing to swear an affidavit... thank you sympathetic judges/juries:rolleyes:).
I seriously question the laying of charges as you stated the police did not take a report at the scene. If you were refered to a CRC then the probability that charges were laid is virtually zero (in 6 years I have seen three instances where charges were laid by an officer at a Collision Reporting Centre.... one was a license violation and the other two were failure to produce proof of liability insurance.
Now, regarding the law suit you will face... I STRONGLY RECOMMEND YOU FULLY COOPERATE WITH YOUR INSURANCE COMPANY. They have a duty to defend you and to indemnify you for any damages you are required to pay up to the limit of liability insurance you purchased. The more you cooperate with them the better chance they have at reducing your liability (through partial defences) and/or calculating an accurate assessment of the other parties damages thus allowing for a faster settlement with fewer costs incurred. Assuming that you have 1,000,000 third party liability coverage the chances that you will have any personal exposure in this matter is negligable. Let your insurer protect you and help them do that.
If you have questions I'd be glad to help. |
|
|
| Moral Hazard |
| quote: | Originally posted by geroin
sue/charge them, unless they a have hospital report proving that they attended with broken bones they cant do . |
WHAT??? Even if they claimed to have fractures and medical records don't support that he can't sue them. In order to make a suit (that wouldn't get thrown out of court immediately that is) he'd need to prove pecuniary damages (there is no non-pecuniary/pain and suffering payable for slander, which is the only tort I can fathom a suit such as you suggest being for). Being as there is no conceivable way Diabolic will suffer financial loss due to false allegations of injury (let prove said loss) there is no grounds for suit.
FYI, if the fractures exist they are easy to prove, if they don't the biker and his passenger will likely claim soft tissue injuries, which are extremely difficult to disprove. Additionally, fractures aren't worth very much money unless they are to a major bone such as your femur or pelvis.... soft tissue injuries (provided they are more then just a 1 year whiplash) can be worth significan dollars.
Here's some case law for you.... the same case law I generally rely on to assess damages
Fractured ribs.....
1998-29.5 $12,000
Judge: Bouck J.
Plaintiff, age 45, suffered fractured ribs which caused significant pain and interfered with his activities for some time. An accident that occurred at work earlier in the year complicated the assessment of damages. Plaintiff failed to prove that his complaint of leg pain or the drug addiction he developed for painkillers was caused by the accident. Bouck J. awarded $12,000 for non-pecuniary damages.
MacDonald v. Huckin (December 30, 1997), Doc. Victoria 96/1921 (1997), 1 P.I.D.P. 5922 (B.C. S.C.) (19 pages)
1996-29.2 $6,000
Judge: Higgins J.
Plaintiff, age 64, slipped and fell, suffering bruises to the head, 3 fractured ribs and chest contusions. She was rendered unconscious for about 5 minutes. She continued to experience soreness in the chest area and headaches, above and beyond pre-accident migraines. There was no evidence of long-term disability. General damages for pain and suffering were assessed by Higgins J. at $6,000.
Morash v. McAllister Place Ltd. (March 4, 1997), Doc. S/C/1592/95 (1997), 1 P.I.D.P. 4926 (N.B. Q.B.) (12 pages)
1999-29.6 $7,000
Judge: Wilson Prov. J.
Plaintiff, age 65, suffered a broken rib with associated lower chest bruising and pain. Recovery from the broken rib took about 6 weeks. Plaintiff had pre-existing asthma. The accident was responsible for the onset of an asthma attack 7 weeks later. Wilson Prov. J. awarded $2,000 for pain and suffering, including the rib injury and an additional $5,000 for the asthma attack and time spent in hospital treating it.
Morrison v. Rigger Drilling Supply Ltd., Doc. Edmonton 9603-03119 (1999), 1 P.I.D.P. 6333 (Alta. Q.B.) (11 pages)
1999-29.7 $18,000
Judge: Mercer J.
Plaintiff, age 67, sustained multiple rib fractures and extensive bruising to the left side of her face. She continued to experience pain 4 years post accident, but her activities were not restricted. Mercer J. assessed damages for pain and suffering in the amount of $18,000.
Lynch Estate v. Anderson (1990), 180 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 225, 548 A.P.R. 225 (Nfld. T.D.); additional reasons (1991), 181 Nfld. & P.E.I.R. 225, 550 A.P.R. 225 (Nfld. T.D.) (28 pages)
Chronic Whiplash Associated Disorder
2005-26.1147 $42,000
Judge: Erb J., Paperny J.A., Picard J.A. and Russell J.A.
Plaintiff, a 45-year-old contract courier, suffered injuries in a motor vehicle accident. His injuries included the following: low back injury which resolved within five months; whiplash-type injury which produced a chronic and serious musculo-ligamentus strain to the neck, shoulders and upper back with trigger points in the muscles which continued to the time of trial and would possibly continue well into the future; myofascial pain syndrome; headaches; heavy headedness; dizziness, fatigue; deconditioning and weakening muscles; concentration difficulties; and mild depression and anxiety arising from frustration over his slow recovery. Plaintiff could no longer lift weights or exert himself either at work or in recreational activities. The accident resulted in life style changes, periods of continuous difficulty, and at other times, intermittent problems. Plaintiff suffered chronic pain for more than five years. Plaintiff was unable to work at the level he did in the past. Erb J. assessed plaintiff's general damages at $42,000, and awarded $25,000 for loss of future earning capacity. [Originally digested in Goldsmith's Damages for Personal Injury & Death at §2004-26.1106.] On appeal by defendant on the issue of mitigation of damages, the Court of Appeal (Paperny, Picard, Russell JJ.A.) dismissed the appeal.
Pfob v. Bakalik (2004), 1 P.I.D.P. 9513, 2004 ABCA 278, 2004 CarswellAlta 1194 (Alta. C.A.)
2005-26.1160 $35,000
Judge: Taylor J.
Plaintiff, a 49-year-old chamber maid, was injured when the vehicle in which she was stopped was struck from behind. The plaintiff immediately felt a stinging in her upper and lower back. She later developed a headache, neck pain, shoulder pain, and pain and discomfort in her lower back, hips, and left knee. Plaintiff had suffered a whiplash injury to her neck and shoulders. She experienced shoulder pain on a weekly basis. The whiplash was substantially resolved within one year of the accident. Plaintiff suffered regular headaches for approximately one year post-accident. The headaches subsided to the point that they only occurred intermittently thereafter. Plaintiff's main complaint was with her lower back. She had a pre-existing back condition, consisting of a grade 1 forward spondylothesis, and exhibited some evidence of degenerative disc disease. The accident aggravated the pre-existing condition to the extent that what had been asymptomatic and of a mild and non-interfering nature was rendered to a state in which it interfered with the plaintiff's ability to work and otherwise do what she was able to do previously. The pain caused by the plaintiff's moderate lumbar lower back injury was expected to last a total of four to five years. In addition to affecting her ability to work as a chamber maid, plaintiff was unable to go for walks or ride her bicycle as she did before. These restrictions had been prematurely imposed on her as a consequence of the accident. Taylor J. awarded non-pecuniary damages in the amount of $35,000 and damages for loss of earning capacity in the amount of $27,000.
Kipling v. Richmond (2004), 2004 CarswellBC 2621, 2004 BCSC 1446 (B.C. S.C.)
2005-26.1166 $26,000
Judge: Cole J.
Plaintiff, aged 24, was injured when the vehicle in which she was stopped was struck from behind. Plaintiff was able to drive her vehicle, but began developing soreness later that day. By the following morning, her soreness and stiffness had increased, and she attended a walk-in clinic with complaints of soreness in her neck and back. She was found to have tender soft tissue in the cervical spine, with full range of motion but with pain in the cervical spine, rhomboids, scapula, and thoracic areas. She had suffered a soft tissue strain. Three months post-accident, plaintiff's pain continued. She saw her family physician, who diagnosed her as having sustained a whiplash injury and a musculoskeletal strain to her lower back. More than three years post-accident, plaintiff continued to suffer intermittent low back pain, intermittent headaches, and restrictions on her physical activities. An x-ray at this time revealed moderate osteoarthritic changes, and it was likely that her degenerative back disease was a result of the motor vehicle accident. Cole J. awarded general damages in the amount of $26,000.
Yount v. Prospect Electric Ltd. (2005), 2005 CarswellBC 500, 2005 BCSC 322 (B.C. S.C.)
Rotator Cuff Tear
2005-27.151 $75,000
Judge: Donnelly J.
Plaintiff, aged 19, slipped and fell on some wet stairs on the premises of the defendant. The stairwell was in darkness at the time of the incident. Plaintiff wrenched his shoulder, and his hip and shoulder were numb after the accident. He was unable to do physical work after the incident. One year after the incident, he was still complaining about constant pain in his shoulder and back. He was diagnosed with chronic back pain and rotator cuff strain. Chronic back pain continued four years post accident, and it was expected to be permanent. Seven years post-accident, plaintiff's spine displayed mild degenerative disc disease. Prior to accident, plaintiff had shoulder complaints and low-back pain, but these problems were minor in nature. The fall caused plaintiff to suffer a significant injury to his shoulder, back, and hip. The chronic pain at the time of trial was permanent. The injuries had caused a profound and continuing disruption in the plaintiff's daily life and enjoyment thereof, including work and leisure activity. Given the plaintiff's age, this represented a comprehensive and serious loss. Donnely J. awarded general damages in the amount of $75,000, as well as $37,500 for loss of future earning capacity.
Hutchinson v. Stratford-Perth Family YMCA (2004), 2004 CarswellOnt 6189 (Ont. S.C.J.); additional reasons at (2005), 2005 CarswellOnt 2076
2005-27.153 $56,000
Judge: Hart J.
Plaintiff wife suffered injuries in a head-on collision. Her primary injury was a significant rotator cuff injury to her right shoulder. She required arthroscopic surgery on the shoulder. Injuries affected plaintiff wife's ability to do housework, and affected her relationship with plaintiff husband. Hart J. awarded plaintiff wife general damages in the amount of $56,000, as well as $15,000 for loss of housekeeping capacity, and $5,000 for costs of future care. Hart J. awarded plaintiff husband damages for loss of consortium and servitum in the amount of $5,000.
Delahay v. Holder Estate (2005), 2005 CarswellAlta 527, 2005 ABQB 283 (Alta. Q.B.)
2003-27.130 $55,000
Judge: Caputo J.
Plaintiff, aged 33, suffered a concussion and soft tissue injuries when his bicycle was struck by a motor vehicle. The plaintiff injuries included swollen facies, neck pain, back pain, left shoulder abrasions, left hip contusion, left ankle abrasions and stiffness, left palm abrasion, and finger abrasion. Plaintiff was referred to an orthopaedic surgeon and was diagnosed with rotator cuff tendonitis and an overlap problem with cervical spine mechanical pain. Plaintiff attended for physiotherapy treatments but they did little to help his shoulder and neck problem, which prevented him from lifting heavy weights and repetitive bending. At the time of the accident, plaintiff was intending to return to the printing business in which he worked from high school until four years before the accident. After the accident, plaintiff secured a job in the printing business, but was subsequently let go, as he was physically unable to do the job because of the injuries suffered in the accident. Nine years after the accident, plaintiff continued to suffer from stiffness and irritation along his collarbone, along his left shoulder and in the shoulder and neck. He had to limit ordinary work and recreational activities such as shovelling snow, swimming or playing hockey because they aggravated the pain in his shoulder. Caputo J. assessed plaintiff's general damages at $55,000.
Barniske v. Mohamed (2003), 1 P.I.D.P. 8507, 2003 CarswellOnt 711 (Ont. S.C.J.)
The above are just pain and suffering awards.... economic loss and medical costs would be in addition. |
|
|
| Moral Hazard |
| quote: | Originally posted by d!abolic
THAT THEY HAD BROKEN LEGS AND FRACTURED RIBS! |
ribs are no problem... see post above
Here's some case law for fractured Tibias/fibulas.... I don't have any case law handy for femurs as they are rarely broken in auto accidents without there being other major injuries (usually fractured pelvis or dislocated hips)
2003-47.67 $50,000
Judge: Dillon J.
Plaintiff fell over the curb of a sidewalk, breaking the fibula and tibia of her left leg. She underwent an open reduction and internal fixation, remained in hospital for four days, and was immobilized by a cast for six weeks. Plaintiff remained in a wheelchair for six months, and eventually moved to crutches and a walker. She used an air cast for seven months. Plaintiff required personal assistance, physiotherapy and professional home care assistance. Plaintiff's prognosis was for residual symptoms and deformity on a permanent basis. She would be prevented from heavy or very heavy physical activity and any activity requiring excessive standing, climbing, squatting and running. She was also at risk of developing post-traumatic osteoarthritis of the ankle. At time of trial, plaintiff's leg still swelled and was painful if sitting for long periods of time. Plaintiff enjoyed painting, travelling, camping, walking, babysitting and a happy marital life prior to fall. These activities had not been resumed to their prior status at the time of trial. Dillon J. awarded plaintiff $50,000 for non-pecuniary damages and $20,000 for loss of earning capacity.
Blake v. Buy-Low Foods Ltd., 2002 BCSC 1647, 2002 CarswellBC 2818 (B.C. S.C.)
2002-47.65 $40,000
Judge: McLellan J.
Plaintiff, a 25-year-old machine operator, suffered a badly broken lower leg when he was struck by a car in a pedestrian crosswalk. His tibia and fibula suffered high-energy fractures in more than one place. The fractures damaged the muscles and soft tissue of his leg, but the broken bones did not come through his skin. Plaintiff had surgery and spent one week in bed in hospital before being sent home in a full leg cast. He was in a lot of pain and had difficulty sleeping. The cast was removed three months later, and plaintiff wore a smaller walking cast for six weeks. Three and a half months after the accident, he was able to return to work but could only do light duties. He had a bad limp when the walking cast was removed, which was partially addressed by physiotherapy, exercises and a heel lift. His right leg was slightly shorter than his left. He was unable to run, skate or snowboard. He could use a stationary bike, but was unable to engage in mountain biking. McLellan J. awarded plaintiff non-pecuniary damages in the amount of $40,000 and damages for diminution of earning capacity in the amount of $60,000.
Doucet v. Crittenden (2001), 1 P.I.D.P. 7824, 2001 CarswellNB 465, 2001 NBQB 271 (N.B. Q.B.)
2000-47.59 $60,000
Judge: Morin J.
Plaintiff, aged 36 at the time of the trial, sustained an open fracture of the left tibia which required open reduction, internal fixation and skin grafting. The fracture was a very serious one and was accompanied by an injury to the collateral ligament. As a result of his surgeries, plaintiff had significant scarring on his left leg. Plaintiff was still experiencing pain in his left leg at the time of the trial. Morin J. assessed general non-pecuniary damages for pain, suffering and loss of enjoyment of life at $60,000.
Carr v. Anderson (June 28, 2000), Doc. 97-CV-1889 (2000), 1 P.I.D.P. 6927, 2000 CarswellOnt 2282 (Ont. S.C.J.) (12 pages) |
|
|
| d!abolic |
| quote: | Originally posted by magikb
taken from the "I am now a blondie!" thread..
so what was your main post about? u-turns? cops charging who? the max amount of time before a collision is reported??
if you are a cop, should you not already be aware of all this?? or was that a bunch of too?
ty luck or full of .. or maybe a little bit of both
:rolleyes: |
*smacks head* Both of those are Arnie quotes |
|
|
| VERTiG0 |
Hahah, the Insurance Brothers to the rescue again!
Awesome. |
|
|
| d!abolic |
| quote: | Originally posted by Moral Hazard
I seriously question the laying of charges as you stated the police did not take a report at the scene. If you were refered to a CRC then the probability that charges were laid is virtually zero (in 6 years I have seen three instances where charges were laid by an officer at a Collision Reporting Centre.... one was a license violation and the other two were failure to produce proof of liability insurance.
|
I don't remember saying that. The cop did take a report, but he told me to go do another one at Collision centre. When i got there, they looked at me funny and said that there was no need since the cop already did that. He also gave us an $100 ticket for "starting not in safety." What does this mean? |
|
|
| VERTiG0 |
| quote: | Originally posted by d!abolic
He also gave us an $100 ticket for "starting not in safety." What does this mean? |
It means you accelerated from a stop to make your U-turn when it wasn't safe to do so, as evident by the goddamn motorcycle that smashed into you.
hurrrrrrrrr., |
|
|
|
|
