clean hairy
Well-Known Member
What are your thoughts on this?
That was my first thought; however, if you play the video, you will see that they found quite a bit of undercarriage damage after they started pulling it apart.Totaled? Damage doesn’t seem that bad.
Insurance company decides if it's worth itTotaled? Damage doesn’t seem that bad.
In todays world of inflated used car values I would’ve thought they’d fix it.Insurance company decides if it's worth it
You thought wrongIn todays world of inflated used car values I would’ve thought they’d fix it.
It said she was from Land O LakesI’m guessing she’s in Land O’Lakes, FL. According to my insurance company, when my car was totaled last year by someone I was told Florida is a no-fault state. That means each company pays for their insuree and anything over that the insurance companies fight it out. I wonder why her insurance company isn’t taking care of this?
She was in the vehicle when it was hit? Ow ow my neck, my back I’m in pain and can’t move. And get a lawyer. Big company…..equals sweet settlement.What are your thoughts on this?
But she didn’t identify the state. There is also a Land o’ Lakes, Wisconsin.It said she was from Land O Lakes
Sorry @Operational needsBut she didn’t identify the state. There is also a Land o’ Lakes, Wisconsin.
Now apologize to Operational, please.
"In the United States, fault-based insurance laws are much more common compared to no-fault laws. Texas is one of 38 states plus the District of Columbia have a fault-based system, and only 12 states are no-fault states." Fault vs No-Fault Insurance Laws by State.this is why you need full coverage insurance. with full coverage insurance your insurance is on the hook to make you whole regardless of who is at fault. it just makes no difference at all from your end. so you don't even have to bother talking to the other party at all. you call your insurance, they pay you and then they go after the guy who is at fault to cover their costs, and they can't be given the runaround like you can because they know all the "give 'em the runaround" tricks themselves and do this every single day unlike you who have maybe zero experience in having some amazon mook wreck your car.
the problem this lady is having is not that amazon legally doesn't have to pay, it's that they're just not paying. they're legally required to but it's work for someone, and significantly more work for someone that doesn't know how to do it, to invoke the law to get them to cough it up. which is what amazon is betting on, that they can make it so difficult and fruitless for her to pursue it that she just gives up. if she gives up then they don't have to pay regardless of what the law says. and this is resoundingly common in all of those 38 states with fault based insurance laws, because the insurance guy on the other end of the phone call can hear it in your voice that you've never done this before."In the United States, fault-based insurance laws are much more common compared to no-fault laws. Texas is one of 38 states plus the District of Columbia have a fault-based system, and only 12 states are no-fault states." Fault vs No-Fault Insurance Laws by State.
That means each company pays for their insuree and anything over that the insurance companies fight it out.