Traffic tickets, accidents, insurance Discuss legal issues, emissions testing, illegal modifications, etc....

3 car accident. NOT @ FAULT RULE???

Old 06-Mar-2009, 09:25 AM
  #21  
Member
 
dachopstix's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Posts: 30
Originally Posted by FiveO
Only if the injury is catastrophic. A sore neck or bit of a limp arising out of the accident won't do even if you still have it a year after the crash. Unless you're stuck lifelong in a neck and head halo, you've lost the use of a leg, or suffered some other similarly catastrophic injury, you won't get far in trying to sue the other driver.

Even if you do manage to get an award, there is also that $30,000 mandatory deductible that comes right off the top.

Plus, if you're deemed to win your case, minus the deductible, you ALSO have to pay taxes on any settlements/awards...
dachopstix is offline  
Old 06-Mar-2009, 05:45 PM
  #22  
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
hula_balu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 459
someone metioned going to small claims court?? how does that work?
hula_balu is offline  
Old 06-Mar-2009, 06:29 PM
  #23  
Senior Member
 
FiveO's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 494
Originally Posted by hula_balu
someone metioned going to small claims court?? how does that work?

First of all, under Ontario's no-fault insurance jurisdiction, you do not have the right to sue for damages arising out of a crash except in narrowly defined circumstances involving catastrophic injury.

Second, there is a mandatory $30,000 deductible on any damages awards arising from lawsuits related to auto crashes.

In Ontario, Small Claims courts are currently limited to lawsuits involving a maximum of $10,000 in claims. Next January, that limit is being raised to $25,000, but even that falls far below the $30,000 deductible.
FiveO is offline  
Old 06-Mar-2009, 10:46 PM
  #24  
Senior Member
Thread Starter
 
hula_balu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 459
i see. thanks
hula_balu is offline  
Old 08-Mar-2009, 01:21 PM
  #25  
Senior Member
 
CivicGurl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Pickering
Posts: 546
I was in a similar circumstance nearly a year ago. I was completely stopped at a stoplight and I was hit from behind and pushed into the car in front and the car in front was pushed into the car in front (4 cars total). The cars were all fairly driveable (the car in front of me was questionable) and we went to the Accident Reporting Station. The guy who started the chain was reponsible for all of us. I paid no deductible and my insurance did not go up.
CivicGurl is offline  
Old 08-Mar-2009, 06:59 PM
  #26  
Senior Member
 
FiveO's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 494
Originally Posted by CivicGurl
I was in a similar circumstance nearly a year ago. I was completely stopped at a stoplight and I was hit from behind and pushed into the car in front and the car in front was pushed into the car in front (4 cars total). The cars were all fairly driveable (the car in front of me was questionable) and we went to the Accident Reporting Station. The guy who started the chain was reponsible for all of us. I paid no deductible and my insurance did not go up.

Ontario's fault determination rules are provincial law and fall under the Insurance Act of Ontario. You can see the written statutes complete with fault determination pictures at Insurance Act - R.R.O. 1990, Reg. 668 .

Section 9 covers multiple rear-end collisions. They don't deem the people in the middle of a chain-reaction collision sandwich to be at fault if they are already stopped when the chain-reaction collision starts.

On the other hand, if the people in the middle are still moving when they get shoved into the car ahead of them, then they are deemed 50% at fault for not leaving enough following distance prior to the hit.
FiveO is offline  
Old 18-Mar-2009, 11:28 AM
  #27  
!!!!AWAITING CONFIRMATION!!!!!!
 
Mikey2001's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Richmond Hill
Posts: 20
Originally Posted by dachopstix
When you're not-at-fault, your insurance company will pay for all damages and injuries, without the deductible, and once all payments are submitted, they will approach the other two cars' insurance companies with a bill - in essence, your insurance company will "sue" the other two insurance companies for the money that was paid out on your behalf, and your premiums "shouldn't" go up...
Working for an insurance company, that's actually a very good explanation.

Basically the textbook explanation of no fault is that in the event of a peril each insured would go "home" to their own insurance companies and their insurance company will be responsible for any damages or subsequent law suits.

"Fault" still needs to be determined in order to figure out if you need to pay your deductible, as well if you are deemed to not be at fault your insurance company has the right to subrogate (get their money back) from the "at fault" person's insurance company. In this way your insurance company is reimbursed for anything they pay out to you and your premium isn't affected as much.

No fault insurance basically does away with the amount of lawsuits that would be filed in a non at fault jurisdiction, such as in the states, which is why you see all the commercials on television about car injury lawyers.

hope that helps
Mikey2001 is offline  
Related Topics
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
Oilpanhands
Traffic tickets, accidents, insurance
9
08-Feb-2008 11:31 AM
rick10
CFz Discussion
14
10-Jan-2008 11:16 PM
moto_spritz
Traffic tickets, accidents, insurance
7
13-May-2007 10:06 PM
kwikb16a2
Traffic tickets, accidents, insurance
3
22-Sep-2004 02:04 AM
NoSpleeny
CFz Discussion
50
05-Jun-2004 12:25 PM


Thread Tools
Search this Thread
Quick Reply: 3 car accident. NOT @ FAULT RULE???



All times are GMT -4. The time now is 06:26 AM.