Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 cuda1179 wrote:
I'm just wondering how big of a Jerk the DA is considering the attorney I was talking to is literally less than 10 miles from the county border, and less than 18 from that county's courthouse. How jaded do you need be to refuse a case is the neighboring town?

It isn't necessarily the DA, its about the kind of law the lawyer practices. Most of the ones I've met are terrified at the idea of going to court. They write letters (for a hefty fee), plea down traffic tickets, but actual litigation scares them.

When I had to lawyer up, I was able to draw upon my friend network to find a pugilist who was always spoiling for a fight. Rather enjoys it. He lived up to his reputation and had the other side reeling. We never did see court and that's probably the only time I've seen a state agency tuck its tail and run.

Good luck and keep in mind that overcharging is usually just a strong-arm tactic to force a plea, and it can backfire badly with a skilled defense. There are established guidelines for first-time offenders that make jail sentences very rare. At least 'round here, judges bend over backwards for diversion programs even for violent offenders.

Alas, that kind of representation is not cheap, so maybe setup a fund-raiser.

Well, more developments. Looks like the construction company opted for a double dose of insurance fraud and fraud on the courts, and the pictures I took the day of the accident are paying off.

Construction company initially claimed I drove through 1400 feet of concrete, and I alone was responsible for $210,000 of damage. My well documented pictures clearly show it was, at most, 800 feet.

The company also submitted pictures of the barriers I ignored. This included a fence, 4 signs, 4 metal/wood barricades, and about 16 sandbags. Were they there when I took pictures the day of the incident? Nope. In fact, if you look in the background the utility poles in my pics have no horizontal supports, and only two power lines. In their pictures? Horizontal supports and 7 power lines. This isn't even the same road.

After my insurance rep and lawyer pointed out these discrepancies, the total damage somehow dropped to only $48,000, including damage done by the other party. My insurance guts are both frustrated and amused by this. According to them, no matter what, my coverage is enough and my insurance rates won't even increase.

Nice.
Also that construction company should be named and shamed.

I know this won’t necessarily apply in the US?

But under UK Law, such blatant attempts to inflate a claim would scupper them in the whole.

There’s a term for it I can’t properly recall, but it’s to do with just how dishonest you’ve been. Mildly inflating a claim (for instance, you claimed your tyres were brand new, but they were in fact two years old with high mileage) might bugger that specific head of loss. But when you tell massive porkies from the get go, especially providing manufactured evidence? You can lose the entire claim.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
But on Cuda’s point about their photos of the incident on the day paying off?

I cannot stress enough how much of a good idea that is.

In my insurance days many years ago now, dashcams and smartphones did exist, but weren’t nearly as common as they are today. Which could make defending inflated claims tricky.

For instance? You’ve rear ended someone, and hold you hands up as being at fault. You exchange details with the other driver. Yet, when the costs are being addressed in the claim? There are five** Personal Injury claims for whiplash and Mycoxafloppin.

You’re absolutely sure there was only the driver, but unless you can film or photograph the scene? It’s a right sod, but not impossible, to prove that to a sufficient degree unless you’ve a supporting, independent witness*

*As in someone unknown to both parties, with no basis for a claim for either ideally***

**Though my record on a claim was 8 Personal Injury and Mycoxafloppin claims….from a Mini. Yes that was a piece of piss to deny for all except the Driver, as they were the only party that was definitely there.

***Except in Scotland, where anyone can be a witness. No I don’t know why.

Nice to see some good news today.

Agreed, this seems to be the best possible outcome, especially after an honest mistake. Hopefully the stress will lift now.

@ MDG - Its because we are so inherently trustworthy up here

This seems like a pretty clear case of fraud to me. You should report it to the police if your insurance company hasn't already done so. Somebody at that construction company made a deliberate decision to defraud you, and has definitely committed a crime.

 cuda1179 wrote:
After my insurance rep and lawyer pointed out these discrepancies, the total damage somehow dropped to only $48,000, including damage done by the other party. My insurance guts are both frustrated and amused by this. According to them, no matter what, my coverage is enough and my insurance rates won't even increase.

There is no creature more ruthless, more tireless or determined than insurance companies trying to get out of a claim.

That being said, they have the deep pockets to fight this, and the typical solution is for the claimant to get a clue, ask for a pittance and walk away. Many years ago a snowmobiler drunk out of his mind managed to hit one of the few obstacles on a frozen lake: my parent's ice shanty. He died, and the family sued. The legal system being what it is, the insurance company did the math and paid them a modest amount because it was cheaper than defending the case. Sounds like that may happen here, which is a win.

Turn of news, I heard from my lawyer. He received the disclosure of evidence in my criminal case. In his words, "I've seen more evidence in a jaywalking case."

He talked with the prosecutor, and as long as insurance pays out (and it sounds like it will) the Class B Felony charge he was pushing for is going away. Also the serious misdemeanor charge is going to drop to a simple misdemeanor, or have a suspended sentence. Worst case, a small fine.

 cuda1179 wrote:
Turn of news, I heard from my lawyer. He received the disclosure of evidence in my criminal case. In his words, "I've seen more evidence in a jaywalking case."

He talked with the prosecutor, and as long as insurance pays out (and it sounds like it will) the Class B Felony charge he was pushing for is going away. Also the serious misdemeanor charge is going to drop to a simple misdemeanor, or have a suspended sentence. Worst case, a small fine.

No consequence for what is in essence legal harrassement and potential insurance fraud by the construction company?

Not Online!!! wrote:

 cuda1179 wrote:
Turn of news, I heard from my lawyer. He received the disclosure of evidence in my criminal case. In his words, "I've seen more evidence in a jaywalking case."

He talked with the prosecutor, and as long as insurance pays out (and it sounds like it will) the Class B Felony charge he was pushing for is going away. Also the serious misdemeanor charge is going to drop to a simple misdemeanor, or have a suspended sentence. Worst case, a small fine.

No consequence for what is in essence legal harrassement and potential insurance fraud by the construction company?

It sounds like a lot or crime is happening here, but not from cuda’s side…

Yeah the whole thing smells fishy. I think I'd fight even the small fine and misdemeanor, just on principle. No way I'd let those bastards get away with anything, especially something that will be on my record.

Having followed this story since cuda first posted it, I've been thinking the whole time that this kind of crap is why we need people like The Equalizer in real life. Sometimes vigilante justice is the only justice. Because sometimes, the system utterly fails and/or corrupt officials (and sometimes even the cops) are in on the take, leaving the innocent to suffer injustice.

Sorry if I sound a little crazy, this whole situation has made my skin crawl and my blood boil, and I'm not even the victim. It offends my sense of justice and fair play.

^^^ Well, so far the system seems to be working just fine.

Wonder if it’d the same approach as I understand the US Medical Insurance industry to be?

Hospital (here the Construction Company) sees the opportunity, and Thinks Of A Number. The Insurers receive the claim, and the negotiations begin?

The same thing kinda happens in the UK Industry, in that the injured party to an insurance claim has to justify its Head Of Claim, and the other party’s Insurer is expected to ensure nothing BS is included.

Which kind of falls apart with Credit Hire, which remind a wild west of really quite spectacularly untrustworthy cowboys.

 Mad Doc Grotsnik wrote:
Wonder if it’d the same approach as I understand the US Medical Insurance industry to be?

Hospital (here the Construction Company) sees the opportunity, and Thinks Of A Number. The Insurers receive the claim, and the negotiations begin?

The same thing kinda happens in the UK Industry, in that the injured party to an insurance claim has to justify its Head Of Claim, and the other party’s Insurer is expected to ensure nothing BS is included.

Which kind of falls apart with Credit Hire, which remind a wild west of really quite spectacularly untrustworthy cowboys.

That’s not really how medical billing works in the US.

If the hospital/provider is in network with the insurance, they will have pre-negotiated how much gets paid for each service. The patient might still owe something, depending on the procedure/policy/diagnosis/amount already paid/etc.
If the hospital is not in network, they will charge whatever they normally do, if the insurance has out of network coverage they will pay whatever they want, and the rest is on the patient.

It’s a hot mess and complicated, and a bit OT for this thread. But generally there is not any post procedure negotiations for how much they will pay. Only if they will (the whole deny/appeal process)

Not Online!!! wrote:
Nice.
Also that construction company should be named and shamed.

Oh, I plan to name and shame. HOWEVER... as long as there is any possible way for this to backfire on me I can't. Wait until my criminal case is resolved and the civil part concluded. For anyone in the Central, to east-of center Iowa area this might be of interest.

 Easy E wrote:
^^^ Well, so far the system seems to be working just fine.

Well said.

This is definitely not the time to be talking about vigilante justice.

I'm glad it looks like this will all blow over. It seemed ridiculous from the onset, but I know these things look a lot scarier from the inside, and I totally understand wanting to just be done with it and not pushing back all the way even if you are in the right.