On Sat, 04 Dec 2004 18:28:15 -0700, Big Bill >


>>He did not say that car was previously in front of him.
>
>Yes he did:
>"About two weeks ago, my car hit the rear bumper of another Honda car
>in front in another city when he stops suddenly, because of another
>car in front of him stopped suddenly."

It leaves open the possibility
....
>>
>>Even if the insurance co. pays out a whopping $400, how long will it be
>>before increased insurance rates add up to $400?
>
>That's between him and his insurance company.

I was asking because I hear **** all the time about people being scared
to report an accident because their rates will go up.

I'm sure it varies greatly from state to state and even insurance co. to
insurance co., but I'm genuinely curious how much someone's insurance
would go up for a minor accident like this.

>>
>>>Of, if the OP doesn't want to involve insurance, point out that the
>>>prior damage should reduce financial liability.
>>
>>Or completely negate it as suggested earlier. If the bumper needed
>>replacing before it was hit (again), then there was no new real damage.
>
>It pretty obviously didn' tneed replacing, as it wasn't replaced.

That's ridiculous. What makes you think he's going to replace it this
time?

>>
>>>If the other driver
>>>doesn't agree, there are other options; insurance can be calle din, or
>>>the OP can wait for the other driver to sue, for example. Maybe a
>>>judge will buy the prior damage defence, and reduce the amount of
>>>liability.
>>
>>Given what little we actually know here, if I were the judge, I'd
>>dismiss it and tell them to report it to their insurance companies.
>
>That's not what judges do (Judge Judy notwithstanding). They rule on
>the case before them.

Well, I admit I'm no legal expert. I'd want to see an accident report
though, and if there was one, their insurance companies are gonna find
out about the accident anyway.

>If the judge rules against the OP, he can then go to his insurance
>company.

But his insurance will go up ;-)

>>
>>>Either way, he's responsible for the damage he caused, according to
>>>his post.
>>
>>He didn't cause any damage. The bumper already needed replacing.
>
>Evidently you haven't read the OP's post.
>"My car's front bumper hit his rear bumper. On his rear bumper, there
>were two similar scratches/slight dents – one on left, and one on
>right, of the rear PLASTIC bumper.

Right - and the scratches/slight dents were "similar".

If the one the OP caused couldn't have been fixed without replacing the
bumper then neither could the first one. Therefore, the bumper would
have needed to be replaced to fix problems that existed before the
accident.

You can't break what's already broke.

>He said the right scratch/dent was
>his in a previous car accident. He said the left scratch/dent was
>caused by my car hit. My front bumper had no scratch/dent after the
>accident."

Right, which makes me wonder if his car really did cause the
scratch/dent.
--
There's no way to delay that trouble comin' everyday