Insurance company says it's my fault

[KDR]

Got caught in the unpredicted sleet last week outside Boston. On the offramp from the Interstate onto a slower secondary road I hit a patch of sleet/snow/ice. My beautiful red R12RT low-sided and then high-sided causing much damage (I got lucky with only a bruised calf and shredded rainsuit). Progressive says that while I "did everything right," that the accident is my fault. When I asked how it was possible to do everything right and still be at fault I was told, "You were the only vehicle involved and you failed to control your motorcycle." Believe it or not, after thirteen years riding five different motorcycles this is my first accident. Anyone have experience fighting the insurance companies on this issue? They have told me to expect a "significant" rate increase when my policy renews in June because the accident is my fault. Any advice would be welcome.

 

PS. I couldn't find a thread on this topic, but I'm new here so if I missed something that has been covered ad nauseum, please let me know.

[David]

Are you saying it's not your fault? I'm not sure how you'd argue that, as it seems like it was.

 

Just accept your fate, and when they give you the new rate, shop around.

[markgoodrich]

I switched from Progressive to Dairyland (Sentry) because of a "significant" rate increase, based on exactly nothing. I'd bought a Yamaha FJR1300, and they said it was classified as a "sport bike" and thus my multi-bike rate would go way up.

 

Dairyland classified the FJR as a "cruiser". Within two weeks I dropped my Yamaha. $800 in damage. I called Dairyland and explained the situation, asked them what would happen to my rate if I filed the claim. "Nothing, that's what insurance is for," was the reply, assuming there would be no other claims. And yes, it went down as a collision, even though it was in the driveway. My personal experience with Dairyland is great. If I was in your shoes, I'd shop around for a new company.

[ShovelStrokeEd]

Well, you can certainly fight them but, I wouldn't hold out much hope of a win.

 

You did, as they stated, "fail to control your motorcycle". Their position is going to be that you should have modified your speed to meet the conditions of the road. Kinda hard to argue with that.

 

I wasn't there to witness but, unless you have legal proof that the stuff was dumped there just at your arrival, you are not going to get anywhere with a judge. Even then, there are arguments against you such as following too closely, failure to maintain a safe speed, failure to take evasive action.

[Stan Walker]

Harsh as this sounds, I'm afraid I have to agree with the insurence company.

 

You saw the conditions, you choose to continue to ride, you picked the lean angle, you fell down.

 

Who do you think is at fault?

 

This doesn't alter the fact that I feel sorry it happened to you. Just like I feel sorry that it happened to me when I fell down on some loose gravel last year in Death Valley.

 

Collect your insurence money, fix the bike, and learn from the incident. Ice, snow, hail, sleet, gravel, leaves, oil, sand, boxes, paint buckets, 4x4s, etc., are all road hazards that we have to watch out for.

 

Stan

[Tony_K]

Sorry about the mishap but the replies are all correct.

 

Since you contacted the insurance company and reported the solo incident

you're in effect saying "I take some of your money but will pay more to be insured to get it."

 

Riding is riddled with inherent risks of solo accidents. None of them covered by insurance.

 

I would call back you insurance company and tell them to drop the claim. Then you just pay out of pocket for repairs.

 

This is how it is done to save the insurance for when you really need it.

I know you feel you need it now. Then to get the cash expect the bill down the line.

[KDR]

Well, I'm thinking of force majeure more than assessing "fault." I’m not implying that someone else is to blame, but talking more about making responsible choices in the face of circumstances that are beyond anyone’s control. I can think of any number of things that might go wrong that are beyond my control (explosive flat tire, lighting strike, tornado, earthquake, flashfloods) that could cause a loss of control of the motorcycle…all of which, I suppose, would be my “fault.” It was the notion, posited by the adjuster, that if another vehicle had been somehow involved that "blame" could be deferred, but that without another party involved I had to be at fault. It seemed counterintuitive. Excessive speed, DUI, and other illegal or reckless behavior seems like fault to me. Trying to exit the highway because of deteriorating road conditions doesn’t.

 

Thanks for the speedy responses. I guess I’ll wait and see what Progressive has to say.

[KDR]

Actually, I already offered exactly this to Progressive and was told that my "risk" was immediately doubled by calling them to report the accident and that paying for the repairs myself would have "No positive impact" on the increase in my premiums. I would happily pay the $5,000 in repairs if that would keep my premium where it is. But, not possible according to my account representative.

 

What can I say? My first accident. The lesson I learned is never call your insurance company unless you are dead or you are being sued.

[David]

What can I say? My first accident. The lesson I learned is never call your insurance company unless you are dead or you are being sued.

 

The other lesson to be learned is to pull over and stop, right? It scares me that you think this is a little beyond your control.

[KDR]

By exiting the Interstate I was trying to find a safe place to wait until the road conditions improved or didn't, at which point I planned to make other decisions. Stopping in the emergency breakdown lane on the Interstate seems to me to carry risks and stopping on a curve in a single lane exit ramp seems equally risky. I slowed to about 20mph and hit the patch of road that looked shiny to me (in a way that the wet road surface did not) straight up and down...no lean, no brakes, steady throttle.

 

Why, what would you have done differently?

[STICKMAN]

If the bike was your only mode of transportation then you had to ride in those conditions, but I doubt that.

 

I use to think that there were 2 types of riders:

1) Those that are going down

2) Those that have gone down

 

and now you are in most everybodies catagory

 

Class #3 Those that are going down again.....no matter how long you ride there is always that possibility that you will crash, no matter how small. keep the shiny side up and the rubber on the road........

[Stan Walker]

about 20mph....no lean, no brakes, steady throttle

 

...clutch in, coasting, and maybe a bit slower around 15 mph, that would depend on how big the patch and at what slope, assuming I got caught out there in the first place. The best approach would have been to be off the road before it iced up. Ice is a bitch, way worse than snow.

 

That seems like an awful lot of damage for a 20 mph drop onto an icy surface.

[KDR]

Hi Stan, I think it is the high side damage that is getting me. The low side damage is relatively minor scrapes, the high side crash destroyed much of the left side bodywork. I've only got a "guesstimate" from the repair guy right now...somewhere between $3,000-$7,000...so I picked a middle figure for my post.

[David]

By exiting the Interstate I was trying to find a safe place to wait until the road conditions improved or didn't, at which point I planned to make other decisions. Stopping in the emergency breakdown lane on the Interstate seems to me to carry risks and stopping on a curve in a single lane exit ramp seems equally risky. I slowed to about 20mph and hit the patch of road that looked shiny to me (in a way that the wet road surface did not) straight up and down...no lean, no brakes, steady throttle.

 

Why, what would you have done differently?

 

I know it sounds like I'm beating you up, and that's not my intention. I just hate to see something like this happen to you again.

 

Sleet that is a danger to motorcycles can't happen without cold air temperatures, cold surface temperatures, and moist air, and all three of those conditions are easily forecast. So it's about being more aware of the conditions that can spawn dangerous weather.

 

If I get in the plane and know about an inversion or stationery cold front or building cumulonimbus clouds, I can't say that wing icing or a low overcast or a bumpy ride was a freak event. Instead, I am knowingly taking additional risk because at any point I could encounter dangerous conditions. Deciding to ride that day is where the cycle starts, and in accident avoidance you have to back way up, way before the discovery of sleet and your noble attempt to avoid it.

 

Does that make sense?

[Quinn]

I guess it's too late to invent a one armed stranger in a Toyota Camery who slammed on his brakes and forced you to lay it down to keep from hitting him. Of course he drove off after that and you didn't get a license number, but think it may have started with a number.

 

I really do sympathize with you. GEICO did about the same thing to me back in my younger years. As an E-3 in the Air Force, my rates were set so high that I couldn't afford to keep the car.

[KDR]

Hi David, yes, absolutely and I'm certainly not saying that motorcycle riding isn't without risk and that riding in the rain doesn't add to that risk. I accept that death is the only way out of life (what a happy Easter thought).

 

When I got up on that morning I checked the forecast for NYC and Boston. It predicted "periods of rain," and temperatures from 34-46, which seemed within my threshold for risk given that I would leave until around noon when temperatures would be at their highest. While snow was predicted for Boston "overnight," it also predicted "no accumulation," and, as I expected to arrive no later than 5pm, I believed that the ride would be wet but not icy.

 

The weather was as predicted from NYC (with a temperature of 44 when I left the city) to Framingham (with a temperature of 36), which is when I heard sleet start to hit my helmet. I groaned, looked my instrument cluster and saw the temperature read 36 and thought, "Well, let's give this a couple minutes and see what happens." About five minutes later it was still sleeting, which is when I decided it was time to get off the Interstate and reassess the situation.

 

While I understand that almost any weather condition is possible at almost any time and that certain weather patterns make some conditions more likely (even if not predicted) and that weather predictions are just that...I do believe that unforeseen circumstances, beyond my control, were a decisive factor in the accident. The patch of snow/ice/sleet that I encountered was unique in the ride.

 

"Risk is everywhere because control is always limited," wrote Mark Barnes and he is absolutely right. While I will be more conservative in my risk assessment whenever it is raining and 45 or below (acknowledging that 45 is not a magic number and that sleet can occur at much higher temperatures), I don't feel that I was negligent, which "fault" implies to me and I'm troubled that the insurance company believes that had another vehicle been involved (cutting me off, for example) that I would be in the "clear." The forecast was for rain and for temperatures above freezing. When that turned out not to be the case, I changed plans.

 

I could be wrong, but I don't think we are far apart here. I believe the issue is with risk assessment. My colleagues at work believe that motorcycle riding is akin to suicide. I felt comfortable riding in the predicted weather, although I would now bump my rain/temperature threshold up above 45. You, presumably, would have a different criterion.

 

So, yes, in addition to learning that you never call your insurance company unless you are dead or being sued, I learned that I am not comfortable with the risks posed by rain when the temperature is below 45.

[David]

Fair enough. It sounds like you were a lot more careful than I assumed from your original post. My apology for filling in the gaps wrongly.

[KDR]

No apology necessary. I kept the original post short because I wanted to get to the heart of the matter, which perhaps gave a misimpression about who I am and how I ride...especially as I am new here.

 

I think the stunning moment for me was in talking to the adjuster, who lives in Boston, when she said, "I know, didn't that sleet come out of nowhere? I know I didn't see that on the morning news," then three minutes later she's telling me I'm at fault and I'm thinking, "Yes, but..."

 

I love to ride and an opportunity to ride 400+ miles roundtrip is hard to pass up. However, that morning I knew my options were Amtrak (not much safer than riding in sleet now that I think of it, but I don't own a car) or the motorcycle. I figured that rain and above freezing (or better) and I ride. Anything else, and it's Amtrak.

[DavidEBSmith]

Geez, don't everybody get freaked out because the word "fault" is getting tossed around. We're not talking about a moral failing here. We're talking about who the insurance company can get to pay for the accident. If the insurance company can't find anybody else to pay, it's your fault. Doesn't mean you're not living a sainted life free of moral blemish, doesn't mean you did anything right or wrong, there's just nobody else your insurance company can pin it on.

[Plasterman]

Better look at my insurance policy. Not sure I knew that if in solo accident which is considered my fault they won't cover the claim? Is this true for most policies? Maybe I'm just reading things wrong here?

[Bud]

Geez, don't everybody get freaked out because the word "fault" is getting tossed around. We're not talking about a moral failing here. We're talking about who the insurance company can get to pay for the accident. If the insurance company can't find anybody else to pay, it's your fault. Doesn't mean you're not living a sainted life free of moral blemish, doesn't mean you did anything right or wrong, there's just nobody else your insurance company can pin it on.

 

Word

[Tony_K]

Better look at my insurance policy. Not sure I knew that if in solo accident which is considered my fault they won't cover the claim? Is this true for most policies? Maybe I'm just reading things wrong here?

 

Here are a few Q& A's I dug up.

Insurance in most all cases is to cover "damage to others" or personal injury.

You can look into it further if you like or call your agent to get the real low down on your specifics.

http://www.carinsurance.com/kb/content22719.aspx

http://www.carinsurance.com/kb/content22018.aspx

http://www.carinsurance.com/CoverageDefinitions.aspx

[Baba_ORiley]

... I would happily pay the $5,000 in repairs if that would keep my premium where it is. ...

 

Have you done a cost/benefit analysis on this? Not sure how much your premiums will go up... bit seems like it would need to be a lot and for a good period of time to offset the $5,000 benefit in repairs you will get immediately.

 

 

 

.

[Green RT]

Maybe you need a new insurance company. I had a very similar incident happen to me a few years ago. On a cold morning, I lowsided at pretty modest speed. The bike slid into a curb and flipped over thus trashing both sides. It cost $6000 to put it back together (both fairing halves, windshield, both side cases, both rocker arm covers, both pegs, shifter and brake levers, etc). State Farm covered it all and it had no effect on my rates. There was never any discussion about whether it was my fault.

[smiller]

There was never any discussion about whether it was my fault.

They may not have chosen to discuss it with you but you can bet that it was considered your fault as single-vehicle accidents are almost always considered to be the driver's fault.

 

Insofar as rates go... some insurance companies might not raise your rates for one accident if your driving record and claim history is otherwise good. Others might not formally raise your rate for a first accident but may take some other action such as removing your 'Safe Driving' discount, which effectively is an increase I guess. But to an insurance company there is no such thing as a 'faultless' accident.

[Green RT]

There was never any discussion about whether it was my fault.

They may not have chosen to discuss it with you but you can bet that it was considered your fault as single-vehicle accidents are almost always considered to be the driver's fault.

I don't know what impact fault had in their deliberations. It was clear in my mind that it was my fault. I have had insurance from the same carrier for several vehicles over a period of about 45 years now. I don't know if that factored into their decision. That was one of only two claims I have ever had. The second claim was when an uninsured drunk rear ended me (both of us on four wheels). Neither claim affected my rates.

[catmandoo]

they don't call their company progressive for nothing!!!

[bimmers]

somehow I don't seem to get this all. Of course it is ones own fault if no one else is involved. Weather and road conditions do not count as other party.

The real question is what kind of coverage one has. Collision comes with many flavors, comprehensive with even more and so on. If you carry only minimum then it is liability and you always pay and so on.

Impact on premium is tied to reported accidents, tickets etc. This is not a reported accident unless police was involved until insurance company reports it, then they will have a record of one as a driver even if they did not pay out. so it might change your profile but also it may not, most of the time the insurance claim adjusters have little knowledge of the impact.

hope it works out for you but insurance is for paying of the unexpected, have them pay if they do and worry about premiums when they come up for renewla.

 

h

[KDR]

Thus far Progressive isn't saying they won't "cover" the cost of repairs caused by the accident (included under the "collision" section of my policy), just that, as I am at "fault," I get to pay them more money in the future and they get to tell the four credit ranking agencies that I'm a high risk.

 

I suppose that if I were looking for a new mortgage or had any credit card debt that I might be extra-special unhappy. I am only looking to see if anyone here has successfully had an insurance company agree that an accident that does not involve another vehicle and that does involve an "act of God" might not be considered her or his fault and, therefore, might not include a "significant" premium increase.

 

After the attacks of 11 September 2001 I had my homeowners insurance cancelled because my insurance company made a deal with the state legislature to "cherry pick" in New York State and no longer insure areas near the former World Trade Center. I have no illusions about the motivations of the insurance industry nor do I think Progressive is capable of passing moral judgment upon my soul.

[Green RT]

somehow I don't seem to get this all. Of course it is ones own fault if no one else is involved. Weather and road conditions do not count as other party.

I can envision situations where a single vehicle accident might not be the rider's fault. Debris in the road, maybe a deer jumps in front of you, even an unexpected change in road conditions like oil on the road. Weather seems a little more iffy. When I dropped mine, the cold tires and morning frost certainly contributed but the real problem was that my speed was excessive for the conditions (and my ability).

[smiller]

I get to pay them more money in the future and they get to tell the four credit ranking agencies that I'm a high risk.

No offense meant, but I think you're freaking out a bit here. The insurance company made a purely technical judgment that you were 'at fault' with respect to their internal rating mechanism, and that's all. You and your good name will not be soiled for all time, and your rates may not even change that much. Time to get your bike fixed and move on...

[catmandoo]

i have american family and my agent told me if a claim is ever classified as collision my rates will go up,but if its comp they will not!

[KDR]

Have you done a cost/benefit analysis on this? Not sure how much your premiums will go up... bit seems like it would need to be a lot and for a good period of time to offset the $5,000 benefit in repairs you will get immediately.

 

Living in NYC I pay pretty high premiums...as of last year about $2700 annually. (No tickets, no claims, no fines, three bikes, in my forties, married...two BMWs and one 620 Ducati Monster, thirteen years riding, ABS on both BMWs, MSF classes, etc.) The adjuster told me I could expect "anywhere from a 20% to 100% increase" due to being found "at fault." Even at the 20% increase it wouldn't take more than about eight years to cover the cost of repairs. At 100%, well, you get the picture. I figure I've got between twenty to thirty years of riding left and the cost of the premium increase plus the hit on my credit report far outweighs the low-end guesstimate of the repairs. At the high-end guesstimate for repairs it starts to look more reasonable...if the premium increase stays low.

[Francis]

Change insuranc agents. I use the Brody Agency in Hicksville NY. (516)681-1700. They have me with Daryland. Premiums have been trending downward with increased years of no accident driving. They have a "winter" non-riding aspect to their policy. I have a 2002 R1150RT insured with them.

 

Francis

NYC

[HexHead]

I would call back you insurance company and tell them to drop the claim. Then you just pay out of pocket for repairs.

 

This is how it is done to save the insurance for when you really need it.

 

You can't put the genie back in the bottle. The insurance company, whether they pay the claim or not will still list it as an "occurance". Same happens if you call just to ask whether to file a claim or not.

[HexHead]

I figure I've got between twenty to thirty years of riding left and the cost of the premium increase plus the hit on my credit report far outweighs the low-end guesstimate of the repairs.

 

What are you talking about with the "hit on my credit report"?

[daveinatlanta]

Why, what would you have done differently?

Easy for us second guessers to guess but having said that:

1. I usually check the weather and if there is a chance of risky riding weather, I don't ride. The rest of these comments are sort of secondary to this one.

2. If I missed the weather forecast or a freak of nature happened, I would try to find a safer route rather than an interstate when the weather was deteriorating. Then hole up somewhere or call somebody. While it is generally true that interstates get ice treatment before surface streets, if this weather was unexpected, there may not have been time for any DOT response.

3. If I still choose to ride, I'm implicitly accepting the associated risk.

 

A Force Majeuere type of argument is probably a non-starter. Force Majeuere defenses are typically employed (and occasionally successful) where there are large scale catastrophic events such as a Hurricane that affects a mass of people. Attempting to use this argument for an individual loss is likely to get little legal traction.

 

I'm truly sorry that you incurred so much damage but it is good to know your body is relatively damage-free.

[Bob Palin]

You need to talk to a different person at Progressive

 

If you have Collision coverage they will pay for damage no matter who is at fault - here it is from their web site.

 

---

Comprehensive and Collision

Comprehensive and Collision coverage covers the cost to repair or replace your motorcycle if it is stolen or damaged in an accident, regardless of who is at fault. You select a deductible for each coverage, and once the deductible is met, the insurance company pays for the remaining damage.

 

Under Collision Coverage, your insurance company pays for damage to your vehicle when you collide with another vehicle or object.

 

Under Comprehensive Coverage, your insurance company pays for damage to your vehicle caused by an event other than a collision, such as fire, theft or vandalism.

---

 

They may well raise your rates, and from their point of view rightly so as you've proved that you ride in conditions likely to result in a claim, but an accident should not have any effect on your credit rating. Your credit rating does affect your insurance rate however and I suspect the idiot you are talking too has mixed this up.

They will not raise your rates forever, typically it's a few years and the increase may even tail off over those years.

[blitzkreig]

Insurance companies are highly organized money extractors out to take you for all they can. They make money both coming and going.

 

Truth or fairness aren't words often brought up in their management offices. In the end it isn't relevant.

 

They need to blame someone. In the absence of anyone else it is your "fault".

 

The word "accident" has no real meaning to them at all ...

 

In this litigious age the only way to get out from under your issue is to sue the folks responsible for the road conditions and the insurance company.

 

For some reason they listen more readily then ...

[velomoto]

I get to pay them more money in the future

Yes, but if your rates come back down in three four or even five years this will probably end up costing you less than if you paid $5K out of your pocket and continued with your "normal" insurance rate. As others posted, if Prudential seems to be over charging you, definitely shop around.

 

...and they get to tell the four credit ranking agencies that I'm a high risk.

I've never heard of this happening nor is there any logic (not that companies always behave logical but...).

 

Good luck with getting your scooter back together and glad to hear you weren't injured.

 

Greg

[blitzkreig]

Be very careful about paying for your own repairs once you have asked a few questions at the Insurance Company.

 

They may not really care if you paid for the repairs yourself. And hike your rate anyway.

 

Why?

 

Because they can.

 

You notified them of damage to your vehicle. They will up your premium and put it in their computer (which notifies all of the other insurance companies computers) that you have had an at fault accident.

 

If you don't believe me ask.

 

Just don't use your real name.

 

Once you have notified them you might as well get them to pay for the damage ... then bend over.

 

[Alan D]

I did a similar thing in a car. The weather turned bad quickly and it was not predicted. The snow started to stick between exits. I started down the first exit ramp at about 20 mph only to discover I could not stop. I slid about 200 feet down the ramp, across a street and into a guard rail.

 

"I would call back you insurance company and tell them to drop the claim. Then you just pay out of pocket for repairs."

 

Insurance may be the only product we buy and then try not to use it when we need it so it won't cost us more the next time we buy it

[ScottT]

So, if this crash wasn't your fault, who's was it? The sleet? The weatherman? God? Just wondering... BTW, I went down low-siding in 1998 totaling my 1994 R1100RS. My insurance company, Progressive, said it was "my fault". I had hit a small patch of diesel I couldn't see but there was no way to prove who put it there. The result? $8000 payout, a new 1998 R1100RS and I moved on with my life. Look, you crashed your bike with no one else around. You had to know the weather was unusually cold and that precip was a possibility. Progressive is right. Take your lumps and move on.

[Bobnoxous]

I realize this is mostly a semantics issue, but it certainly seems that there's room for "stuff just happens". There really doesn't have to be anybody at fault. Sure, you can argue shades of gray, like the guy who has a heart attack while driving. He could've eaten better, exercised more, or just avoided driving because he might have a heart attack, but be reasonable. You cannot predict everything.

 

If it's really just a question of "we have to raise someone's rates to cover the cost", then that should be stated in the policy. Let's not pretend it's an at fault issue.

 

It would seem to me that if there's an accident that is deemed to have no one at fault (which maybe isn't possible by insurance standards) then your rates shouldn't go up. But, I believe the best solution is the marketplace, so if you feel Progressive isn't giving you the service you want, switch (like you can do that after a claim).

[dmk]

I used to live in MA. I don't know about the insurance laws in other states, but in MA a single vehicle accident is not always the driver's fault. Last year, my wife was traveling just south of Boston in an unexpected October snow squall. She was forced to make a hard emergency stop due to traffic and the guy behind her slid into her. The other driver was judged not to be at fault because the accident was unavoidable due to the weather, but his insurance still paid.

 

If you ever have an accident again in MA due to bad weather, call 911 to report the accident and ask for the State Police to respond. The officer who responds will assess the weather and if they think the circumstances were beyond your control, they can write that into the accident report and it may help you with your insurance claim. The troopers in MA are used to responding to this sort of this sort of thing because MA law requires a report to be filed with the State Police for every accident. In your case, I think there would have been a 50/50 chance the officer would agree with you.

 

Dave

[E30TECH]

The other driver was judged not to be at fault because the accident was unavoidable due to the weather, but his insurance still paid.

 

As far as I know, in NJ, the driver that does the rear-ending is at fault. If there is a 5 car accident, all rear enders, the last guy is at fault.

[Bob Palin]

It would seem to me that if there's an accident that is deemed to have no one at fault (which maybe isn't possible by insurance standards) then your rates shouldn't go up.

Though insurance companies may in fact do that in some cases, and only because they think they will end up getting more money out of you in the long run, there is no reason for them to have to at all. They are simply interested in who's account the outlay is going to be debited against, both in this specific incident and in calculating the probability for future incidents. It's really pretty simple, if you do things that make you likely to be a higher risk in the future you will pay more, unfortunately in this case the victim of the incident cannot push that debit off on any other policy so has to take responsibility for it, whether he was at fault or not. He also proved that he rides in conditions that are likely to make him have a claim, other riders in his risk group were presumably at home or didn't crash, what's the insurance company supposed to think? When insurance companies say "at fault" they mean "financially responsible", nothing else.

 

As for Progressive, a friend of mine lent his car to a dimwit girlfriend who then got in a wreck that totaled the car, the police determined that she was not at fault even though the circumstances were far from clear. The other driver's insurance was Progressive, they paid over blue book for his car, reimbursed him for a cooler that was stuck in the trunk and gave him 10 days car rental even though he hadn't rented a car, no fuss at all. So, they're not all bad.

 

Since I have Progressive I am very interested in the outcome of all this.

[Ken H.]

In this litigious age the only way to get out from under your issue is to sue the folks responsible for the road conditions and the insurance company.

Presuming your serious, you can't be serious. If you are, well, uh, good luck with that.

 

EVERY insurance claim has the fault (for the claim) assigned to someone. Lacking someone else to collect from, it's the rider. Simple as that.

[Tasker]

It would seem to me that if there's an accident that is deemed to have no one at fault (which maybe isn't possible by insurance standards) then your rates shouldn't go up.

Though insurance companies may in fact do that in some cases, and only because they think they will end up getting more money out of you in the long run, there is no reason for them to have to at all.

 

There is no rhyme or reason to what they do, as far as I can tell.

 

When I began the search for new moto insurance after my accident, an accident that was determined by the police as a "no fault" accident, every insurance company was different. Some would ask me if I had had an accident of any kind during the previous three years and some would ask if I had had an at fault accident during the previous three years. The quoted rates reflected my answers. The companies that only cared if my accident was a no fault accident quoted me much lower rates. The others were all higher.

 

I just talked with my local insurance broker last week and he told me that all insurance companies are trending toward higher rates for all accidents, regardless of fault or no fault. When I told him what I had found when calling all of the companies I called, including Progressive, Dairyland, etc. he was stunned that they still asked about fault.

 

I was also told that it depends a lot on the geographic area you live in. Based on all the good reports I had heard about Progressive, I was hoping they would be acceptable. For me, in the area in which I live, they were $250 higher than many of the other companies I received quotes from.

 

It's all a game. It takes time and patience though to play it and figure it out.

[Chugger]

So is it also correct to assume that if he was run off the side of the road and crashed - then having the driver of the car take off - is the MC at fault and not the driver of the car?