The person that was responsible for the accident usually has to cover the repair costs. That fact holds true in all states, even in those with no-fault insurance. There the hit driver’s insurance covers the medical expenses, but the responsible driver ‘s insurance must cover the repair costs. Someone that was in a hurry to gain access to a repaired vehicle might elect to follow an alternate route.
A policyholder that had paid for the option that included collision coverage could use that particular approach. That coverage requires the insurance company to cover the repair costs. Many years ago, that was the only way that a car owner could feel certain of receiving any money, after being hit by an uninsured driver.
Today, consumers have the chance to purchase an uninsured motorist option. Yet insurance companies still offer collision coverage, because it gives policyholders a way to get their repair money in a hurry. An insurer has the right to question a policyholder’s allegations, with respect to who caused the accident?
This approach requires the policyholder to pay out of pocket for the repair work on the damaged vehicle. Once the same policyholder has the bill for the repairs, then that bill can be taken to the insurance company. Following the presentation of that bill, the policyholder has the right to seek reimbursement of the paid money.
Here again, the request for money does not guarantee receipt of those funds. The opposing driver could come forward with an argument. The opposing driver might allege that the other driver was partly responsible for the accident.
The insurance company would need to weigh the evidence from the other driver against the evidence provided by the policyholder. If the insurer were to feel that the policyholder’s case was not as strong as the other driver’s then it could issue a reduced payment, or even no payment.
The danger in the speedy recovery of money for repairs
Personal Injury Lawyer Fort Erie knows that someone that has focused on such a recovery might have overlooked the potential existence of an injury, especially if there were several people in the impacted vehicle. That danger could become greatest if any occupant had been a child.
A child might have suffered an injury such as a concussion. In that case, the same child might have only mild symptoms, and may not even complain about those mild problems. Hence, an uninjured driver would think that there was no reason to check for medical problems.
That fact underlines the importance of a medical exam for each occupant of an impacted vehicle. After all, a claimant is supposed to mitigate any harm done to the body during the course of an accident.