Re: 2002 Grand Caravan - Any Issues???


"NewMan" <cloakedrun2001@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:lo09b2do15vqs7nnnaho8gdtmlr3nj1bit@xxxxxxxxxx
No problem Ken. I am in BC.

I have thought about it, and given that the entire front end has gone
from square to a "trapizoid" with an offset of 2 inches to the left, I
just don't think it is worth the risk to try and rebuild the car. Even
swapping parts to another chassis would take a fair amount of work,
and may not yield the desired results. Worse, I would have to pay
someone else to do it, and it would take time that I am running out
of.

Thanks for the thought though!


Newman a few things that may help:

1) you can try getting some of the money you put in. Start by presenting
the
receipts for the service work. A coworker of mine was in a similar
situation as you 2 years ago, he had a chevy geo that he had put a
factory rebuilt engine in that he rear-ended someone with. (rainy
weather) His insurance company did total out his car - but after he
gave them copies of the receipts for the work that was done, he
got the blue book plus all the extra money he had put into the car.

Blue book value ASSUMES that no SIGNIFICANT work has
been done to the vehicle.

Hopefully you have comprehensive, and if you do then claim it against
your own policy, and let your agent fight with the other company for
the money. If you don't and your arguing with the other company
directly, then you may want to get a car appraisal done immediately,
before the car is scrapped. You may have to file a civil lawsuit
to get the real market value of the vehicle. Don't hesitate and do file
one. Insurance companies are used to people threatening to sue, or
paying lawyers to send letters threatening to sue, so they generally
don't pay attention to that. But the second you file, they will respond
because they do not want you to find out how easy it is to sue
them. Here, a lawsuit like that if fought by the Insurance company
would end up in front of a jury and there's not a person under the
sun who doesen't think Insurance companies are greedy bastards, and
it's damn near impossible not to get a jury ruling in your favor, against
the insurance company, and the companies know it. You don't even
have to bother with retaining a lawyer, just file the paperwork with
the court yourself is enough.

2) Consider a buy back. It would cost you very little to buy it from
the insurance company. They sell these for scrap value, sometimes as
little as $50 will do it. You could have it towed to your driveway,
list it on someplace like craigslist, and within a week some local
person who rebuilds vehicles in their garage for extra money would
be by with a flatbed trailer and $500 and be very happy to get it.

3) I would strongly suggest that you write a letter to the DA (I don't
know if they have DA's where you live) and put everything in it that
your saying here. If this happened in the state I live in, the DA would
plea bargain it down with the 16 year old's lawyer in order to save
the expense of a trial. But, the DA will take into consideration anything
that you tell them. If you tell them nothing, they will assume that nobody
got injured, it didn't hurt anyone, etc. If you explain that you probably
won't get a complete payout from the insurance, that your wife did
get hurt, etc. the DA may even order the kid to pay restitution.

4) I would also try to setup a meeting with the kids parents and the
kid. That is if you could stomach it. If I was in your situation I would
try it. If the kids parents accomodated me I would try to be as kind
as I could to the kid, but firm, and explain how his actions impacted me
and my family and the results. Something like that is extremely hard
for the victim to do, but you will find that if you do it, you will feel
much better for doing it. And it will possibly prevent the kid from
having another car accident - because when he's confronted after
the fact, he is forced to understand that you are a real person, and
that sinks in far better than a lot of punishments would. Of course,
conversely you are also forced to view the kid as something other
than a 16 year old idiot, and you may be happier just continuing to
think of him as a 16 year old spoiled idiot, and not really bothering to
find out the truth.

If the kids parents refused, I would certainly do all I could to extract
as much as possible, including filing a civil lawsuit, etc. if possible. A
refusal
indicates the parents are coddling the child, which is pretty destructive
to the child's development, and the parents also need to be taught
a lesson as well.

5) One last bit on the medical claims. You will almost certainly get a lot
of pressure from the insurance company to sign off on your wife's injuries
as being healed, and allowing them to close the claim, several months
from now. What you need to do is find out what the statue of limitations
for suing is. Here in this state it's 2 years. Do not sign the medical
claim
closure until a week before the statue runs out. Most of the time people
heal up from these injuries just fine. But sometimes a year later a problem
may come back and you will be screwed if you close the claim.

Ted

On Wed, 12 Jul 2006 01:51:14 GMT, Ken Weitzel <kweitzel@xxxxxxx>
wrote:



NewMan wrote:
With respect Ken,

Insurance rates for single males under the age of 21 are about as high
as it gets. The reason for this is that they tend to have the highest
rate of accidents. Raging hormones, no fear, and no concept of how
their actions could affect others are some of the reasons.

In an attempt to address this in our locality, we now have a
"graduated" licensing system. At the age of 16, you can write a test,
and get your "L" learners permit. You must have this for a minimum of
1 year. After one year, there is both a written and a road test. If
you pass these, then you get a restricted license - the "N". You must
keep the "N" designation for a minimum of 2 years. At the end of the 2
years, there is another wirten test and another driving test. If you
pass all these tests over time, then you get an unrestricted "Class 5"
license.

Until you have your unrestricted license, there is ZERO TOLLERANCE for
alcohol. And while you have your "L" there is zero tolerance for
moving violations. Any violation will result in your license being
revoked. There is an associated driving ban after which you can
re-apply at the "L" level and start all over again.

Any driver with an "L" designation MUST be accompanied by a fully
licensed driver who is a minimum of 25 years old. This is by statute
and is NOT a guideline.

With that background in mind...

This 16 year old had only had his "L" for 2 weeks. He went out for a
drive with his girlfriend who is not only under the age of 25, but her
license is an "N". SO he had already broken 2 of the stautory
requirements of operating the vehicle. He then was so busy chatting up
his girlfriend and looking at her that he not only failed to stop at a
stop sign, he also made an illegal left hand turn in the process and
hit my vehicle when it was clearly 1/2 way through the intersection.
Because of his irresponsible acitons, there was no possible way to
avoid the accident. And to top it off, he tried to move the vehcile
after the accident to conceal the fact that he was at fault. A move
that was noticed by the police - and he has been so charged as it is
an offense to do so. HIS parents insurance company has declared him
100% at fault. The poilce have laid at least 3 charges against him.
And he is likely facing a 5 year driving ban. He is, IMHO, completely
irresponsible. His lack of care and concern, and his deference to the
hardship that he has caused - to me at least - make him an idiot.

So I will be out of pocket the $10,000 I put into my van, plus the
fact that I will now have to have a car loan - likely for the next 5
years or so. I have had to cancel our vacation, and my wife will
likely be off work for MONTHS and is in pain while we are trying to
move into our new appartment.

And to add insult to injury, his mothers car was new enough that it is
being fixed! So the little puke did not get injured, has suffered no
loss, and has no bloody clue of the pain and suffering he has caused -
and likely would not care even if he DID know. Mommy will get her car
back, and mommy will likely drive him everywhere - so not having a
license will not even be an inconveinience to him.

All of this, in my view, makes him a "16 year old idiot". The accident
was completely avoidable - presuming he had not been driving with his
prick. And, as you can see, we had absolutely no fault in this
particular situation. It is VERY RARE that an insurance company will
rule fault at "100% - 0%" because it is not in their best interests to
do so - and even THEY have made this assesment.

Around these parts, you can't drink until you are 19, you cannot vote
until you are 18, and (IIRC) you cannot own a gun until you are 21. So
the question is, why the hell do we allow anyone as young as 16 to get
behind the wheel of a potentially leathal machine???? If I had my way,
you would not even be able to get your learners until the age of 19,
maybe even 21. And, just so you know, even though these restrictions
did not exist when I was a teen, I did not get my learners permit
until I was 19, and I did not get my full license until I was almost
21. This was NEVER an inconveinience to me at all. I am sick of these
cocky kids that feel entitled to things. Driving is a priviledge, not
a right. His violation of that priviledge has turned the life of my
family upside down.

Hi Newman...

I owe you an apology, and hope that you will accept it.

Somehow in my getting on in years and a stroke damaged mind
I had you in the position of car owner, as well as the "owner/teacher"
of the 16 year old. Sorry.

I suspect that you're right - today's young people are a little
irresponsible. But I suspect that my generation was too, we just
couldn't see it any more clearly than today's youngster do :)

I'm in Manitoba, Canada, fwiw, and I suspect that our graduated
licenses are much like yours. Get a learner's at 16 (15.5, but ONLY
to drive with a professional instructor or a parent). One year
of driving with anyone who has held a full license for (not sure)
2 or 3 years. No passengers (other than the teacher) other than
immediate family. During this time strict zero tolerance for any
infractions (even so far as to the "teacher" not wearing a seat belt :)

Interesting side thought. The government says they can go with
anyone who's held a license, etc., but one of my grandkids is
only a couple of doors from me. Her Mother has a list of who she
may go with, too, and her list is very very very short! :)

Great for me, I get taken out for hot chocolate and donuts
often :)

Another insteresting thought, and perhaps worth taking note of
for others who may be in my position. Amazes me how easily
she can be distracted. If I so much as speak to her, she
happily looks at me, and keeps looking until I stop speaking!
Maybe we taught her that, pay attention when you're being spoken
to? Yikes, we have to work on that :)

And if you're interested, our youngsters can drink at 18; vote
at 18; and you're never old enough to own a gun :)

We have government insurance, and it's no-fault (civilly).

Now the perhaps helpful part. Here, at least, we can
buy back written off cars. (if it's written off, it's just
going to a junk yard anyway, right?) So you might consider
asking your insurance company if you can buy back your old one,
reclaiming your well maintained engine, transmission, interior,
etc., and put them into a less desirable one that you might
find for the dollars they allow you. Just a thought.

Sorry again for the misunderstanding, and take care.

Ken



.