Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:If you want to know what it will be like for a kid, here is my dd's story. She was slowly passing a bus when a driver hit her and smashed her car into a bus. Dd admitted that she might have been at fault. She ended up in an emergency room. Immediately upon the accident the other driver started asking my dh, who was coming home from a school event, same one dd participated in, if dd was drunk, on drugs, etc.. Fishing for information. DH told him to talk to police officer. DD took a class to remedy her driving ability. DD had a concussion, still has a bruise 18 months after. Her knee is busted. Other driver got his car paid for, his medical paid for. My insurance went up several thousands per year. Other driver walked away, didn't go to ER or anything. He is suing my dd year and a few months after for max in MD, 15K. In hopes of judge ruling in his favor which will allow him to suit her in other court for higher sums.
I am not sure how much suffering would be enough for you? Does this cover it?
Wow, that’s awful for your daughter. I’m prepared to guess the other driver was going too fast. What a jerk for hounding your DD.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Wow, really scary for the learning driver.
Not sure what you want the criminal justice system to do to the kid. If it were 10 years from now and your kid what would make sense in your mind?
Yes, it is scary when you RUN A RED LIGHT and hit a FAMILY.
Except the kid didn’t hit the OP’s car. It was the other way around. From the OP’s account, the kid ran the red light, and the OP’s wife hit HIM. She could have some negligence for failing to ensure that the intersection was clear, green light notwithstanding. If she T-boned the other car, and was only going 35, it is reasonable to think that she may have been able to avoid the collision.
You have no idea what you are talking about!![]()
Actually, PP is correct. If OP were to sue, surely opposing counsel would make this case.
NOT OP DW’s fault at all. Do you slow down at green lights? 35 mph is not that fast. It was totally the kid’s fault.
Exactly. Thank you.
I feel that the car which is now lost should be paid for by the people who caused the wreck, not my DW. But since the other driver was only given a ticket for driving without a license, I don't see their insurance willingly paying this, thus my confusion.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Wow, really scary for the learning driver.
Not sure what you want the criminal justice system to do to the kid. If it were 10 years from now and your kid what would make sense in your mind?
Yes, it is scary when you RUN A RED LIGHT and hit a FAMILY.
Except the kid didn’t hit the OP’s car. It was the other way around. From the OP’s account, the kid ran the red light, and the OP’s wife hit HIM. She could have some negligence for failing to ensure that the intersection was clear, green light notwithstanding. If she T-boned the other car, and was only going 35, it is reasonable to think that she may have been able to avoid the collision.
You have no idea what you are talking about!![]()
Actually, PP is correct. If OP were to sue, surely opposing counsel would make this case.
NOT OP DW’s fault at all. Do you slow down at green lights? 35 mph is not that fast. It was totally the kid’s fault.
Exactly. Thank you.
I feel that the car which is now lost should be paid for by the people who caused the wreck, not my DW. But since the other driver was only given a ticket for driving without a license, I don't see their insurance willingly paying this, thus my confusion.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Wow, really scary for the learning driver.
Not sure what you want the criminal justice system to do to the kid. If it were 10 years from now and your kid what would make sense in your mind?
Yes, it is scary when you RUN A RED LIGHT and hit a FAMILY.
Except the kid didn’t hit the OP’s car. It was the other way around. From the OP’s account, the kid ran the red light, and the OP’s wife hit HIM. She could have some negligence for failing to ensure that the intersection was clear, green light notwithstanding. If she T-boned the other car, and was only going 35, it is reasonable to think that she may have been able to avoid the collision.
You have no idea what you are talking about!![]()
Actually, PP is correct. If OP were to sue, surely opposing counsel would make this case.
NOT OP DW’s fault at all. Do you slow down at green lights? 35 mph is not that fast. It was totally the kid’s fault.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Wow, really scary for the learning driver.
Not sure what you want the criminal justice system to do to the kid. If it were 10 years from now and your kid what would make sense in your mind?
Yes, it is scary when you RUN A RED LIGHT and hit a FAMILY.
Good reminder that you shouldn’t hit the gas when the light turns green until you’ve looked both ways to make sure nobody ran the light. That’s just common sense.
True but that doesn’t sound like what happened here. OP says wife was going 35 MPH and that isn’t likely if she was just pulling out on a green light.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Wow, really scary for the learning driver.
Not sure what you want the criminal justice system to do to the kid. If it were 10 years from now and your kid what would make sense in your mind?
Yes, it is scary when you RUN A RED LIGHT and hit a FAMILY.
Except the kid didn’t hit the OP’s car. It was the other way around. From the OP’s account, the kid ran the red light, and the OP’s wife hit HIM. She could have some negligence for failing to ensure that the intersection was clear, green light notwithstanding. If she T-boned the other car, and was only going 35, it is reasonable to think that she may have been able to avoid the collision.
You have no idea what you are talking about!![]()
Actually, PP is correct. If OP were to sue, surely opposing counsel would make this case.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Wow, really scary for the learning driver.
Not sure what you want the criminal justice system to do to the kid. If it were 10 years from now and your kid what would make sense in your mind?
Yes, it is scary when you RUN A RED LIGHT and hit a FAMILY.
Except the kid didn’t hit the OP’s car. It was the other way around. From the OP’s account, the kid ran the red light, and the OP’s wife hit HIM. She could have some negligence for failing to ensure that the intersection was clear, green light notwithstanding. If she T-boned the other car, and was only going 35, it is reasonable to think that she may have been able to avoid the collision.
You have no idea what you are talking about!![]()
Anonymous wrote:I rolled through a stop sign once and got t boned.
Turns out lady who hit me total my car was speeding, she ran prior stop sign, she never hit brakes and was on phone.
My car passed 2/3 rds in front of her no skid marks on her side. With no skid marks she was not looking and she never hit horn.
It is no fault so did not matter.
Running red light is one cause of crash. But did poster hit brakes, press horn, was at speed limit or less? If not she is at fault to
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Wow, really scary for the learning driver.
Not sure what you want the criminal justice system to do to the kid. If it were 10 years from now and your kid what would make sense in your mind?
Yes, it is scary when you RUN A RED LIGHT and hit a FAMILY.
Except the kid didn’t hit the OP’s car. It was the other way around. From the OP’s account, the kid ran the red light, and the OP’s wife hit HIM. She could have some negligence for failing to ensure that the intersection was clear, green light notwithstanding. If she T-boned the other car, and was only going 35, it is reasonable to think that she may have been able to avoid the collision.
Anonymous wrote:It’s a student driver, let’s not put them in jail for an accident. The parent shouldn’t have been following in a different car, that’s absurd. The parent is at fault in my mind, they are required to be in the car teaching the student.