Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1999 03:40:59 -0600
Reply-To: Budd Premack <bpremack@WAVETECH.NET>
Sender: Vanagon Mailing List <vanagon@gerry.vanagon.com>
From: Budd Premack <bpremack@WAVETECH.NET>
Subject: Re: Legal Advise Please ...[Fwd: Crash Report]...[longish]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="Windows-1252"
Kudos to Ron Salmon for his advice on dealing with this absurd situation.
Follow it.
Tyrone, if you have any witnesses, get statements from them.
Also, how in heck could the substantial damage you described to the
scoflaw's truck have occured at a speed commensurate with your backing up
into him?
Do a little detective work and compare the height of your hitch ball
(pre-accident) to the dent in his front bumper. I'll bet dollars to donuts
that his front end damage is higher than your hitch ball. This could only
reasonably have occured if the rear vehicle were braking hard, thus lowering
its front end. Were there any skid marks showing his braking? I realize
that the accident happened several months ago, but skid marks are slow to
wear off most roadway surfaces.
If you are really good at forensics, you could determine, by examination of
the skid marks, which vehicle made them, and what direction it was traveling
while braking.
Theoretically, the height differential (which I postulated between your
hitch ball and his front bumper impact point) could have occured if the rear
of your van was raised, but if you were backing up and didn't brake, your
van would be level. If you did brake while backing up, the rear of your van
would have gone down, which is exactly the opposite of what would have had
to occur for the damage to his bumper to have been created by your backing
up into him.
Take some pictures of the accident scene (skid marks), and both vehicles
(with a tape measure showing height factors) and use them as necessary.
You stated that your tow loops (to which the hitch was bolted) were tilted
down another 30 degrees. This could only have happened with a substantial
downward force applied to them, such as would have occured when the truck
braked hard. If you backed into him, your van and his truck would have been
level.
Why would his rear tire go flat when the impact occured to the front of his
truck? Because of the skid from his braking on probably bald tires, of
course.
The inconsistencies of his fabricated story to the physical evidence are so
great that even his biased insurance company should quickly cave in once the
facts are presented to their "investigator."
Be persistent but not nasty in dealing with both insurance companies.
Truth is clearly on your side and should win out in a situation such as
this.
If you are really pissed at him, have you considered how stiff your neck has
gotten since the accident? (You make the call on that type of claim.)
BTW, did you ever get your van checked out to determine the extent of damage
to it?
If you haven't ever seen the movie "My Friend Vinny", rent it ASAP. It
deals with circumstantial evidence that was purported to show the guilt of
two innocent travelers. The logical courtroom arguments relating to skid
marks and fact reconstruction will be quite helpful to your situation.
Additionally, it is a great flick; funny, sarcastic, and fast paced.
Good luck and keep us posted.
Budd Premack
86 Syncro, 84 GL, 73 Super
Minneapolis, MN (Land of Frozen Waters)
