Trying to demonstrate impact on 90 Accord
 

This is starting to feel like a CarTalk puzzle, but here goes:

I got rear-ended recently by a 2005 Chrysler Pacifica that pretty much
bashed in the rear panel of my 90 Accord beyond reasonable repair. The
trunk lid seems to have popped out of the way -- though it is bent and
won't close, it's not crushed -- and the bumper looks fine, as if the
other car hit above it.

The party who hit me had a bumper on the ground when the accident
happened, but in the time between then and when they finally responded
to their insurance company weeks later, they'd replaced it and denied
anything ever happened.

While there's probably not much I can do to generate actualy proof
anymore, I am curious about one thing -- their insurance company said
the Pacifica front bumper was too low to have possibly caused damage
above my 24-inch-high bumper. I was at a stop, facing downhill, and
the person who hit me claims she was hit from behind first. Can
anyone think of how this could have happened? The insurance company
says it's completely impossible for that car to have caused the
damage. I can only shrug and say, maybe I was dreaming, but I dreamt
someone's insurance policy number onto a piece of paper in their
handwriting if that's the case.

Re: Trying to demonstrate impact on 90 Accord
 

Waiving the right to remain silent, Pete from Boston <masspete@my-
deja.com> said:

> This is starting to feel like a CarTalk puzzle, but here goes:
>
> I got rear-ended recently by a 2005 Chrysler Pacifica that pretty much
> bashed in the rear panel of my 90 Accord beyond reasonable repair. The
> trunk lid seems to have popped out of the way -- though it is bent and
> won't close, it's not crushed -- and the bumper looks fine, as if the
> other car hit above it.
>
> The party who hit me had a bumper on the ground when the accident
> happened, but in the time between then and when they finally responded
> to their insurance company weeks later, they'd replaced it and denied
> anything ever happened.

You're obviously dealing with a liar who is attempting to evade
responsibility. That's another crime.

> While there's probably not much I can do to generate actualy proof
> anymore, I am curious about one thing -- their insurance company said
> the Pacifica front bumper was too low to have possibly caused damage
> above my 24-inch-high bumper. I was at a stop, facing downhill, and
> the person who hit me claims she was hit from behind first. Can
> anyone think of how this could have happened? The insurance company
> says it's completely impossible for that car to have caused the
> damage. I can only shrug and say, maybe I was dreaming, but I dreamt
> someone's insurance policy number onto a piece of paper in their
> handwriting if that's the case.

One scenario is that the Pacifica's bumper crumpled, and the damage to
your car was caused by material ABOVE the Pacifica's bumper. Either that,
or the Pacifica, if it was hit from behind, lurched upward somehow to hit
you.

It's all moot if the Pacifica's driver wrote their insurance claim number
for you. That, in itself, is admisison that the incident happened.

You should be able to wreck that bastard in court, if you can hang out
long enough...

--
Larry J. - Remove spamtrap in ALLCAPS to e-mail

"A lack of common sense is now considered a disability,
with all the privileges that this entails."

Re: Trying to demonstrate impact on 90 Accord
 

Waiving the right to remain silent, Pete from Boston <masspete@my-
deja.com> said:

> This is starting to feel like a CarTalk puzzle, but here goes:
>
> I got rear-ended recently by a 2005 Chrysler Pacifica that pretty much
> bashed in the rear panel of my 90 Accord beyond reasonable repair. The
> trunk lid seems to have popped out of the way -- though it is bent and
> won't close, it's not crushed -- and the bumper looks fine, as if the
> other car hit above it.
>
> The party who hit me had a bumper on the ground when the accident
> happened, but in the time between then and when they finally responded
> to their insurance company weeks later, they'd replaced it and denied
> anything ever happened.

You're obviously dealing with a liar who is attempting to evade
responsibility. That's another crime.

> While there's probably not much I can do to generate actualy proof
> anymore, I am curious about one thing -- their insurance company said
> the Pacifica front bumper was too low to have possibly caused damage
> above my 24-inch-high bumper. I was at a stop, facing downhill, and
> the person who hit me claims she was hit from behind first. Can
> anyone think of how this could have happened? The insurance company
> says it's completely impossible for that car to have caused the
> damage. I can only shrug and say, maybe I was dreaming, but I dreamt
> someone's insurance policy number onto a piece of paper in their
> handwriting if that's the case.

One scenario is that the Pacifica's bumper crumpled, and the damage to
your car was caused by material ABOVE the Pacifica's bumper. Either that,
or the Pacifica, if it was hit from behind, lurched upward somehow to hit
you.

It's all moot if the Pacifica's driver wrote their insurance claim number
for you. That, in itself, is admisison that the incident happened.

You should be able to wreck that bastard in court, if you can hang out
long enough...

--
Larry J. - Remove spamtrap in ALLCAPS to e-mail

"A lack of common sense is now considered a disability,
with all the privileges that this entails."

Re: Trying to demonstrate impact on 90 Accord
 

Waiving the right to remain silent, Pete from Boston <masspete@my-
deja.com> said:

> This is starting to feel like a CarTalk puzzle, but here goes:
>
> I got rear-ended recently by a 2005 Chrysler Pacifica that pretty much
> bashed in the rear panel of my 90 Accord beyond reasonable repair. The
> trunk lid seems to have popped out of the way -- though it is bent and
> won't close, it's not crushed -- and the bumper looks fine, as if the
> other car hit above it.
>
> The party who hit me had a bumper on the ground when the accident
> happened, but in the time between then and when they finally responded
> to their insurance company weeks later, they'd replaced it and denied
> anything ever happened.

You're obviously dealing with a liar who is attempting to evade
responsibility. That's another crime.

> While there's probably not much I can do to generate actualy proof
> anymore, I am curious about one thing -- their insurance company said
> the Pacifica front bumper was too low to have possibly caused damage
> above my 24-inch-high bumper. I was at a stop, facing downhill, and
> the person who hit me claims she was hit from behind first. Can
> anyone think of how this could have happened? The insurance company
> says it's completely impossible for that car to have caused the
> damage. I can only shrug and say, maybe I was dreaming, but I dreamt
> someone's insurance policy number onto a piece of paper in their
> handwriting if that's the case.

One scenario is that the Pacifica's bumper crumpled, and the damage to
your car was caused by material ABOVE the Pacifica's bumper. Either that,
or the Pacifica, if it was hit from behind, lurched upward somehow to hit
you.

It's all moot if the Pacifica's driver wrote their insurance claim number
for you. That, in itself, is admisison that the incident happened.

You should be able to wreck that bastard in court, if you can hang out
long enough...

--
Larry J. - Remove spamtrap in ALLCAPS to e-mail

"A lack of common sense is now considered a disability,
with all the privileges that this entails."

Re: Trying to demonstrate impact on 90 Accord
 

"Pete from Boston" <masspete@my-deja.com> wrote in message
news:1182281813.565105.311660@o61g2000hsh.googlegr oups.com...
<snip>

Police report?

Re: Trying to demonstrate impact on 90 Accord
 

"Pete from Boston" <masspete@my-deja.com> wrote in message
news:1182281813.565105.311660@o61g2000hsh.googlegr oups.com...
<snip>

Police report?

Re: Trying to demonstrate impact on 90 Accord
 

"Pete from Boston" <masspete@my-deja.com> wrote in message
news:1182281813.565105.311660@o61g2000hsh.googlegr oups.com...
<snip>

Police report?

Re: Trying to demonstrate impact on 90 Accord
 

On Jun 19, 12:36 pm, Pete from Boston <massp...@my-deja.com> wrote:
> This is starting to feel like a CarTalk puzzle, but here goes:
>
> I got rear-ended recently by a 2005 Chrysler Pacifica that pretty much
> bashed in the rear panel of my 90 Accord beyond reasonable repair. The
> trunk lid seems to have popped out of the way -- though it is bent and
> won't close, it's not crushed -- and the bumper looks fine, as if the
> other car hit above it.
>
> The party who hit me had a bumper on the ground when the accident
> happened, but in the time between then and when they finally responded
> to their insurance company weeks later, they'd replaced it and denied
> anything ever happened.
>
> While there's probably not much I can do to generate actualy proof
> anymore, I am curious about one thing -- their insurance company said
> the Pacifica front bumper was too low to have possibly caused damage
> above my 24-inch-high bumper. I was at a stop, facing downhill, and
> the person who hit me claims she was hit from behind first. Can
> anyone think of how this could have happened? The insurance company
> says it's completely impossible for that car to have caused the
> damage. I can only shrug and say, maybe I was dreaming, but I dreamt
> someone's insurance policy number onto a piece of paper in their
> handwriting if that's the case.

Always CALL THE COPS! I know that this wont help you now but it will
next time. If you have full coverage insurance just pay your
deductible and let the insurance companys duke it out. If your side
wins you will get your deductible back. If you don't have full
coverage you can sue the person that hit you. As far as I know just
because the insurance company screws you over that does not make the
person who hit you not responsible for the damage that they caused.
Did you get the name address drivers license number license plate
number from the person that hit you? If you did I would show up at
there house and ask them why they are trying to screw you over. People
will sometimes cave in if they are confronted with there lies.

Re: Trying to demonstrate impact on 90 Accord
 

On Jun 19, 12:36 pm, Pete from Boston <massp...@my-deja.com> wrote:
> This is starting to feel like a CarTalk puzzle, but here goes:
>
> I got rear-ended recently by a 2005 Chrysler Pacifica that pretty much
> bashed in the rear panel of my 90 Accord beyond reasonable repair. The
> trunk lid seems to have popped out of the way -- though it is bent and
> won't close, it's not crushed -- and the bumper looks fine, as if the
> other car hit above it.
>
> The party who hit me had a bumper on the ground when the accident
> happened, but in the time between then and when they finally responded
> to their insurance company weeks later, they'd replaced it and denied
> anything ever happened.
>
> While there's probably not much I can do to generate actualy proof
> anymore, I am curious about one thing -- their insurance company said
> the Pacifica front bumper was too low to have possibly caused damage
> above my 24-inch-high bumper. I was at a stop, facing downhill, and
> the person who hit me claims she was hit from behind first. Can
> anyone think of how this could have happened? The insurance company
> says it's completely impossible for that car to have caused the
> damage. I can only shrug and say, maybe I was dreaming, but I dreamt
> someone's insurance policy number onto a piece of paper in their
> handwriting if that's the case.

Always CALL THE COPS! I know that this wont help you now but it will
next time. If you have full coverage insurance just pay your
deductible and let the insurance companys duke it out. If your side
wins you will get your deductible back. If you don't have full
coverage you can sue the person that hit you. As far as I know just
because the insurance company screws you over that does not make the
person who hit you not responsible for the damage that they caused.
Did you get the name address drivers license number license plate
number from the person that hit you? If you did I would show up at
there house and ask them why they are trying to screw you over. People
will sometimes cave in if they are confronted with there lies.

Re: Trying to demonstrate impact on 90 Accord
 

On Jun 19, 12:36 pm, Pete from Boston <massp...@my-deja.com> wrote:
> This is starting to feel like a CarTalk puzzle, but here goes:
>
> I got rear-ended recently by a 2005 Chrysler Pacifica that pretty much
> bashed in the rear panel of my 90 Accord beyond reasonable repair. The
> trunk lid seems to have popped out of the way -- though it is bent and
> won't close, it's not crushed -- and the bumper looks fine, as if the
> other car hit above it.
>
> The party who hit me had a bumper on the ground when the accident
> happened, but in the time between then and when they finally responded
> to their insurance company weeks later, they'd replaced it and denied
> anything ever happened.
>
> While there's probably not much I can do to generate actualy proof
> anymore, I am curious about one thing -- their insurance company said
> the Pacifica front bumper was too low to have possibly caused damage
> above my 24-inch-high bumper. I was at a stop, facing downhill, and
> the person who hit me claims she was hit from behind first. Can
> anyone think of how this could have happened? The insurance company
> says it's completely impossible for that car to have caused the
> damage. I can only shrug and say, maybe I was dreaming, but I dreamt
> someone's insurance policy number onto a piece of paper in their
> handwriting if that's the case.

Always CALL THE COPS! I know that this wont help you now but it will
next time. If you have full coverage insurance just pay your
deductible and let the insurance companys duke it out. If your side
wins you will get your deductible back. If you don't have full
coverage you can sue the person that hit you. As far as I know just
because the insurance company screws you over that does not make the
person who hit you not responsible for the damage that they caused.
Did you get the name address drivers license number license plate
number from the person that hit you? If you did I would show up at
there house and ask them why they are trying to screw you over. People
will sometimes cave in if they are confronted with there lies.

Re: Trying to demonstrate impact on 90 Accord
 

On Jun 19, 5:36 pm, william1...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Jun 19, 12:36 pm, Pete from Boston <massp...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > This is starting to feel like a CarTalk puzzle, but here goes:
>
> > I got rear-ended recently by a 2005 Chrysler Pacifica that pretty much
> > bashed in the rear panel of my 90 Accord beyond reasonable repair. The
> > trunk lid seems to have popped out of the way -- though it is bent and
> > won't close, it's not crushed -- and the bumper looks fine, as if the
> > other car hit above it.
>
> > The party who hit me had a bumper on the ground when the accident
> > happened, but in the time between then and when they finally responded
> > to their insurance company weeks later, they'd replaced it and denied
> > anything ever happened.
>
> > While there's probably not much I can do to generate actualy proof
> > anymore, I am curious about one thing -- their insurance company said
> > the Pacifica front bumper was too low to have possibly caused damage
> > above my 24-inch-high bumper. I was at a stop, facing downhill, and
> > the person who hit me claims she was hit from behind first. Can
> > anyone think of how this could have happened? The insurance company
> > says it's completely impossible for that car to have caused the
> > damage. I can only shrug and say, maybe I was dreaming, but I dreamt
> > someone's insurance policy number onto a piece of paper in their
> > handwriting if that's the case.
>
> Always CALL THE COPS! I know that this wont help you now but it will
> next time. If you have full coverage insurance just pay your
> deductible and let the insurance companys duke it out. If your side
> wins you will get your deductible back. If you don't have full
> coverage you can sue the person that hit you. As far as I know just
> because the insurance company screws you over that does not make the
> person who hit you not responsible for the damage that they caused.
> Did you get the name address drivers license number license plate
> number from the person that hit you? If you did I would show up at
> there house and ask them why they are trying to screw you over. People
> will sometimes cave in if they are confronted with there lies.

There was a cop there when it happened. I asked for his assistance.
He said to go away. Seriously. "What should I do?" I asked. "You
should go back to your car," he replied. "About the accident, I
mean," he said. "Go back to your car," he said. I may be pursuing
that situation a little further.

Later, when I called the insurance company and they asked if I called
the police, I explained what had happened. They asked if I'd gotten
the other person's info, and said, "Sounds like you did what you
should have." At the time it didn't occur to me that there was
anything to be achieved by calling the cops, but only now do I realize
it would've made some difference.

Re: Trying to demonstrate impact on 90 Accord
 

On Jun 19, 5:36 pm, william1...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Jun 19, 12:36 pm, Pete from Boston <massp...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > This is starting to feel like a CarTalk puzzle, but here goes:
>
> > I got rear-ended recently by a 2005 Chrysler Pacifica that pretty much
> > bashed in the rear panel of my 90 Accord beyond reasonable repair. The
> > trunk lid seems to have popped out of the way -- though it is bent and
> > won't close, it's not crushed -- and the bumper looks fine, as if the
> > other car hit above it.
>
> > The party who hit me had a bumper on the ground when the accident
> > happened, but in the time between then and when they finally responded
> > to their insurance company weeks later, they'd replaced it and denied
> > anything ever happened.
>
> > While there's probably not much I can do to generate actualy proof
> > anymore, I am curious about one thing -- their insurance company said
> > the Pacifica front bumper was too low to have possibly caused damage
> > above my 24-inch-high bumper. I was at a stop, facing downhill, and
> > the person who hit me claims she was hit from behind first. Can
> > anyone think of how this could have happened? The insurance company
> > says it's completely impossible for that car to have caused the
> > damage. I can only shrug and say, maybe I was dreaming, but I dreamt
> > someone's insurance policy number onto a piece of paper in their
> > handwriting if that's the case.
>
> Always CALL THE COPS! I know that this wont help you now but it will
> next time. If you have full coverage insurance just pay your
> deductible and let the insurance companys duke it out. If your side
> wins you will get your deductible back. If you don't have full
> coverage you can sue the person that hit you. As far as I know just
> because the insurance company screws you over that does not make the
> person who hit you not responsible for the damage that they caused.
> Did you get the name address drivers license number license plate
> number from the person that hit you? If you did I would show up at
> there house and ask them why they are trying to screw you over. People
> will sometimes cave in if they are confronted with there lies.

There was a cop there when it happened. I asked for his assistance.
He said to go away. Seriously. "What should I do?" I asked. "You
should go back to your car," he replied. "About the accident, I
mean," he said. "Go back to your car," he said. I may be pursuing
that situation a little further.

Later, when I called the insurance company and they asked if I called
the police, I explained what had happened. They asked if I'd gotten
the other person's info, and said, "Sounds like you did what you
should have." At the time it didn't occur to me that there was
anything to be achieved by calling the cops, but only now do I realize
it would've made some difference.

Re: Trying to demonstrate impact on 90 Accord
 

On Jun 19, 5:36 pm, william1...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Jun 19, 12:36 pm, Pete from Boston <massp...@my-deja.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > This is starting to feel like a CarTalk puzzle, but here goes:
>
> > I got rear-ended recently by a 2005 Chrysler Pacifica that pretty much
> > bashed in the rear panel of my 90 Accord beyond reasonable repair. The
> > trunk lid seems to have popped out of the way -- though it is bent and
> > won't close, it's not crushed -- and the bumper looks fine, as if the
> > other car hit above it.
>
> > The party who hit me had a bumper on the ground when the accident
> > happened, but in the time between then and when they finally responded
> > to their insurance company weeks later, they'd replaced it and denied
> > anything ever happened.
>
> > While there's probably not much I can do to generate actualy proof
> > anymore, I am curious about one thing -- their insurance company said
> > the Pacifica front bumper was too low to have possibly caused damage
> > above my 24-inch-high bumper. I was at a stop, facing downhill, and
> > the person who hit me claims she was hit from behind first. Can
> > anyone think of how this could have happened? The insurance company
> > says it's completely impossible for that car to have caused the
> > damage. I can only shrug and say, maybe I was dreaming, but I dreamt
> > someone's insurance policy number onto a piece of paper in their
> > handwriting if that's the case.
>
> Always CALL THE COPS! I know that this wont help you now but it will
> next time. If you have full coverage insurance just pay your
> deductible and let the insurance companys duke it out. If your side
> wins you will get your deductible back. If you don't have full
> coverage you can sue the person that hit you. As far as I know just
> because the insurance company screws you over that does not make the
> person who hit you not responsible for the damage that they caused.
> Did you get the name address drivers license number license plate
> number from the person that hit you? If you did I would show up at
> there house and ask them why they are trying to screw you over. People
> will sometimes cave in if they are confronted with there lies.

There was a cop there when it happened. I asked for his assistance.
He said to go away. Seriously. "What should I do?" I asked. "You
should go back to your car," he replied. "About the accident, I
mean," he said. "Go back to your car," he said. I may be pursuing
that situation a little further.

Later, when I called the insurance company and they asked if I called
the police, I explained what had happened. They asked if I'd gotten
the other person's info, and said, "Sounds like you did what you
should have." At the time it didn't occur to me that there was
anything to be achieved by calling the cops, but only now do I realize
it would've made some difference.

Re: Trying to demonstrate impact on 90 Accord
 

On Jun 19, 3:55 pm, Larry in AZ <usen...@DE.LETE.THISljvideo.com>
wrote:
> Waiving the right to remain silent, Pete from Boston <masspete@my-
> deja.com> said:
>
> > This is starting to feel like a CarTalk puzzle, but here goes:
>
> > I got rear-ended recently by a 2005 Chrysler Pacifica that pretty much
> > bashed in the rear panel of my 90 Accord beyond reasonable repair. The
> > trunk lid seems to have popped out of the way -- though it is bent and
> > won't close, it's not crushed -- and the bumper looks fine, as if the
> > other car hit above it.
>
> > The party who hit me had a bumper on the ground when the accident
> > happened, but in the time between then and when they finally responded
> > to their insurance company weeks later, they'd replaced it and denied
> > anything ever happened.
>
> You're obviously dealing with a liar who is attempting to evade
> responsibility. That's another crime.
>
> > While there's probably not much I can do to generate actualy proof
> > anymore, I am curious about one thing -- their insurance company said
> > the Pacifica front bumper was too low to have possibly caused damage
> > above my 24-inch-high bumper. I was at a stop, facing downhill, and
> > the person who hit me claims she was hit from behind first. Can
> > anyone think of how this could have happened? The insurance company
> > says it's completely impossible for that car to have caused the
> > damage. I can only shrug and say, maybe I was dreaming, but I dreamt
> > someone's insurance policy number onto a piece of paper in their
> > handwriting if that's the case.
>
> One scenario is that the Pacifica's bumper crumpled, and the damage to
> your car was caused by material ABOVE the Pacifica's bumper. Either that,
> or the Pacifica, if it was hit from behind, lurched upward somehow to hit
> you.
>
> It's all moot if the Pacifica's driver wrote their insurance claim number
> for you. That, in itself, is admisison that the incident happened.
>
> You should be able to wreck that bastard in court, if you can hang out
> long enough...

Unlikely. Out of state, for one. No hard evidence, second. And
lastly their insurance company is unimpressed that I magically have
someone's info without them hitting me.

It was pouring rain and I had a lot on my mind in the post-accident
whirlwind (word to the wise: get in an accident only with a friend in
the car to remind you of these things), and idiot me didn't take
pictures. I will never make that mistake again.

But yes, in the time I kept calling their company and asking if they'd
gotten in touch with them, they kept telling me "they have 30 days to
respond," plenty of time to get their own minor damage repaired. I
kept telling their company this, and then was, of course, not the
least bit surprised when they lied.

Re: Trying to demonstrate impact on 90 Accord
 

On Jun 19, 3:55 pm, Larry in AZ <usen...@DE.LETE.THISljvideo.com>
wrote:
> Waiving the right to remain silent, Pete from Boston <masspete@my-
> deja.com> said:
>
> > This is starting to feel like a CarTalk puzzle, but here goes:
>
> > I got rear-ended recently by a 2005 Chrysler Pacifica that pretty much
> > bashed in the rear panel of my 90 Accord beyond reasonable repair. The
> > trunk lid seems to have popped out of the way -- though it is bent and
> > won't close, it's not crushed -- and the bumper looks fine, as if the
> > other car hit above it.
>
> > The party who hit me had a bumper on the ground when the accident
> > happened, but in the time between then and when they finally responded
> > to their insurance company weeks later, they'd replaced it and denied
> > anything ever happened.
>
> You're obviously dealing with a liar who is attempting to evade
> responsibility. That's another crime.
>
> > While there's probably not much I can do to generate actualy proof
> > anymore, I am curious about one thing -- their insurance company said
> > the Pacifica front bumper was too low to have possibly caused damage
> > above my 24-inch-high bumper. I was at a stop, facing downhill, and
> > the person who hit me claims she was hit from behind first. Can
> > anyone think of how this could have happened? The insurance company
> > says it's completely impossible for that car to have caused the
> > damage. I can only shrug and say, maybe I was dreaming, but I dreamt
> > someone's insurance policy number onto a piece of paper in their
> > handwriting if that's the case.
>
> One scenario is that the Pacifica's bumper crumpled, and the damage to
> your car was caused by material ABOVE the Pacifica's bumper. Either that,
> or the Pacifica, if it was hit from behind, lurched upward somehow to hit
> you.
>
> It's all moot if the Pacifica's driver wrote their insurance claim number
> for you. That, in itself, is admisison that the incident happened.
>
> You should be able to wreck that bastard in court, if you can hang out
> long enough...

Unlikely. Out of state, for one. No hard evidence, second. And
lastly their insurance company is unimpressed that I magically have
someone's info without them hitting me.

It was pouring rain and I had a lot on my mind in the post-accident
whirlwind (word to the wise: get in an accident only with a friend in
the car to remind you of these things), and idiot me didn't take
pictures. I will never make that mistake again.

But yes, in the time I kept calling their company and asking if they'd
gotten in touch with them, they kept telling me "they have 30 days to
respond," plenty of time to get their own minor damage repaired. I
kept telling their company this, and then was, of course, not the
least bit surprised when they lied.

Re: Trying to demonstrate impact on 90 Accord
 

On Jun 19, 3:55 pm, Larry in AZ <usen...@DE.LETE.THISljvideo.com>
wrote:
> Waiving the right to remain silent, Pete from Boston <masspete@my-
> deja.com> said:
>
> > This is starting to feel like a CarTalk puzzle, but here goes:
>
> > I got rear-ended recently by a 2005 Chrysler Pacifica that pretty much
> > bashed in the rear panel of my 90 Accord beyond reasonable repair. The
> > trunk lid seems to have popped out of the way -- though it is bent and
> > won't close, it's not crushed -- and the bumper looks fine, as if the
> > other car hit above it.
>
> > The party who hit me had a bumper on the ground when the accident
> > happened, but in the time between then and when they finally responded
> > to their insurance company weeks later, they'd replaced it and denied
> > anything ever happened.
>
> You're obviously dealing with a liar who is attempting to evade
> responsibility. That's another crime.
>
> > While there's probably not much I can do to generate actualy proof
> > anymore, I am curious about one thing -- their insurance company said
> > the Pacifica front bumper was too low to have possibly caused damage
> > above my 24-inch-high bumper. I was at a stop, facing downhill, and
> > the person who hit me claims she was hit from behind first. Can
> > anyone think of how this could have happened? The insurance company
> > says it's completely impossible for that car to have caused the
> > damage. I can only shrug and say, maybe I was dreaming, but I dreamt
> > someone's insurance policy number onto a piece of paper in their
> > handwriting if that's the case.
>
> One scenario is that the Pacifica's bumper crumpled, and the damage to
> your car was caused by material ABOVE the Pacifica's bumper. Either that,
> or the Pacifica, if it was hit from behind, lurched upward somehow to hit
> you.
>
> It's all moot if the Pacifica's driver wrote their insurance claim number
> for you. That, in itself, is admisison that the incident happened.
>
> You should be able to wreck that bastard in court, if you can hang out
> long enough...

Unlikely. Out of state, for one. No hard evidence, second. And
lastly their insurance company is unimpressed that I magically have
someone's info without them hitting me.

It was pouring rain and I had a lot on my mind in the post-accident
whirlwind (word to the wise: get in an accident only with a friend in
the car to remind you of these things), and idiot me didn't take
pictures. I will never make that mistake again.

But yes, in the time I kept calling their company and asking if they'd
gotten in touch with them, they kept telling me "they have 30 days to
respond," plenty of time to get their own minor damage repaired. I
kept telling their company this, and then was, of course, not the
least bit surprised when they lied.

Re: Trying to demonstrate impact on 90 Accord
 

The police actually have to be dispatched to an accident unless they
actually saw it happen.

Re: Trying to demonstrate impact on 90 Accord
 

The police actually have to be dispatched to an accident unless they
actually saw it happen.

Re: Trying to demonstrate impact on 90 Accord
 

The police actually have to be dispatched to an accident unless they
actually saw it happen.

Re: Trying to demonstrate impact on 90 Accord
 

Pete from Boston <masspete@my-deja.com> wrote in
news:1182281813.565105.311660@o61g2000hsh.googlegr oups.com:

> This is starting to feel like a CarTalk puzzle, but here goes:
>
> I got rear-ended recently by a 2005 Chrysler Pacifica that pretty much
> bashed in the rear panel of my 90 Accord beyond reasonable repair. The
> trunk lid seems to have popped out of the way -- though it is bent and
> won't close, it's not crushed -- and the bumper looks fine, as if the
> other car hit above it.
>
> The party who hit me had a bumper on the ground when the accident
> happened, but in the time between then and when they finally responded
> to their insurance company weeks later, they'd replaced it and denied
> anything ever happened.

You DID exchange insurance and license information?
that alone would be evidence that -something- happened.
Else why would she give you her info?
>
> While there's probably not much I can do to generate actualy proof
> anymore, I am curious about one thing -- their insurance company said
> the Pacifica front bumper was too low to have possibly caused damage
> above my 24-inch-high bumper. I was at a stop, facing downhill, and
> the person who hit me claims she was hit from behind first. Can
> anyone think of how this could have happened? The insurance company
> says it's completely impossible for that car to have caused the
> damage. I can only shrug and say, maybe I was dreaming, but I dreamt
> someone's insurance policy number onto a piece of paper in their
> handwriting if that's the case.
>

ALWAYS call the police and get a police report filled out.
Cellphone cameras are VERY useful,too. Or if there's a drugstore nearby,
buy a disposable camera and take pix.

regardless of whether she was hit from behind,she still is liable for
damage her vehicle caused to your auto.

--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
kua.net

Re: Trying to demonstrate impact on 90 Accord
 

Pete from Boston <masspete@my-deja.com> wrote in
news:1182281813.565105.311660@o61g2000hsh.googlegr oups.com:

> This is starting to feel like a CarTalk puzzle, but here goes:
>
> I got rear-ended recently by a 2005 Chrysler Pacifica that pretty much
> bashed in the rear panel of my 90 Accord beyond reasonable repair. The
> trunk lid seems to have popped out of the way -- though it is bent and
> won't close, it's not crushed -- and the bumper looks fine, as if the
> other car hit above it.
>
> The party who hit me had a bumper on the ground when the accident
> happened, but in the time between then and when they finally responded
> to their insurance company weeks later, they'd replaced it and denied
> anything ever happened.

You DID exchange insurance and license information?
that alone would be evidence that -something- happened.
Else why would she give you her info?
>
> While there's probably not much I can do to generate actualy proof
> anymore, I am curious about one thing -- their insurance company said
> the Pacifica front bumper was too low to have possibly caused damage
> above my 24-inch-high bumper. I was at a stop, facing downhill, and
> the person who hit me claims she was hit from behind first. Can
> anyone think of how this could have happened? The insurance company
> says it's completely impossible for that car to have caused the
> damage. I can only shrug and say, maybe I was dreaming, but I dreamt
> someone's insurance policy number onto a piece of paper in their
> handwriting if that's the case.
>

ALWAYS call the police and get a police report filled out.
Cellphone cameras are VERY useful,too. Or if there's a drugstore nearby,
buy a disposable camera and take pix.

regardless of whether she was hit from behind,she still is liable for
damage her vehicle caused to your auto.

--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
kua.net

Re: Trying to demonstrate impact on 90 Accord
 

Pete from Boston <masspete@my-deja.com> wrote in
news:1182281813.565105.311660@o61g2000hsh.googlegr oups.com:

> This is starting to feel like a CarTalk puzzle, but here goes:
>
> I got rear-ended recently by a 2005 Chrysler Pacifica that pretty much
> bashed in the rear panel of my 90 Accord beyond reasonable repair. The
> trunk lid seems to have popped out of the way -- though it is bent and
> won't close, it's not crushed -- and the bumper looks fine, as if the
> other car hit above it.
>
> The party who hit me had a bumper on the ground when the accident
> happened, but in the time between then and when they finally responded
> to their insurance company weeks later, they'd replaced it and denied
> anything ever happened.

You DID exchange insurance and license information?
that alone would be evidence that -something- happened.
Else why would she give you her info?
>
> While there's probably not much I can do to generate actualy proof
> anymore, I am curious about one thing -- their insurance company said
> the Pacifica front bumper was too low to have possibly caused damage
> above my 24-inch-high bumper. I was at a stop, facing downhill, and
> the person who hit me claims she was hit from behind first. Can
> anyone think of how this could have happened? The insurance company
> says it's completely impossible for that car to have caused the
> damage. I can only shrug and say, maybe I was dreaming, but I dreamt
> someone's insurance policy number onto a piece of paper in their
> handwriting if that's the case.
>

ALWAYS call the police and get a police report filled out.
Cellphone cameras are VERY useful,too. Or if there's a drugstore nearby,
buy a disposable camera and take pix.

regardless of whether she was hit from behind,she still is liable for
damage her vehicle caused to your auto.

--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
kua.net

Re: Trying to demonstrate impact on 90 Accord
 

Pete from Boston wrote:
> This is starting to feel like a CarTalk puzzle, but here goes:
>
> I got rear-ended recently by a 2005 Chrysler Pacifica that pretty much
> bashed in the rear panel of my 90 Accord beyond reasonable repair. The
> trunk lid seems to have popped out of the way -- though it is bent and
> won't close, it's not crushed -- and the bumper looks fine, as if the
> other car hit above it.
>
> The party who hit me had a bumper on the ground when the accident
> happened, but in the time between then and when they finally responded
> to their insurance company weeks later, they'd replaced it and denied
> anything ever happened.
>
> While there's probably not much I can do to generate actualy proof
> anymore, I am curious about one thing -- their insurance company said
> the Pacifica front bumper was too low to have possibly caused damage
> above my 24-inch-high bumper. I was at a stop, facing downhill, and
> the person who hit me claims she was hit from behind first. Can
> anyone think of how this could have happened? The insurance company
> says it's completely impossible for that car to have caused the
> damage. I can only shrug and say, maybe I was dreaming, but I dreamt
> someone's insurance policy number onto a piece of paper in their
> handwriting if that's the case.
>

You may be be screwed? If the other party is denying it ever happened
then it's your responsibility to prove that it did. Your 90 Accord is
older than my 92 Civic. Repair the damages to have it pass safety
inspection and move on. We're both driving old cars.

Minor accidents are bad news. Police don't care unless someone is
injured. If you don't have pictures then there is no evidence unless you
have a witness.

Bad insurance companies will always say it wasn't their customer's fault.

Please don't shoot the messenger. That would be me.

--
JD..

Re: Trying to demonstrate impact on 90 Accord
 

Pete from Boston wrote:
> This is starting to feel like a CarTalk puzzle, but here goes:
>
> I got rear-ended recently by a 2005 Chrysler Pacifica that pretty much
> bashed in the rear panel of my 90 Accord beyond reasonable repair. The
> trunk lid seems to have popped out of the way -- though it is bent and
> won't close, it's not crushed -- and the bumper looks fine, as if the
> other car hit above it.
>
> The party who hit me had a bumper on the ground when the accident
> happened, but in the time between then and when they finally responded
> to their insurance company weeks later, they'd replaced it and denied
> anything ever happened.
>
> While there's probably not much I can do to generate actualy proof
> anymore, I am curious about one thing -- their insurance company said
> the Pacifica front bumper was too low to have possibly caused damage
> above my 24-inch-high bumper. I was at a stop, facing downhill, and
> the person who hit me claims she was hit from behind first. Can
> anyone think of how this could have happened? The insurance company
> says it's completely impossible for that car to have caused the
> damage. I can only shrug and say, maybe I was dreaming, but I dreamt
> someone's insurance policy number onto a piece of paper in their
> handwriting if that's the case.
>

You may be be screwed? If the other party is denying it ever happened
then it's your responsibility to prove that it did. Your 90 Accord is
older than my 92 Civic. Repair the damages to have it pass safety
inspection and move on. We're both driving old cars.

Minor accidents are bad news. Police don't care unless someone is
injured. If you don't have pictures then there is no evidence unless you
have a witness.

Bad insurance companies will always say it wasn't their customer's fault.

Please don't shoot the messenger. That would be me.

--
JD..

Re: Trying to demonstrate impact on 90 Accord
 

Pete from Boston wrote:
> This is starting to feel like a CarTalk puzzle, but here goes:
>
> I got rear-ended recently by a 2005 Chrysler Pacifica that pretty much
> bashed in the rear panel of my 90 Accord beyond reasonable repair. The
> trunk lid seems to have popped out of the way -- though it is bent and
> won't close, it's not crushed -- and the bumper looks fine, as if the
> other car hit above it.
>
> The party who hit me had a bumper on the ground when the accident
> happened, but in the time between then and when they finally responded
> to their insurance company weeks later, they'd replaced it and denied
> anything ever happened.
>
> While there's probably not much I can do to generate actualy proof
> anymore, I am curious about one thing -- their insurance company said
> the Pacifica front bumper was too low to have possibly caused damage
> above my 24-inch-high bumper. I was at a stop, facing downhill, and
> the person who hit me claims she was hit from behind first. Can
> anyone think of how this could have happened? The insurance company
> says it's completely impossible for that car to have caused the
> damage. I can only shrug and say, maybe I was dreaming, but I dreamt
> someone's insurance policy number onto a piece of paper in their
> handwriting if that's the case.
>

You may be be screwed? If the other party is denying it ever happened
then it's your responsibility to prove that it did. Your 90 Accord is
older than my 92 Civic. Repair the damages to have it pass safety
inspection and move on. We're both driving old cars.

Minor accidents are bad news. Police don't care unless someone is
injured. If you don't have pictures then there is no evidence unless you
have a witness.

Bad insurance companies will always say it wasn't their customer's fault.

Please don't shoot the messenger. That would be me.

--
JD..

Re: Trying to demonstrate impact on 90 Accord
 

william1977@gmail.com wrote:

> The police actually have to be dispatched to an accident unless they
> actually saw it happen.

Who said the police were involved at all?

In my town, the police will not come out for a property damage only accident
of 2 cars. This isn't uncommon in cities where they have... crime...

Re: Trying to demonstrate impact on 90 Accord
 

william1977@gmail.com wrote:

> The police actually have to be dispatched to an accident unless they
> actually saw it happen.

Who said the police were involved at all?

In my town, the police will not come out for a property damage only accident
of 2 cars. This isn't uncommon in cities where they have... crime...

Re: Trying to demonstrate impact on 90 Accord
 

william1977@gmail.com wrote:

> The police actually have to be dispatched to an accident unless they
> actually saw it happen.

Who said the police were involved at all?

In my town, the police will not come out for a property damage only accident
of 2 cars. This isn't uncommon in cities where they have... crime...

Re: Trying to demonstrate impact on 90 Accord
 

Pete from Boston wrote:

>
> There was a cop there when it happened. I asked for his assistance.
> He said to go away. Seriously. "What should I do?" I asked. "You
> should go back to your car," he replied. "About the accident, I
> mean," he said. "Go back to your car," he said. I may be pursuing
> that situation a little further.
>
> Later, when I called the insurance company and they asked if I called
> the police, I explained what had happened. They asked if I'd gotten
> the other person's info, and said, "Sounds like you did what you
> should have." At the time it didn't occur to me that there was
> anything to be achieved by calling the cops, but only now do I realize
> it would've made some difference.

Ahhh. If the police were there already, did they take a report? Did they
get your info on the report? If so, go to the police station, and request
a copy of the report.

If they didn't take a report, I would certainly talk to the supervisor on
duty at the police station. And it would probably be a good idea to call a
lawyer. If you present proper evidence, they will often take your case on
contingency. Can't hurt to try. Insurance companies push around
individuals without proper representation. They are confident that you do
not know all of your rights. When a lawyer calls, they are much more
likely to fold.

Re: Trying to demonstrate impact on 90 Accord
 

Pete from Boston wrote:

>
> There was a cop there when it happened. I asked for his assistance.
> He said to go away. Seriously. "What should I do?" I asked. "You
> should go back to your car," he replied. "About the accident, I
> mean," he said. "Go back to your car," he said. I may be pursuing
> that situation a little further.
>
> Later, when I called the insurance company and they asked if I called
> the police, I explained what had happened. They asked if I'd gotten
> the other person's info, and said, "Sounds like you did what you
> should have." At the time it didn't occur to me that there was
> anything to be achieved by calling the cops, but only now do I realize
> it would've made some difference.

Ahhh. If the police were there already, did they take a report? Did they
get your info on the report? If so, go to the police station, and request
a copy of the report.

If they didn't take a report, I would certainly talk to the supervisor on
duty at the police station. And it would probably be a good idea to call a
lawyer. If you present proper evidence, they will often take your case on
contingency. Can't hurt to try. Insurance companies push around
individuals without proper representation. They are confident that you do
not know all of your rights. When a lawyer calls, they are much more
likely to fold.

Re: Trying to demonstrate impact on 90 Accord
 

Pete from Boston wrote:

>
> There was a cop there when it happened. I asked for his assistance.
> He said to go away. Seriously. "What should I do?" I asked. "You
> should go back to your car," he replied. "About the accident, I
> mean," he said. "Go back to your car," he said. I may be pursuing
> that situation a little further.
>
> Later, when I called the insurance company and they asked if I called
> the police, I explained what had happened. They asked if I'd gotten
> the other person's info, and said, "Sounds like you did what you
> should have." At the time it didn't occur to me that there was
> anything to be achieved by calling the cops, but only now do I realize
> it would've made some difference.

Ahhh. If the police were there already, did they take a report? Did they
get your info on the report? If so, go to the police station, and request
a copy of the report.

If they didn't take a report, I would certainly talk to the supervisor on
duty at the police station. And it would probably be a good idea to call a
lawyer. If you present proper evidence, they will often take your case on
contingency. Can't hurt to try. Insurance companies push around
individuals without proper representation. They are confident that you do
not know all of your rights. When a lawyer calls, they are much more
likely to fold.

Re: Trying to demonstrate impact on 90 Accord
 

Pete from Boston wrote:
> This is starting to feel like a CarTalk....


Get a lawyer.

a

Re: Trying to demonstrate impact on 90 Accord
 

Pete from Boston wrote:
> This is starting to feel like a CarTalk....


Get a lawyer.

a

Re: Trying to demonstrate impact on 90 Accord
 

Pete from Boston wrote:
> This is starting to feel like a CarTalk....


Get a lawyer.

a

Re: Trying to demonstrate impact on 90 Accord
 

On Wed, 20 Jun 2007 13:18:18 GMT, a <a@a.ca> wrote:

>Pete from Boston wrote:
>> This is starting to feel like a CarTalk....
>
>
>Get a lawyer.
>
>a


This is pointless as the car isn't worth it at this point. Even if
they decided to pay the value of the car, you are looking at only 1-2
grand. A lawyer is going to charge you at least $700+ to show up once
in court. And if you win and they appeal it, it is another $700,
there's the value of the car.

What you should always do if you are involved in an accident is get
the driver's license, vin number of the vehicle, license plate number
and proof of insurance. This way you have multiple backups in case
something like this occurs. Also if you know that the other driver is
at fault like in this case, then you should call the other driver's
insurance and file a claim with them. This will be processed by the
insurance headquarters so there is no way of the individual nor the
agent will be able to push this under the carpet.

If you get no where and can live with the car as is for the moment,
you can take the driver to district court. Once it is reviewed by the
judge you will most certainly win. Make sure you take pictures of the
damages if you do decide to go to court.

Good Luck

Re: Trying to demonstrate impact on 90 Accord
 

On Wed, 20 Jun 2007 13:18:18 GMT, a <a@a.ca> wrote:

>Pete from Boston wrote:
>> This is starting to feel like a CarTalk....
>
>
>Get a lawyer.
>
>a


This is pointless as the car isn't worth it at this point. Even if
they decided to pay the value of the car, you are looking at only 1-2
grand. A lawyer is going to charge you at least $700+ to show up once
in court. And if you win and they appeal it, it is another $700,
there's the value of the car.

What you should always do if you are involved in an accident is get
the driver's license, vin number of the vehicle, license plate number
and proof of insurance. This way you have multiple backups in case
something like this occurs. Also if you know that the other driver is
at fault like in this case, then you should call the other driver's
insurance and file a claim with them. This will be processed by the
insurance headquarters so there is no way of the individual nor the
agent will be able to push this under the carpet.

If you get no where and can live with the car as is for the moment,
you can take the driver to district court. Once it is reviewed by the
judge you will most certainly win. Make sure you take pictures of the
damages if you do decide to go to court.

Good Luck

Re: Trying to demonstrate impact on 90 Accord
 

On Wed, 20 Jun 2007 13:18:18 GMT, a <a@a.ca> wrote:

>Pete from Boston wrote:
>> This is starting to feel like a CarTalk....
>
>
>Get a lawyer.
>
>a


This is pointless as the car isn't worth it at this point. Even if
they decided to pay the value of the car, you are looking at only 1-2
grand. A lawyer is going to charge you at least $700+ to show up once
in court. And if you win and they appeal it, it is another $700,
there's the value of the car.

What you should always do if you are involved in an accident is get
the driver's license, vin number of the vehicle, license plate number
and proof of insurance. This way you have multiple backups in case
something like this occurs. Also if you know that the other driver is
at fault like in this case, then you should call the other driver's
insurance and file a claim with them. This will be processed by the
insurance headquarters so there is no way of the individual nor the
agent will be able to push this under the carpet.

If you get no where and can live with the car as is for the moment,
you can take the driver to district court. Once it is reviewed by the
judge you will most certainly win. Make sure you take pictures of the
damages if you do decide to go to court.

Good Luck

Re: Trying to demonstrate impact on 90 Accord
 

On Jun 20, 11:53 am, n...@nowehere.com wrote:
> On Wed, 20 Jun 2007 13:18:18 GMT, a <a...@a.ca> wrote:
> >Pete from Boston wrote:
> >> This is starting to feel like a CarTalk....
>
> >Get a lawyer.
>
> >a
>
> This is pointless as the car isn't worth it at this point. Even if
> they decided to pay the value of the car, you are looking at only 1-2
> grand. A lawyer is going to charge you at least $700+ to show up once
> in court. And if you win and they appeal it, it is another $700,
> there's the value of the car.
>
> What you should always do if you are involved in an accident is get
> the driver's license, vin number of the vehicle, license plate number
> and proof of insurance. This way you have multiple backups in case
> something like this occurs. Also if you know that the other driver is
> at fault like in this case, then you should call the other driver's
> insurance and file a claim with them. This will be processed by the
> insurance headquarters so there is no way of the individual nor the
> agent will be able to push this under the carpet.
>
> If you get no where and can live with the car as is for the moment,
> you can take the driver to district court. Once it is reviewed by the
> judge you will most certainly win. Make sure you take pictures of the
> damages if you do decide to go to court.
>
> Good Luck

It was pointless, but for the reason that my own insurance company
said "clearly, you could not have caused this damage yourself," and
paid me the value of the car, plus that of all parts put in during the
past year, without deductible nor surcharge. I'd have liked to have
seen the liars who hit me get what was coming to them, but not enough
to waste more time on it.

I'm glad we don't have Geico in Mass, avoiding any temptation I may
have had to be insured through them.

Re: Trying to demonstrate impact on 90 Accord
 

On Jun 20, 11:53 am, n...@nowehere.com wrote:
> On Wed, 20 Jun 2007 13:18:18 GMT, a <a...@a.ca> wrote:
> >Pete from Boston wrote:
> >> This is starting to feel like a CarTalk....
>
> >Get a lawyer.
>
> >a
>
> This is pointless as the car isn't worth it at this point. Even if
> they decided to pay the value of the car, you are looking at only 1-2
> grand. A lawyer is going to charge you at least $700+ to show up once
> in court. And if you win and they appeal it, it is another $700,
> there's the value of the car.
>
> What you should always do if you are involved in an accident is get
> the driver's license, vin number of the vehicle, license plate number
> and proof of insurance. This way you have multiple backups in case
> something like this occurs. Also if you know that the other driver is
> at fault like in this case, then you should call the other driver's
> insurance and file a claim with them. This will be processed by the
> insurance headquarters so there is no way of the individual nor the
> agent will be able to push this under the carpet.
>
> If you get no where and can live with the car as is for the moment,
> you can take the driver to district court. Once it is reviewed by the
> judge you will most certainly win. Make sure you take pictures of the
> damages if you do decide to go to court.
>
> Good Luck

It was pointless, but for the reason that my own insurance company
said "clearly, you could not have caused this damage yourself," and
paid me the value of the car, plus that of all parts put in during the
past year, without deductible nor surcharge. I'd have liked to have
seen the liars who hit me get what was coming to them, but not enough
to waste more time on it.

I'm glad we don't have Geico in Mass, avoiding any temptation I may
have had to be insured through them.

Re: Trying to demonstrate impact on 90 Accord
 

On Jun 20, 11:53 am, n...@nowehere.com wrote:
> On Wed, 20 Jun 2007 13:18:18 GMT, a <a...@a.ca> wrote:
> >Pete from Boston wrote:
> >> This is starting to feel like a CarTalk....
>
> >Get a lawyer.
>
> >a
>
> This is pointless as the car isn't worth it at this point. Even if
> they decided to pay the value of the car, you are looking at only 1-2
> grand. A lawyer is going to charge you at least $700+ to show up once
> in court. And if you win and they appeal it, it is another $700,
> there's the value of the car.
>
> What you should always do if you are involved in an accident is get
> the driver's license, vin number of the vehicle, license plate number
> and proof of insurance. This way you have multiple backups in case
> something like this occurs. Also if you know that the other driver is
> at fault like in this case, then you should call the other driver's
> insurance and file a claim with them. This will be processed by the
> insurance headquarters so there is no way of the individual nor the
> agent will be able to push this under the carpet.
>
> If you get no where and can live with the car as is for the moment,
> you can take the driver to district court. Once it is reviewed by the
> judge you will most certainly win. Make sure you take pictures of the
> damages if you do decide to go to court.
>
> Good Luck

It was pointless, but for the reason that my own insurance company
said "clearly, you could not have caused this damage yourself," and
paid me the value of the car, plus that of all parts put in during the
past year, without deductible nor surcharge. I'd have liked to have
seen the liars who hit me get what was coming to them, but not enough
to waste more time on it.

I'm glad we don't have Geico in Mass, avoiding any temptation I may
have had to be insured through them.