Getting sued over car accident
 

So two years ago I was in a car accident. My adjustor told me that the other person was at fault and liable and I was paid out for my missed work and any physio I took. He also told me that case was closed and if I had any injuries later on related to the accident there was nothing I could do because it was closed. Now today I recieved a letter in the mail stating that I am being sued about the accident.

Now my question, is can the other party sue me? It's been almost two years and the case is closed to my understanding. This isn't a letter from a legal office or a lawyer, it's a letter from ICBC.

Can he sue me? cuz this is fucking ridiculous.:2finger::banghead:

If ICBC is suing you they are probably thinking your missed work payout was not justified or something.....Not the other party. If the other party sues you I think there will be a lawyer's letter instead.

GL.

You can sue for anything. It doesn't mean you'll win, though.

Just got off the phone with my adjuster, he said that it could be any passengers that were injured in the car accident. There was one guy, in the other guys car who had his head go through the window cuz he didn't have his seatbelt on. Might be him who's sueing me which is dumb cuz he wasn't wearing seatbelt.

Getting sued over an accident that you weren't even at fault?? :eek:

the judge will most likely dismiss the case if the evidence isnt strong enough

IIRC, they have to name all parties related to the incident, regardless of fault etc so that they can get you to testify or some shit.

he should be suing the driver of the car he was in.

Yes that is what he said. Pretty stupid tho.

I know. It's such a waste of time it's ridiculous.

That's what I figured too.

so did you give the letter over to your adjuster at ICBC to let them take care of it?

Gonna fax it over to him later today. Don't have a fax machine at home.

Explain the accident, what happened. How is he at fault?

if it goes to court and he loses sue him for wasted time and money you spent on it hah

this whole thing sounds like a waste of time... too bad you couldn't just skip it like math class at 8 am

I was heading east bound on Broadway around 2:30 am. I ran a yellow because I couldn't stop and the guy who was going south bound on Main ran a SOLID red light and I T-boned his car. My car spun onto the other side of the road and his car got pushed a couple lanes over. He had three passengers and I had my ex-gf with me. His passenger in the back seat smashed his head into the window. His face was pretty bloody and the two in the front seats were okay.

LOL I can't sue for wasted time? And I don't have to spend a single dime on this because I'm covered from ICBC, unless apparently he wins and the amount is more than my coverage. I doubt that's the case because he'd have to be sueing for over 2 milll.

lol reminds me of grade 12 lol skipping first block everyday. it's such a waste of time and a big headache.

If ICBC deemed you not at fault and closed the case, you should have no problem. ICBC will go to bat for you.

that's what insurance is for.

curious though, did they name you specifically as the defendent or in conjunction with ICBC?

I have been named as the Defendant.

That's how it works, if someone sues after the fact, they sue everybody and they try to re-open the case to prove you were at least partially at fault so that if that does happen they have someone else to get money from.

I was in an accident nearly 2 years ago too... and the other driver was found 100% at fault... now just recently I got a letter saying he is sueing me because he couldn't claim for all these injuries (ridiculous things, he says the accident made him gain weight and letter also says the brakes on my car were faulty and I may have been drunk or on drugs at time of accident) so he is trying in desperation to get me held at least partly responsible so he can make a claim against ICBC (and, subsequently, against my comprehensive) for a payout.

It's just people trying to milk the cow. So long as ICBC maintains you're not at fault, they will get shit from you... and they will sic their lawyers on the guy like crazy because they don't want to pay out.

I got the samething for an accident I was involved in about a dozen years ago, I think it's fairly standard. I didn't have to do anything ICBC took care of it but I was served the papers non the less. Thats why you pay insurance don't worry about it.

same thing happened to my sister. she talked to ICBC and they handled it. i'm sure the guy that's trying to sue you will have a fun time dealing with ICBC lawyers :thumbsup:

how the fuck can u get sued when u aint even at fault??

somebody explain

fucking lame

if you're getting ICBC to handle this, watch what you're signing. ICBC's a BITCH when it comes to papers.
but if you're not at fault, hell go along with it because judge most likely dismiss the case.
and as stated above, the person should be sue-ing the driver(his friend) because he was at fault not you.
GL

My friend just got a letter from a law firm stating that she is being sued for a car accident happened in 2010. ICBC deemed that my friend is at 20% fault for the accident. Since there is a 20% fault, what is the implications? My friend is very worried so any experience or advises that can help are appriecated.

What ICBC does for their investigation to determine who's at fault is not always as in-depth as what might be done in a court case.

Sort of like a criminal vs civil trial. A person could be found not-guilty of a crime in a criminal trial, but could still be held financially responsible in a civiil trial. This is because the standards for a criminal trial are higher than a civil trial.

How many times have we heard of people get into an accident and the consensus is the other party should be at fault, but ICBC still puts it at 50:50 (or some other split)? Unless there's a lot of money involved (serious accident, significant injuries or death), ICBC is not going to do an expensive investigation to determine exactly who the fault lies with. So they make an educated guess.

The person suing is probably betting that ICBC might have made a mistake in assigning blame 100% on the other party and is going to go to court to see if they can get some extra cash.

And people wonder why our premiums are so high - it's assholes who think getting in an accident is like winning the lottery.

She has to go see a lawyer. Don't screw around with this and think you can get advice from friends or online. Spend the $500 to sit down with a lawyer and have them go over things with you.

Is she properly insured? ICBC would be the one paying out any money from a decision, so ICBC would be going to bat for you in court. If she's not properly insured, then she has good reason to worry.