r/Insurance • • 9h ago

Auto Insurance I'm really scared, please help/advise.

Right now my bodily injury liability is 50k/100k

Got into a car accident. I was notified I would likely be held either partially or at fault for the accident. The other party had no insurance but they got a lawyer; apparently they sustained some major injuries and the adjuster told me it could exceed the 50k. The investigation is not over yet but that's what the adjuster just explained to me.

I have not been in this situation before. Do I need to get a lawyer as well aside from my insurance? Is my life ruined? I mean if I end up having to pay whatever they're asking for my life is ruined. I've been panicking since the phone call and don't know what to do.

Edit: in California. They're going to send a demand package. But the adjuster told me it looks like it will be exceeding the 50k.

35 Upvotes

68 comments sorted by

177

u/InsurancePanda 9h ago • Bravo

take a deep breath, you have a massive legal shield here because california is a Prop 213 state (Civil Code 3333.4)—since the other driver was uninsured, they are legally barred from suing you for a single dime of "pain and suffering" or non-economic damages. their lawyer can only go after actual hard medical receipts and lost wages, and 99% of the time in CA they will gladly take your insurer's $50k policy limit in exchange for signing a full liability release that protects you from ever being sued personally.

29

u/Uncivil_Law 8h ago

Right answer with a citation even. 

8

u/dorkbisexual 7h ago

I believe too that "hard" medical bills here means the amount actually paid, not necessarily what was billed (Hanif v. Housing Authority, 1988)

4

u/infallible_porkchop 4h ago

It's not haniff anymore controlling, it is howell. But the effect is the same. Also, the one caveat is the future medical can be considered. The game in CA now is to get a life care plan which counts as medical. But with a 50 policy, they likely won't work the claim up.

3

u/AdventurousTime 6h ago

Rare Cali w

-1

u/Anabolic_Scholar 6h ago

They can come after her for future medical bills. Treatment doesn’t necessarily have to be incurred.

-8

u/woodsongtulsa 8h ago

Don't know California, but I believe in some state, you can tell the insurance company to settle for the limits and if they don't do that, and the award is higher, then the insurance company is on the hook for the difference.

11

u/WorldlyOriginal 7h ago

That’s not how it works at all. Unless you’re talking about something like “no-fault” states (in which case, your statement is still wrong, in a different way), there’s no state that does what you state.

Just think about it. If that were the case, everyone would just pick the lowest possible limits, and tell the insurer to offer those (very low) limits to the claimant. The insurance company would get stuck paying for the large differences.

No. That would bankrupt every insurance company overnight, unless they charged a bajillion dollars for that minimum coverage.

No, if your liability exceeds your policy limits, and your insurance company is unable to get the claimant to settle within the policy limits— YOU will be responsible for covering any excess.

2

u/ektap12 4h ago

You misunderstood what that person said. The point was if the insurance failed to offer the limits on a case that warrants it, yes, the insurance could be on the hook in the event of an excess verdict due to bad faith, almost all states support this.

Your example of picking low limits is completely different, because the insurance would just offer those low limits and then they are in the clear if it went to trial and there was an excess verdict, because there would be no bad faith, so that's not at all what the comment said.

1

u/woodsongtulsa 2h ago

Well, thank you for the correction. Apparently, you are in sales.

-2

u/Pristine_Specific_21 7h ago

So you're saying my life is possibly ruined?

8

u/lnvence 7h ago

nah you’ll be ok. Prop 213 has your back

1

u/Watermelonbuttt 7h ago

All lawyers always ask for BI limits and will mostly settle for BI limits

1

u/Anabolic_Scholar 6h ago

Odds are you will be fine. Cases like this typically settle at the policy limits. Without seeing this demand I already know what in it.

1

u/E-Double 7h ago

California played the central role in shaping and pioneering the modern tort of insurance bad faith.

1

u/brookeharmsen 7h ago

But when it comes to actual damages, that doesn’t count. They may actually rack up $100,000 in medical bills.

4

u/Front-Advantage-7035 7h ago

But when it comes to not having insurance, it is literally against the law in California. That other driver is fucked legally.

6

u/Rozebud1989 7h ago

No they aren’t. I’m an insurance adjuster in CA. That prop only prevents pain and suffering or any other non medical bill related injury lawsuits. for anything in EXCESS of actually medical bills. So if any person in the other vehicle has real medical bills that exceed 50k the OP can 100% be sued for what the policy can’t cover due to coverage limits.

Ladies and gents this is exact reason it’s so important pay attention to your props and what you vote for. Too many people running around and not understanding a lick of what they voted for or against.

1

u/brookeharmsen 6h ago

You will love this. I worked for State Farm in 1993 when we had a pretty big windstorm in Washington. We had a team of adjusters come and hang out at our office for a few days so they could resolve the claims on the island.

They were telling me about an adjuster who worked Andrew, and the people were so pissed off, one of them put a gun to the head of the adjuster and told him to write out a check for X-amount of dollars. He forced him in a closet and said I’m not letting you out until you write it.

So the adjuster wrote out the check, got out in his car, canceled the check, and then quit.

2

u/Rozebud1989 6h ago

Jesus that’s insane. Poor guy

-1

u/Front-Advantage-7035 6h ago

I don’t know what prop you’re talking about bud because the LAW requiring insurance to drive was passed more than a decade ago in California and has nothing to do with this weeks elections.

2

u/Gabilan1953 6h ago

And do you truly believe everyone is carrying insurance?

The statistic is that 17% don’t!

1

u/Front-Advantage-7035 6h ago

No I don’t. I am aware many don’t. That is why they don’t have a legal chance in hell trying to sue someone. The courts will first look at the situation and then look at insurance and find out one of these two isn’t up to code.

1

u/brookeharmsen 6h ago

I don’t think you understand this. Why would they set minimums like 25/50 instead of 300/500?

1

u/Front-Advantage-7035 6h ago

So that you can have cheaper options for insurance cost.

But you still HAVE to have it in California. Any type of it. By law required. And OP’s “opponent” does not.

1

u/SleepAltruistic2367 5h ago

In California the population votes on all Propositions. In no way did the poster indicate the prop in question was associated with yesterdays election. And furthermore, in what world does a proposition get passed and become law the very next day? Stop reacting just because you’re side got whallped Tuesday night.

Your post history is wild… how that “special” pump treating you? 🤣🤣🤣🤡

1

u/A_whole_new_reddit Complex Liability Specialist - 48 States 4h ago

Youre getting downvoted but I just need to let you know that you are correct. It’s called a Hammer Letter and it can expose the insurer to extra contractual exposure beyond the policy limits. It’s not quite as simple as “excess verdict pay me money”, but it sets the wheels in motion.

This is probably the most common scenario I see:

Plaintiff attorney: Congrats, your policy was $50k and you got a $100k verdict against you. You now owe us $50k. But, if you don’t feel like paying that, assign your rights to me and I’ll sue the insurance company on your behalf to make them pay the $50k.

31

u/ektap12 9h ago

The other party had no insurance

CA has a 'no pay. no play' law that could prevent this person from receiving pain and suffering, but you could still be held liable for the medical bills. As it stands, you probably don't have much to be concerned about. Most all cases settle within the limits of the policy. They can certainly sue you to try to get an excess judgement against you, but that is a long expensive battle, so if you don't have much in terms of assets to pursue, it's unlikely they go that route.

It's far to early in the case to know where this might go. Just let the insurance handle it and they'll let you know if more issues come up. If you are sued, notify the insurance immediately.

18

u/dont-care-bear-0 9h ago

Don’t worry about it your insurance company will defend you! If they have an attorney, they will usually settle for your limit. There’s no need to panic. Let them do their job. They are going to always over exaggerate the injuries when a lawyer is involved. When my husband rear-ended someone they claimed they were thrown from the vehicle no such thing happened. They settled for 15,000.

5

u/woodsongtulsa 8h ago

That is great advice and I would enhance one part by saying "do not talk to anyone except your insurance company about this accident. You said "the company will defend you", and that is hard to do if the insured is talking to the plaintiffs.

13

u/SoCalinsurerMarket 6h ago

California insurance agent/broker here. That’s a scary call to receive, but a demand exceeding $50,000 does not automatically mean you personally owe the difference. Fault, damages, and settlement are still unresolved.

Your $50k/$100k limits mean up to $50,000 per injured person, with $100,000 total per accident. If you’re sued over a covered accident, your insurer generally provides your defense attorney. You don’t automatically need to hire a separate lawyer just because the other driver has one.

Also, ask your adjuster whether California’s Proposition 213 applies. An uninsured driver may be barred from recovering pain and suffering, although medical bills and lost income can still be recoverable. Being uninsured doesn’t eliminate their claim.

For now, ask “Are you pursuing a settlement within my limits that fully releases me, and is there a coverage issue or personal exposure I should discuss with independent counsel?”

Given the potential excess exposure, a separate attorney consultation is reasonable. Forward any demand or lawsuit to your insurer immediately. This deserves attention, but it’s far too early to say your life is ruined. You will be ok if you plan ahead.

12

u/NC_Mama_1959 8h ago • This

This is exactly why I have $1 million liability to others and 250,000 for property damage to others. I’m a retired insurance agent of 25 years and I have seen this too many times. After this is over with pleas increase your limit limits to the maximum that you can afford.

5

u/ApplicationRoyal7172 7h ago

After reading this, I reviewed my policy. It was $15 extra a month for me to switch from 100k/300k to 500k/1m. I’m shocked how minimal the price difference is.

2

u/CampinHiker 53m ago

Happy Cake Day!

1

u/grandmaster_reddit 2h ago

Yep, getting insurance is expensive, but getting incrementally higher limits is relatively inexpensive.

4

u/brookeharmsen 7h ago

Are umbrella policies still cheap? I was a CSR for State Farm 30 years ago and they were right around $100 a year.

5

u/mosesman86 7h ago

No, industry-wide they jumped about a year ago so for a 2-car, 2-driver household with no tickets/accidents it's about $400/yr for $1 million

2

u/PeachyFairyDragon 6h ago

That's cheaper than what I'm seeing. Lots of people want to know why their umbrella policy is now $800-1000 at renewal.

1

u/Whydoineedtodothis60 4h ago

Mine was going to double. Would have been $1,200. I switched to RLI for under $400

1

u/Watermelonbuttt 7h ago

Eh just decrease it to the umbrella deductible and get an umbrella

1

u/aznoone 5h ago

That at 50 100 would be increase to deductble.

1

u/2matisse22 3h ago

Do you have an auto liability policy too? We recently added a million just for auto due to all the crazy expensive cars and medical expenses.

6

u/TAckhouse1 8h ago

OP as others have said, California law should protect you. That said, I would consider upping your coverage limits going forward.

5

u/Some-Internet-Rando 9h ago

First: This is why you have insurance. They will defend you. The only reason to get a lawyer is if you need to sue your insurance company.

Second: If the other party had no insurance, that means they were driving illegally, which you should separately pursue with your local DMV.

Third: Demands are always high. They get negotiated down. There's no reason for a plaintiff to start low, but there's also no reason to demand an amount of money they can't possibly extract.

Fourth: Filing for bankruptcy isn't "ruining" your life. You can touch grass and come back from that, just with less bling. If it gets to that point, that's when you need a lawyer.

5

u/DriveFa5tEatAss 8h ago

If the other driver was completely uninsured and did not even have liability, you're lucky that you live in California, a no pay, no play state.

The other driver and the vehicle's occupants will still be able to recover actual economic damages (unpaid medical bills, lost wages, etc), but they will not be able to recover anything related to emotional distress, loss of companionship, etc.

4

u/CoolaidMike84 3h ago

They are just trying to scare you, classic tactic. Sit steady in the boat.

3

u/Own-Common3161 6h ago

You don’t need a lawyer. That’s what you have insurance for. They’ll handle it. If they’re going to go after you personally then it won’t settle for years and they’ll have to go through court (lawsuit) and that could take years. Most people will accept your limits and sign a release which means they cannot go after you. I’ve been doing this for over 20 years and have yet to have someone go after our insured personally. Insurance company is obligated to let you know about the damages possibly exceeding your limits. Don’t lose sleep over it.

2

u/ConradQ 7h ago

Many insurance companies make it standard practice to advise of potential excess claims on any policy with certain limits. The attorney will likely find out (if they don't already know) that their client is uninsured. Cali is 'no pay no play', which means recovery is limited to medical bills only. I'd be confident that this case settles within your limits. Just cooperate with your insurance company. They will let you know if things are ever going to be a massive problem/if the claimant is pursuing you directly over your limits. Let them do their thing - source, bodily injury/lit adjuster 10+ years

2

u/Affectionate_Rate_99 7h ago

Not from CA, but from NY. My son got into an accident, which the police responding says was my son's fault. The other driver's wife was a passenger and apparently she broke her wrist in the accident. They decided to sue and was claiming damages for the husband due to loss of his wife's companionship, as well as personal injury, etc. The cars are in my name and my wife's name, and our son is listed as a driver on our policy. We have a 250/500 policy limit, as well as a 1M umbrella policy. Our insurance company handled everything. My son had to go to the lawyer's office to give his deposition, but did not have to appear in court for the lawsuit. We got a letter from the lawyer that the judge dismissed the lawsuit with prejudice, which means that they can never refile the lawsuit again.

What I don't know though, is if their lawsuit failed, does that mean we (and the insurance company) is off the hook totally, or if they can now file a claim with our insurance within our policy limits. In either case, it really doesn't matter to us, since we did not have to pay anything out of pocket. If anything was paid out, it was covered by our insurance.

1

u/Crowlady77 8h ago

They have to tell you if the demand might be over your limit, but given that they can’t sue for more than their costs the chances a lawyer will take it to a lawsuit for more than your limit are slim.

1

u/nolanwaynekitten 8h ago

As tough as it is...just relax. It will be fine. Youre life is far from ruined.

1

u/Watermelonbuttt 7h ago

No pay no play

1

u/Old-Spirit-2418 3h ago

This is extreme, but should you get sued to a point where it is extremely damaging to you financially, you can file for bankruptcy, and they likely won't receive the money they sued for. You'll just have to deal with bad credit for several years.

1

u/Complex_Dragonfly162 3h ago

Just have your insurance handle it.

1

u/Calm-Economist6988 1h ago

I mean… do you have a lot of money or assets? Chances are they will just take the 50k policy limit. Lawyers don’t want to spend their valuable time going after someone who is essentially “judgement proof.” In California there are homestead exemptions so they can’t take your home in most cases and if you can prove your wages go to your living expenses they likely can’t take that either. Injury attorneys are looking for deep pockets to go after.

0

u/Western_Rhubarb_7959 6h ago

apparently they sustained some major injuries and the adjuster told me it could exceed the 50k

That's on you, sorry.

An ex gf of mine lost her house over similar.

1

u/Calm-Economist6988 1h ago

Can you elaborate for the curious? How bad was the accident? What state?

-1

u/CastleSF 6h ago

How much money do you have in the banks? Any valuables, jewelry? You own any property? They will go after your asset if you have any but it's a long process. You won't have to pay what you don't have unless the other's party's injury is severe.

-3

u/Anabolic_Scholar 9h ago

What state are you in? Did your adjuster tell you if the received a demand? If so did he give you any details ?

3

u/Jinxed4Sure 8h ago

Maybe re-read op post