chaikwa

In like sticking 30-35k # in trucks that aren't supposed to have that much in them to begin with?

And jury's.

There's a statement I'd want in writing from the insurance agent before I'd feel all warm and fuzzy about it. I betcha they won't give it to you.

I'm done too loch. I'm in agreement with you 150%, but some people see only what they want to see. Others CAN'T see anything but what they want to because they haven't seen enough of life yet. Still others are not capable of it in the first place, and unfortunately, these are the people that make the existence of the DOT a necessity.

chaikwa.

keith1992

The truck is non CDL so the whole thing (load + truck) ain't supposed to weigh more than 26,400 otherwise you are in CDL/commercial territory. I dont know what the curb weight on the truck is, but it don't matter cause just the cargo is more than the whole truck is supposed to weigh.

Hey, when I haul scrap to the mill, I get paid by the ton. More tons = more money. If I put only the 10K load in there that I was supposed to, I would break even. So I am gonna cram as much in as I possibly can. Anything else is a waste of fuel and a needless cut into my profit margin.

GAmes

If you had read post #19 you would know that I read my policy. I didn't say hitting ice was a crime, but you could be cited for failure to control your vehicle. You said that if you violate ANY LAW your policy coverage is waived. You are a complete idiot to pay premiums on a policy like that, if it is true. But I doubt it, the whole purpose of collision coverage is to pay for a drivers mistake that causes a wreck.

By the way it is you're, a contraction of you are, not your.

SWC

I try to stay away from heated discussions as I personally don't discuss things rationally when I get too fired up. Since I brought this up and some of those posting to this thread feel I am naive when I take my agent at his word, I must clarify my statement about the discussion that I related with the insurance agency I deal with.
I am not a person who lives in denial of the facts of life. When I ask my insurance agent if I am covered in the way I stated in the previous post and I get the response that I would not be dropped like a hot potato and he has not heard of any such incidents, I believe him. Why? Because I know this individual personally and the others in this agency and IF they knew or suspected differently they would say so.
Sorry to have stirred up this hornets nest about insurance and the your distrust in your money grubbing insurance companies.
Now I will go back to my warm fuzzy place in my snow bank where it is -20 Celsius and snowing and try to feel "warm and fuzzy".
Stan

keith1992

No, what you described (blindly taking the word of an insurance salesman just because you "personally" "know" him) is just being a sucker. Wait until you have a claim. They all have a good laugh at your expense. Your insurance agent don't have any say in whether the claim gets paid for not. Could be the most honest guy in the world with the best intentions in the world. That and a buck might get you a cup of coffee.

loch

One more post.

Coverage under this Part I, i including our duty to defend, will not apply to any insured person for: bodily injury or property damage caused by, or reasonably expected to result
from, a criminal act or omission of that insured person. . This exclusion applies regardless of whether that insured person i is actually charged with, or convicted of, a crime. for purposes of this exclusion, criminal acts or omissions do not include traffic violations."

But DOT regs clearly state if an unsafe vehicle is clearly responsible for a death or injury, it IS A CRIME not a traffic violation.

All insurance providers have adopted the ammendment. They would simply be stupid if they hadnt, its a loop hole they can activly use, and they do.

Now if you request a policy bylaw from your ins. provider you will find this part1 or one that states the same thing.

PS I bet your agent wont volunteer that information either. I was an agent for Allstate for 4 years, I didnt grab this out of thin air.

Virginia Diesel

My Dodge 3500 pulls my 36 foot Crossroads Paradise Pointe down the road like it's not there. A great combo.

GAmes

Go for 2.

Which DOT reg would that be and who determines if it is unsafe?

loch

Criminal act and Criminal intent: part 2-7-4

All crimes involve a forbidden act or a forbidden refusal to act. Drunk driving is an example othe former<failure to file an income tax return is an example of the latter. The law requires most crimes to have an additional element (criminal intent). But some crimes do not require criminal intent--it is enough that the prohibited act occured. An example of the latter is negligent homicide.A driver who maintains a speed of 37 mph on a rain slicked highway might be well under the posted speed limit and yet be driving negligently fast for the road conditions. there is no criminal intent in the drivers mind, because he fails to recognize the risk inherent in his speed under those conditions. However, he would be criminally culpable for any death or injury that his misjudgement causes.

Now go read a book. Im done with you.

raymond21

Jury still out on this one, however the initial accident was not the 5ers fault. Most likely he is within his legal weight limits, F-350 w/ 30 footer. Still an example of the destruction a heavy "pick-up" can cause.

keith1992

Agreed. But just because the vehicle was overloaded does not mean it is unsafe or that it caused the accident. A good attorney can address this issue properly. For instance, just because you are speeding does NOT mean that you caused the accident.

I T-boned a guy going about 45 MPH in a 20 zone on a paper route when I was in high school as he pulled out of the only 24 hour diner in town. I was arrested for reckless driving and his insurance tried to refuse to pay for my damages, saying that the accident resulted from a criminal act (reckless driving was a criminal charge in that state). It went to court and his insurance (it was All State, as a matter of fact) still had to pay because a whole restaurant full of witnesses saw him pull out into the roadway without even slowing at the end of the driveway. I clearly had the right of way, the fact that I was driving more than double the speed limit was irrelevant. I had the right of way even if I was driving 200 MPH. The reckless driving charge fell apart when the lawsuit was won due to the testimony of the witnesses and I ended up taking a deal that resulted in dismissal of reckless driving and instead a guilty plea to excessive speed, 25 MPH over the limit or more, which carried a nasty fine but that paled in comparison to what it would have done to my insurance.

GAmes

Wow, that sure sounds official. Doesn't come up with a google though.

Valv

The State DOT inspector called on the scene to investigate.
Any Commercial Vehicle Enforcement agent is also and inspector and they are called on accident scenes to investigate.

sodbuster03

Another reason not to buy a little car. Just proves that in the event of an accident."ye with the most lug nuts wins". Exactly why these are the vehicles I own 01 2500 dodge, 03 yukonxl, 04 H2, 91 suburban. No lunch boxes for me or my family.

sodbuster03

What about when the 19yr old volunteer firefighter crashes the half full tanker into you, because the idiot didn't slow down for a curve & got sloshed over into you. Needless to say he lost in that wreck, because he crashed into my trailer with the 200 komatsu hoe on it. It's real funny how many vol firefighters around here crash the firetrucks. Just something I've noticed lately.