Sadly, my 2013 1LE got hit today.

[CrystalRedTintcoat]

Big bummer. Yeah, don't sign anything.

[Mannsiam]

Heuy look at it like this cars are replaceable. As long a your OK you can get a new one.

[Novie LE]

Originally Posted by Mannsiam

Heuy look at it like this cars are replaceable. As long a your OK you can get a new one.

+1, not sure when the accident occured, but give it a couple days to a week to make sure YOU are ok and thinking clearly. Good luck.

[Mannsiam]

Originally Posted by Indydriver

My son is a PI attorney. You need to talk to one. Even if you aren't physically injured (and understand that it is too early to tell for sure), you are already suffering from the mental anguish of having your dream car destroyed and nearly being killed. At the very least, this Toyota driver's insurance company should be happy to put you in the new car of your choosing.

Here is how I look at it. If he has insurance they will pay for the car, if not then go after him. If you have just minor injuries and his insurance is paying for everything then go with it. Accidents are calle dthat because thats what they are. I am so tired of hearing people claim or want to sue people just because or come up with stupid reasons to sue. Its like claiming disability for a bogus injury just because you dont want to work. Just because you were involved in an accident doesnt mean you have to sue. But like I always told my soldies do what your concious lets you do.

[javi05]

SORRY TO HEAR THAT!!! same type of thing happened to me on my 2011 camaro convert.. good luck.

[B-_-RAD]

Probably totalled. Looks like you took a solid hit, I personally wouldn't want it fixed. Glad to hear you're ok!

[Indydriver]

Originally Posted by Mannsiam

Here is how I look at it. If he has insurance they will pay for the car, if not then go after him. If you have just minor injuries and his insurance is paying for everything then go with it. Accidents are calle dthat because thats what they are. I am so tired of hearing people claim or want to sue people just because or come up with stupid reasons to sue. Its like claiming disability for a bogus injury just because you dont want to work. Just because you were involved in an accident doesnt mean you have to sue. But like I always told my soldies do what your concious lets you do.

Here's how I look at it: will the victim be made whole without legal pressure? If the OP gets "replacement value" for his car, he is not made whole in my opinion. And I would hardly call his circumstances a "stupid reason to sue". I dislike frivolous lawsuits as much as the next guy but, seeing what my son does has made me appreciate the role of a good attorney when you need one because otherwise, it's easy for a lay person to get steamrolled by the pros on the other side. You can bet the opposition has legal counsel backing them up.

[DaemonGPF]

One of my engineers just went through a VERY similar situation with his SRT-8 Challenger. Distracted driver plowed through an intersection and took the front of his car clean off. It was weeks old at the time. His dream car. Hunted it for months. Insurance repaired it and he's had issues since. The value is obviously depleted. So now he's talking to a lawyer. I'd to the same in your shoes. It's a high performance car and now you'll always question if you can take it to the edge or not.

[Indydriver]

Originally Posted by DaemonGPF

One of my engineers just went through a VERY similar situation with his SRT-8 Challenger. Distracted driver plowed through an intersection and took the front of his car clean off. It was weeks old at the time. His dream car. Hunted it for months. Insurance repaired it and he's had issues since. The value is obviously depleted. So now he's talking to a lawyer. I'd to the same in your shoes. It's a high performance car and now you'll always question if you can take it to the edge or not.

Exactly. The victim needs to AT LEAST be made whole. Your engineer obviously was not.

[DaemonGPF]

That, or at least the ability to get out of said vehicle without having to shell out cash from pocket to make it happen. Just repairing such a vehicle does not make this necessarily feasible. If it's devalued beyond where it was prior to the crash, the offender or their insurance company should at least rectify that difference.

[1LE Captain]

Glad you aren't hurt. Seems the car did well considering the speed.

Push for a total. The car will never be the same. Never.

[jrhagen]

It wasn't an accident. Accidents are unavoidable. This was absolutely avoidable had the other driver been doing their job and paying attention.

Call this what it was: a wreck or collision.

Hang this driver out to dry in my book.

Originally Posted by Mannsiam

Here is how I look at it. If he has insurance they will pay for the car, if not then go after him. If you have just minor injuries and his insurance is paying for everything then go with it. Accidents are calle dthat because thats what they are. I am so tired of hearing people claim or want to sue people just because or come up with stupid reasons to sue. Its like claiming disability for a bogus injury just because you dont want to work. Just because you were involved in an accident doesnt mean you have to sue. But like I always told my soldies do what your concious lets you do.

[Dropspeed]

These threads make my stomach turn as I know how upset I would be. Distracted driving on the part of the van running the red light is not an accident....It is avoidable.

There appear to be lots of internet attorneys on here. Florida is a No-Fault state. Unfortunately the OPs auto insurance is what his car is covered by, not the other drivers. If he is injured....feel free to read below:



Contained within the No Fault Law is Florida’s Permanent Injury Threshold. Florida Statute 627.737 states,

In any action of tort brought against the owner, registrant, operator, or occupant of a motor vehicle with respect to which security has been provided as required by ss. 627.730-627.7405, or against any person or organization legally responsible for her or his acts or omissions, a plaintiff may recover damages in tort for pain, suffering, mental anguish, and inconvenience because of bodily injury, sickness, or disease arising out of the ownership, maintenance, operation, or use of such motor vehicle only in the event that the injury or disease consists in whole or in part of:

(a) Significant and permanent loss of an important bodily function.
(b) Permanent injury within a reasonable degree of medical probability, other than scarring or disfigurement.
(c) Significant and permanent scarring or disfigurement.
(d) Death.

The essence of the Permanent Injury Threshold, as stated in Florida Statute 627.737, is that a person injured in an automobile accident that is receiving Personal Injury Protection Benefits to pay medical expenses cannot recover for Pain and Suffering (either Past or Future) unless and until it is determined that the person involved in the automobile accident sustained a Permanent Injury. It is quite often overlooked by attorneys and insurance adjusters that this Permanent Injury Threshold does not apply to all car accident cases. There are several types of vehicles that are exempt from any requirement to have Personal Injury Protection insurance. Two examples are Taxi Cabs and Public Mass Transit Vehicles. In many situations, passengers or operators of these types of vehicles do no have to their avail Personal Injury Protection Insurance and, as a consequence, are not subject to the Permanent Injury Threshold. This means that if somebody is injured in an accident in these types of vehicles, they may automatically be entitled to Past Pain and Suffering Damages regardless of proving a permanent injury. The person may also be entitled to a Future Pain and Suffering Award if a permanent injury is suffered.
The difference in a case when an injured person is not subject to the Permanent Injury Threshold is the award of Past Pain and Suffering Damages regardless of any Permanent Injury. When somebody is subject to the Permanent Injury Threshold, these damages are not available unless the injured person establishes a Permanent Injury as described in Florida Statute 627.737. For some cases addressing these topics please see Utvich v Felizola, 742 So.2d847 (Fla 3d DCA 1999) and Watson v. Prudential Property & Cas. Ins. Co., 696 So.2d 394 (Fla. 3d DCA 1997).

[bluBlud]

Originally Posted by Mannsiam

Heuy look at it like this cars are replaceable. As long a your OK you can get a new one.

Walking away from an accident is certainly way more important than the car, but the '13s aren't exactly replacable if you're not a fan of the refresh.

I don't have much sympathy for the other driver if they were on the phone or something. My whole family was 3 seconds away from getting t-boned by a guy who ran a light at about the same speed. I could CLEARLY see he was too busy texting... didn't even slow down.