• The driver contemplating suing the innocent child she hit admits that she had no insurance. I humbly recommend she spend the next few years on the high school speaking circuit talking about what happened and why having auto insurance is very important. She may find it cathartic.

    • What, no Obamacare?

  • It isn’t clear from the piece if she is saying that she didn’t have auto insurance or medical insurance as she is looking to see a therapist. Would therapists be covered under her auto coverage?

  • “Would therapists be covered under her auto coverage?”

    Med Pay coverage would cover it, if she could show that the injury was accident related. However, Med Pay is usually capped at $2K to $5K. In states with Personal Injury Protection (PIP), that would also be a potential source of funds. PIP is a no -fault coverage for the insured, and can cover med treatment, lost wages and other expenses. There is also, usually a limit on the amount which can be paid.

    I’m assuming that the parents were able to collect from their uninsured or underinsured motorist coverage for treatment of their child. If that’s the case, then the driver needs to be concerned about the UM or UIM insurer seeking to recover its subrogation claim against her. And, should she sue the parents (since the driver cannot sue the minor child without suing the parents), I’d expect a counter-claim by them on their own behalf and on behalf of their injured child.

    There’s some important jury sympathy issues here. If the driver sues first, then the parents and their insurer look a lot more sympathetic to a jury when they bring a counter-claim. But, if the parents’ insurer sues first, then the driver’s counter-claim looks like a defensive move, and more sympathetic. But, however you cut it, the driver injured a child — and the strongest sympathy will always be with the hurt kid.

    • The liability/fault here lies with the parent’s for negligence in the oversight of their child. The claim would be against the homeowner’s policy. Usually these policies have between 100,000-300,000 coverage in personal liability that would cover the negligence of the parents.

      If this is truly impacting the driver’s life as described, he should make the claim. That’s WHY the insurance policy carries liability coverage.

  • Not on topic, but I followed the link, which in turn linked to another letter “sex Ed” which highlights a harmful effect of sex offender registries as currently run:

    letter writer (lw), 8 years ago in high school, told her parents truthfully that her high school sister was romantically involved with a 22-year-old teacher. The parents looked into it and decided (like Bill Wyman’s mother-in-law), that the attachment was genuine and basically acceptable as long as they cooled it until her 18th birthday. They warned lw not to report it, but she did anyways. The teacher went to prison and married the girl when he got back out, but now he is on the sex offender registry, barred not just from teaching high school students (as he should be), but also from most other normal life. LW complains that the couple still hate her 8 years later and have cut her totally out of their life. The loss she has suffered stands as a deterrent to others considering reporting similar behavior. The dilemma could be avoided, however, if healing (and reconciliation) were made possible, specifically if sex offender registries were reviewed in a timely manner to cull those who are not a threat.