My RX-7 got hit-and-run: the final chapter!
Good to see some closure on this.
Most everything has been said. Although I don't entirely agree on how Wompa got around to getting it taken care of, I think the extra $3500 he received is deserved. I totally agree with Jumbogumbp with the additional payout for the emotional stress and future raises in insurance. That stuff just eats at you and eats at you.
I certainly hope the kid is paying for his mistakes in one way or another to his dad. I totally agree that his dad sounds cool as hell. I don't have any kids, but I'd probably do the same thing if my son did this, he'd certainly pay me back with interest though. My hopes are that the money wasn't needed for something important. Although, not too many guys can just write a check for $3500. I hope his dad pulled away in a Benz only with a slight dent in his checking account.
Of course hindsight is 20/20, the best thing Wompa could have done is go to his insurance company, as Super77 said. But who knows how that would have panned out? You don't exactly have a broad overview of everything when it happens to you.
FYI, I've been hit and run twice with no resolution, just money out of pocket. I even had the license plate of one of them as he tore off and almost ran over one of my friends, long story, but the Police didn't do **** either, which is very disconcerting.
Most everything has been said. Although I don't entirely agree on how Wompa got around to getting it taken care of, I think the extra $3500 he received is deserved. I totally agree with Jumbogumbp with the additional payout for the emotional stress and future raises in insurance. That stuff just eats at you and eats at you.
I certainly hope the kid is paying for his mistakes in one way or another to his dad. I totally agree that his dad sounds cool as hell. I don't have any kids, but I'd probably do the same thing if my son did this, he'd certainly pay me back with interest though. My hopes are that the money wasn't needed for something important. Although, not too many guys can just write a check for $3500. I hope his dad pulled away in a Benz only with a slight dent in his checking account.
Of course hindsight is 20/20, the best thing Wompa could have done is go to his insurance company, as Super77 said. But who knows how that would have panned out? You don't exactly have a broad overview of everything when it happens to you.
FYI, I've been hit and run twice with no resolution, just money out of pocket. I even had the license plate of one of them as he tore off and almost ran over one of my friends, long story, but the Police didn't do **** either, which is very disconcerting.
It was simply an out of court settlement minus lawyer's fees. The OP would have been within his rights to file a civil suit. None of the evidence (photographs, witnesses who saw the truck reverse into the car - twice I think - or the police report) were fabricated. The police made the mistakes on their own. There is a strong possibility that he could have won a civil suit with punitive damages and the father knew that. So he paid to make the problem go away. Very likely if this had gone through the courts and the guy had been fined, his father would have paid the court fees and fines for him.
junkyard turbo
Joined: Nov 2005
Posts: 302
Likes: 0
From: south bend indiana
its insurance fraud now kid, unless you paid whatever your insurance paid to fix the car back to them (yea right)
i am an insurance agent, and trust me... this is fraud. i thought the story was cool and was waiting for the ending cause i thought something clever was coming.., but you just fucked it all up by admitting to high misdemeanor, possibly low felony depending on your state laws
dumbfuck
i am an insurance agent, and trust me... this is fraud. i thought the story was cool and was waiting for the ending cause i thought something clever was coming.., but you just fucked it all up by admitting to high misdemeanor, possibly low felony depending on your state laws
dumbfuck
Oh who gives a ****, go preach that "Its fraud" **** somewhere else. He could have taken that guy to civil court and he would have got every penny of what he got from insurance through a legal court of law and STILL NOT been required to pay a ******* dime back to the insurance company. He pays premiums for a reason folks. Its up to the inurance company to take legal action against the responsable party for their compensation. So many holier than thou saints willing to point the finger at someone and tell them how wrong they are as if their own **** dont stink, if and when they were in the same situation you better believe they would want some compensation. So basically you folks are saying that out of any and every accident you've had and ended up with a little cash left over from repairs that you then called up your insurance broker and said "Oh hey, I have 300 dollars left from repairs I would like to give this back to you" BULLSHIT!
Not saying thats what I would have done in the same situation, not at all. I would go through a legal court system but hey I dont feel any sympathy towards the guilty party/s (not that its even my place to). People pay insurance companies their whole lives and never collect a cent, never get a dollar, not one single greenback for any repair, injury, or accidnet of any kind. We buy CEO's Million dollar homes, pay their 6 figure salaries, and buy them Lobster dinners every night while alot of us live in poverty. Thats what I call stealing, only its perfectly legal.
Not saying thats what I would have done in the same situation, not at all. I would go through a legal court system but hey I dont feel any sympathy towards the guilty party/s (not that its even my place to). People pay insurance companies their whole lives and never collect a cent, never get a dollar, not one single greenback for any repair, injury, or accidnet of any kind. We buy CEO's Million dollar homes, pay their 6 figure salaries, and buy them Lobster dinners every night while alot of us live in poverty. Thats what I call stealing, only its perfectly legal.
Former Rotorhead
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 1,926
Likes: 0
From: Midland, MI
he would have got every penny of what he got from insurance through a legal court of law and STILL NOT been required to pay a ******* dime back to the insurance company.
That didnt even make any sense or have anything to do with this topic. Do you even know the whole story? I doubt there is any stereotype on this subject. There is nothing wrong with what he did, he was payed for the damage that was caused to him. Good job, well played.
I think that your should repay the Insurance company what they paid out for repairs, if there is $ left after repaying them, that should be yours, then you would be immune from prosecution. IMHO.
if you dont do this you are liable to be prosecuted by the Insurance Company should they uncover what occurred.
Steve
if you dont do this you are liable to be prosecuted by the Insurance Company should they uncover what occurred.
Steve
Screw the insurance company just as they so often screw the honest consumer when the cards are in their favor. He'll be paying a higher rate due to the scum bag that hit him and ran. Just watch, he has another incident that is in no way his fault and they'll want to drop his coverage.
This is just compensation for pain and suffering. He tried to got he legal route and the authorities wouldn't do **** for him.
Jack
This is just compensation for pain and suffering. He tried to got he legal route and the authorities wouldn't do **** for him.
Jack
Edit: You honestly cared so much about this you had a discussion with your dad and had him log onto this website to read the entirety of the thread(s) just to give you his opinion so you could disagree with one person?
toeachisown
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 223
Likes: 0
From: glen burnie, md
I just know that if i was that guys father, i would make my son pay me every dollar that i wrote on that check.. and i'm sure his father has plenty of money being that wompa, himself, was able to go to the father, regardless of the evidence provided, and walk away with 5k$. i think anyone who didn't have money like that would have put up some sort of fight or arguement at least before subjecting to the loss of 5k$ that very moment... i wonder if that check was ever cancelled 
Rotary Enthusiast
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 1,079
Likes: 0
From: Jefferson, OR
Nah, that's some shady ****. I wouldn't be online bragging about how you scammed (and you did) his father into giving you money for something that was already taken care of through insurance. Your beef was with your "friend" and his "friend"...not this guy's Dad. I just hope he's making his son pay him back. I might consider deleting this thread if I were you...you basically just admitted on a public forum that you lied and fraudulently received a large sum of money...you are potentially looking at serious time if anyone in law enforcement saw this and decided to turn you in. You've already provided pictures of your license plate, clear as day...
Rotary Enthusiast
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 1,079
Likes: 0
From: Jefferson, OR
Actually your dad is wrong. In court the money obtained out of court would be ruled a civil damages settlement. A settlement can be for any amount of money, and there is no evidence that any amount of it was directed at repairing the car. The money changed hands to settle legal issues and as reparation for damages to his insurance record since they covered the repairs. It would be insurance fraud if A) He did it on purpose or B) He collected the insurance money AFTER he collected the money from the father. All that is needed is for him to state the money was to prevent any civil litigation and it's suddenly free and clear.
they pay to blumpkin me
Joined: May 2007
Posts: 372
Likes: 0
From: VA Beach, VA
Actually your dad is wrong. In court the money obtained out of court would be ruled a civil damages settlement. A settlement can be for any amount of money, and there is no evidence that any amount of it was directed at repairing the car. The money changed hands to settle legal issues and as reparation for damages to his insurance record since they covered the repairs. It would be insurance fraud if A) He did it on purpose or B) He collected the insurance money AFTER he collected the money from the father. All that is needed is for him to state the money was to prevent any civil litigation and it's suddenly free and clear.
Former Rotorhead
Joined: May 2002
Posts: 1,926
Likes: 0
From: Midland, MI
See, I would totally agree IF he had not told the guy that the $3500 for repairs was an out-of-pocket expense. The way I see it, the guy wrote a check with the belief that Wompa had to pay $3500 of his own money to fix his car after his son damaged it. He paid for the repairs, AND THEN added another $1500 on top of it to take care of any bad feelings or to keep it out of court. The $1500 was the out-of-court settlement...the $3500 was given under the false belief that Wompa had to pay that amount using his own money, when that wasn't the case. Wompa lied to the father, saying that the repairs were paid for out of pocket (not that they were paid for by the insurance company) and that, I believe, is dishonest.
And yes, if the insurance company found out that he had gone to the father and was paid FOR THE REPAIRS again, they would turn around and demand their money back.
To think of it another way, how would this father explain the breakdown of the money in a court? Would he say, "well, I paid him for the repairs to his car plus some extra because I felt bad", or would he say "I paid him $5000 to keep this out of court"? From the way the story was told, I would think it would be closer to the first...I could be wrong, this is only one side of the story. However, just based on what he said IN the story
LIE
Another quote to show that he knew that he had lied...calling the guy a "sucker" and admitting he lied about the repair being out-of-pocket expense.
I'm sorry, but given THAT evidence no court in America would see that as a 100% legit "out of court settlement"
And yes, if the insurance company found out that he had gone to the father and was paid FOR THE REPAIRS again, they would turn around and demand their money back.
To think of it another way, how would this father explain the breakdown of the money in a court? Would he say, "well, I paid him for the repairs to his car plus some extra because I felt bad", or would he say "I paid him $5000 to keep this out of court"? From the way the story was told, I would think it would be closer to the first...I could be wrong, this is only one side of the story. However, just based on what he said IN the story
"$3500 is what it cost me out of pocket to repair my car to satisfaction after your son vandalized my car."
"Haha, sucker.." I said under my breath as I walked slowly towards my once-again beautiful FD sitting by itself in the parking lot, admiring the brand new authentic OEM '99-spec front bumper and turn lamps that his dad just paid for.
"Too bad insurance already paid for the whole thing, *******.." were the last words to escape my mouth before all the noise in the cabin was drowned out by the sound of my turbochargers spooling up as I hit full boost.
"Too bad insurance already paid for the whole thing, *******.." were the last words to escape my mouth before all the noise in the cabin was drowned out by the sound of my turbochargers spooling up as I hit full boost.
I'm sorry, but given THAT evidence no court in America would see that as a 100% legit "out of court settlement"
He who smokes bitches
Joined: Jun 2005
Posts: 3,452
Likes: 0
From: El Dorado County
**** happens, life isn't fair.
Wompa got fucked when his car was vandalized.
Wompa got fucked again when the police couldn't find the guy who did it, despite knowing exactly who it was due to evidence and whitenesses.
Father got fucked for having a dumb *** irresponsible son.
Wompa wins.
Wompa got fucked when his car was vandalized.
Wompa got fucked again when the police couldn't find the guy who did it, despite knowing exactly who it was due to evidence and whitenesses.
Father got fucked for having a dumb *** irresponsible son.
Wompa wins.
Rotary Enthusiast
Joined: Apr 2005
Posts: 1,079
Likes: 0
From: Jefferson, OR
See, I would totally agree IF he had not told the guy that the $3500 for repairs was an out-of-pocket expense. The way I see it, the guy wrote a check with the belief that Wompa had to pay $3500 of his own money to fix his car after his son damaged it. He paid for the repairs, AND THEN added another $1500 on top of it to take care of any bad feelings or to keep it out of court. The $1500 was the out-of-court settlement...the $3500 was given under the false belief that Wompa had to pay that amount using his own money, when that wasn't the case. Wompa lied to the father, saying that the repairs were paid for out of pocket (not that they were paid for by the insurance company) and that, I believe, is dishonest.
And yes, if the insurance company found out that he had gone to the father and was paid FOR THE REPAIRS again, they would turn around and demand their money back.
To think of it another way, how would this father explain the breakdown of the money in a court? Would he say, "well, I paid him for the repairs to his car plus some extra because I felt bad", or would he say "I paid him $5000 to keep this out of court"? From the way the story was told, I would think it would be closer to the first...I could be wrong, this is only one side of the story. However, just based on what he said IN the story
LIE
Another quote to show that he knew that he had lied...calling the guy a "sucker" and admitting he lied about the repair being out-of-pocket expense.
I'm sorry, but given THAT evidence no court in America would see that as a 100% legit "out of court settlement"
And yes, if the insurance company found out that he had gone to the father and was paid FOR THE REPAIRS again, they would turn around and demand their money back.
To think of it another way, how would this father explain the breakdown of the money in a court? Would he say, "well, I paid him for the repairs to his car plus some extra because I felt bad", or would he say "I paid him $5000 to keep this out of court"? From the way the story was told, I would think it would be closer to the first...I could be wrong, this is only one side of the story. However, just based on what he said IN the story
LIE
Another quote to show that he knew that he had lied...calling the guy a "sucker" and admitting he lied about the repair being out-of-pocket expense.
I'm sorry, but given THAT evidence no court in America would see that as a 100% legit "out of court settlement"
Possession is 9/10ths the law... since the transaction was completed and it would be one persons word against another without witnesses they would rule in favor of the one holding the money. Obviously at some point the other party agreed to hand him the money (regardless of pretenses). The lawyer fees would break the $3500 mark anyway.
PS: Lying isn't illegal or lawyers and used car salesmen would be filling the prisons.