On Thu, 15 Dec 2005 05:46:56 +0000, Jeffry wrote:
> "Phil Allison" wrote in message
> news:40cdmmF16gv5oU1@individual.net...
>>
>> "Jeffry"
>> "Phil Allison"
>>>>
>>>>> Would this case have essentially been between the drunk's health
>>>>> insurer
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ** NO !
>>>>
>>>> Getting hit by a truck is not an illness !!!
>>>>
>>>>
>>> The hosptial and doctors fees from this injury would be covered by the
>>> drunk's health insurance, if it existed.
>>
>>
>> ** No - not where a TPC compensation claim is pending.
>>
>>
> My standard policy will pay me out immediately if injured in an
> accident. It is then up to them to claim from the TPC if possible. I'm
> suggesting that these two parties are the true litigants in the case at
> hand. And that they should not have taken their dispute to the HC, at
> the expense of policy holders and tax payers.
We don't know much about the nature of the drunk's claim in damages, but
it would probably included both medical expenses and loss of income. In
situation like this, which of those claims is likely to be the greater?
And there seems to be no insurer covering the drunk for loss of income.
It's either recovery from the driver (ie the driver's insurer) or
nothing. |