need help from the collective

Status
Not open for further replies.
Originally Posted By: clinebarger
Originally Posted By: turtlevette


https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B8dIYWYkGgT9UklQeklDQW5JUXc/view?usp=drivesdk

I've got a whole notebook full of comps. The NADA guide does not distinguish the 301 from the 400. I can make them average the CCC value with NADA per law. PA and CT have similar laws.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B8dIYWYkGgT9QlJiQ2Z3d2hpc00/view?usp=drivesdk

https://drive.google.com/file/d/0B8dIYWYkGgT9TEQyT3VQODdQQmM/view?usp=drivesdk


If you can get it done.....Good for you!

NADA may not distinguish between a 301 & a 400.....But an educated buyer sure would!


I thought it was a 1980...no 400 available.

Quote:
The high retail in one of those links said $94,770, No 2nd gen F-body is worth that much.


1970 Ram Air might be. 1973-4 Super Duty Formula.
Quote:
The other link show the values shooting up $8,000 in 2015, I would like to hear the rationale behind that.

I'm not picking on your car man, But it doesn't look like it was in great shape, These car rot in Texas.....I can't imagine what kind of rot is hidden in a northeast car??


May not be a Northeast car. My father in law has a 74...it was a Georgia car.
 
Originally Posted By: turtlevette
http://www.transamflorida.com/TRANSAMFORSALE5.htm

This place has top of the market cars.

The bandits have seen a bump because Burt Renolds sold his personal cars for around half a million a year or 2 ago.

The other way I know it's a bandit is that y84 is stamped on the cowl plate.




Cool man, Get what you can get!!


Jaraxle, Some of these cars also had a Olds 403 in them & had the same 6.6L designation on the shaker, Not sure when the Poncho 400 was dropped but I'm pretty sure the Olds 403 was still offered after that.
 
Okay, but how do you explain using what you purport to be such a valuable machine as a daily driver without even bothering to spend the money to insure it?
Be prepared for this, since it's a question you're inevitably going to have to answer.
 
Yeah, and that explains how and why these things get faked all of the time everywhere.
ROFLMAO!
 
Originally Posted By: fdcg27
Okay, but how do you explain using what you purport to be such a valuable machine as a daily driver without even bothering to spend the money to insure it?
Be prepared for this, since it's a question you're inevitably going to have to answer.


I don't know what's considered a daily driver. I don't use it much in the winter. It's not been started since November. It was a nice day and I was going to get some hamburgers.

It's not legally relevant whether I have collision. I didn't want to insure my new mustang but the wife insisted. It's been 7 years since we bought it and I'd have $3500 in a pot for repairs had I not bought collision. Over the years with many vehicles I've probably saved enough to buy a really nice car. It's a calculated risk.

I'm more worried about justifying my damage list i posted earlier. If I run up against any major stumbling blocks, I'll ask for a continuance to work it out.
 
Insurance is absolutely rotten most of the time, turtlevette. There's no much else to say about it. They've come through very well for me on a couple occasions, but those are exceedingly rare, happy accidents - probably glaring mistakes on their part if they look back with 20/20 hindsight.

You should see the depreciation they nail a taxi with, given the miles those things accrue.
wink.gif
 
Yesterday I got an opposition to my request for text message list put together by an associate at the law firm. The claim is that it's a violation of his privacy. The second claim is that the only dispute is the amount of award so there is no need for me to request this info to prove liability. I'm going to write-up a response.

No personal info is contained in a timed stamped list of text messages. I don't see it. They normally delete the content of the message after a couple weeks.

In any tort fault must first be proven before any award can be obtained. So I do need the information, and good cause is shown. The standing offer is not an admission of liability by the driver. They could come to court and do a 180 and deny any responsibility.

I'm kinda liking this. Going up against an associate who's not that bright.
 
What's the purpose of text message logs? He's at fault, who cares? Sounds like a waste of time.
 
Below is what I plan to send to the court. Any ideas to improve this are welcome. Any comments positive or negative.


Response to defendants opposition to plantiff's request for production of cell phone records filed by Esq. for the defendant.


1. There is no personal information contained in a timed stamped event list of text messages. The information contained is merely that a text was sent or received with the corresponding date and time stamp. The actual message is typically deleted by the provider after a few weeks. The record will confirm the individual had texting activity on that day. That's it. This is not an undue violation of privacy especially considering the public safety implications. These texting record requests are commonplace everywhere and are used in auto accident investigations and lawsuits. In fact it's becoming routine to request cell phone records in auto accident cases.

2. In any tort, fault must first be proved by the plaintiff before monetary damages can be established. Degree of liability must also be established ie, is the defendant 100% responsible, 90% etc. A plaintiff must have access to texting activity to prove fault and extent of liability in an auto accident where distraction is suspected. The police report indicated that distracted driving is suspected. An offer by the defendant does not negate or diminish this burden of the plaintiff.

3. To say that texting is irrelevant in an auto accident, is utter disrespect and insult to the hundreds of thousands of people who have been killed, permanently disfigured and injured because of texting. Even in property damage cases it makes much difference in the minds of Judges and juries to assure the aggrieved party is made whole again. Many states are allowing punitive damages. I believe Massachusetts will eventually change the law to be more progressive. This is one of the biggest concerns in our society at this moment.


Respectfully submitted,

plaintiff
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Originally Posted By: turtlevette
Below is what I plan to send to the court. Any ideas to improve this are welcome. Any comments positive or negative.


Response to defendants opposition to plantiff's request for production of cell phone records filed by [name removed] Esq. for the defendant.


1. There is no personal information contained in a timed stamped event list of text messages. The information contained is merely that a text was sent or received with the corresponding date and time stamp. The actual message is typically deleted by the provider after a few weeks. The record will confirm the individual had texting activity on that day. That's it. This is not an undue violation of privacy especially considering the public safety implications. These texting record requests are commonplace everywhere and are used in auto accident investigations and lawsuits. In fact it's becoming routine to request cell phone records in auto accident cases.

2. In any tort, fault must first be proved by the plaintiff before monetary damages can be established. Degree of liability must also be established ie, is the defendant 100% responsible, 90% etc. A plaintiff must have access to texting activity to prove fault and extent of liability in an auto accident where distraction is suspected. The police report indicated that distracted driving is suspected. An offer by the defendant does not negate or diminish this burden of the plaintiff.

3. To say that texting is irrelevant in an auto accident, is utter disrespect and insult to the hundreds of thousands of people who have been killed, permanently disfigured and injured because of texting. Even in property damage cases it makes much difference in the minds of Judges and juries to assure the aggrieved party is made whole again. Many states are allowing punitive damages. I believe Massachusetts will eventually change the law to be more progressive. This is one of the biggest concerns in our society at this moment.


Respectfully submitted,
[name removed]
plaintiff


I'd delete the third paragraph. Focus on the facts of the case. The text information is relevant because it may be evidence of negligence on the part of the defendant. I had a case a few years ago where a car pulled out in front of another car and caused a serious accident. The accident was caught on some security cameras and the footage was time stamped. Plaintiff asked for text records and I granted the request. It was settled not long after that.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I was in court yesterday. Won this round. They have to produce the records. It they're not in by the deadline I'll get default judgment. If he doesn't show in court I'll get default judgment.

I feel like Mike Ross in suits.
 
Just got back from court. It was a good hour and a half and was exhausting. I wouldn't recommended this for someone who hasn't represented themselves before at least in a traffic case.

The lawyer constantly interrupts and objects. I wasn't happy with the way the magistrate handled the session . evidence rules are supposed to be relaxed and testifying more informal. That's the whole point of small claims. To give the little guy a chance. Regretfully we live in a society where the corps and rich rule with an iron fist.
 
I'll have more thoughts as i digest over time.

Its amazing to me how employees of a corporation act in an unethical and mean spirited way because they think that's what their boss wants and it'll mean they can keep their miserable job.

Some of the stuff that went down.

1. They accused me of buying a title washed car because it had been registered in Canada.
2. They asked me why I was driving the car in winter.
3. I has some bottles AZ $2 oil in the back so they insinuated the engine was a oil burner.
4. The inspector said the dash was cracked after I told the magistrate it was perfect.

I mean who lies in court and for what. To save a couple of grand?

I drove the car there and welcomed any of them to look it over.

The inspector didn't bother to wipe the snow off the car but does all this testifying about how its in fair condition. These guys are so used to getting away with murder, they don't think anything of it. Insurance companies are out of control.
 
Last edited:
Oh wow, I had to go back to the previous page and the first page to re-familiarize myself with everything. Do you have any pics of the TA after you fixed her up? I saw the pics on the first page. Obviously I hope it works out. The more of a pain you are to them the more likely they will give you what you want. Either phone calls or emails daily to the attorneys.
 
Originally Posted By: turtlevette
I'll have more thoughts as i digest over time.

Its amazing to me how employees of a corporation act in an unethical and mean spirited way because they think that's what their boss wants and it'll mean they can keep their miserable job.

Some of the stuff that went down.

1. They accused me of buying a title washed car because it had been registered in Canada.
2. They asked me why I was driving the car in winter.
3. I has some bottles AZ $2 oil in the back so they insinuated the engine was a oil burner.
4. The inspector said the dash was cracked after I told the magistrate it was perfect.

I mean who lies in court and for what. To save a couple of grand?

I drove the car there and welcomed any of them to look it over.

The inspector didn't bother to wipe the snow off the car but does all this testifying about how its in fair condition. These guys are so used to getting away with murder, they don't think anything of it. Insurance companies are out of control.




I can't understand why the Magistrate wouldn't want to go look at the car; when I had a case where a simple examination of the relevant evidence would settle the matter I always wanted to see it first hand.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

JTK
Bad year with the deer.
2
Replies
29
Views
2K
jeepman3071
M
F250 and even F150 cost more than F350 (Help with insurance)
Replies
10
Views
949
14.1 Grms
ls1mike
Truck update
4 5 6
Replies
110
Views
5K
ls1mike
haggler
'18 Optima EX, Selling Time?
Replies
9
Views
885
haggler
G
It's time for the motorcycle insurance shuffle
2 3
Replies
43
Views
1K
02SE
Back
Top