To Tom & Ray,
I am a long time listener and always hoped to have car trouble so I could call you. No such luck.
Worse than that- I have to write to correct you. You are modern day pseudo-sages so it’s gonna be pretty embarasing for you to admit your mistake on the air…but I know you will because YOU guys have integrity where your caller did NOT.
I was so revolted by the idea of honoring Trish by saying that she was lucky to be rid of HIM when it’s more likely a reversal of fortune. I’m sure she’s got other great qualities but… yikes! Her ethics are completely failing.
You were right that Trish owes her ex-bo the $500 bucks plus the car rental expense for totalling his car AND you were RIGHT that the situation was very revealing about personality and it’s good that she smashed the car so their true characters could be revealed.
I can understand hesitating on HOW to pay, but WHETHER to pay??? What kind of person would hesitate to admit wrong doing in that situation. She looked down approaching a stop light and SMASH. And she has to call YOU to find out what’s the right thing to do??? Her Ex-bo is sooooo lucky she totaled his car to find this out that she has no sense of personal responsibility…
Someone has to defend the Ex and Lady Justice.
Love you guys,
I’ve had the pleasure of listening to you for nearly 30 years (how’s that even possible? ) and haven’t learned a THING !! Thank you! Really.
Polliana
Where can i listen to this radio show? Is it aired over where?
Here’s the website,
click on section #2
It’s spelled “Huzza” or “Huzzah”.
http://www.msa.md.gov/msa/mdmanual/01glance/html/symbols/lyricsco.html
I agree with you wholeheartedly. That woman has some gall. She doesn’t feel she should have to pay because he “unceremoniously dumped” her. If she had slammed into a stranger, would she have said she (or her insurance) shouldn’t have to pay because she doesn’t know the person?
She probably gave him that ‘I’m not paying for this’ attitude at the time of the accident and that’s why he dumped her. She admits the accident was her fault, yet she’s so cavalier about it, “And he’s already bought a new car” - as if that entitled her to smash up his old one.
And then later on in the call when Tommy says, jokingly “As a lawyer you don’t have to worry about ethics at all” she responds with “Well hey, that’s why I called you cause I don’t have any.” So I guess at least she’s honest.
I don’t see what the big deal for her is anyway. Most lawyers charge $250+ per hour for their services, so $500 should be pocket change for this woman.
| Mr. Cheap said:
| "And then later on in the call when Tommy says, jokingly “As a lawyer you don’t have to
| worry about ethics at all” she responds with “Well hey, that’s why I called you cause I
| don’t have any.”
Maybe she knows what she is and they’re just negotiating the price.
…and it’s spelled “Beau”, not “Bo”.
Thank you… 
Polliana makes an excellent point posting that Trish’s ex-boyfriend did the right thing when he dumped her.
What I was waiting for Tom & Ray to say was that if Trish was a lawyer, then surely she should have realized without asking Tom & Ray that if ex-boyfriend sues Trish in small claims court for his $500 deductible, he’s going to win in a heartbeat. It then becomes Trish’s problem to collect from her insurance. And he should not bother his insurance company with this, or he’ll pay extra in premiums for it. She already faces a stinging premium increase the next time her insurance is due–or she may even get dumped by her insurance company, not just ex-boyfriend.
Even if she doesn’t pay him, I’d say Polliana’s right: he learned Trisha’s character pretty cheaply, saved himself a lot of money in the long run and got the better deal.
Morally she owes him the deductible and the rental, but the legal situation is not so clear, and quite interesting. If you posed it as a hypothetical in a law class the students would think you were nuts.
Consider: If person A borrows the car of person B with permission, and has a collision with person C, B’s insurance will (almost always) provide primary coverage, because it was B’s car. B has to pay the deductible, and A’s insurance does not cover anything unless the damage exceeds B’s policy limits. If anyone sues A as a result of the accident, A is defended by B’s insurance since A was insured by B’s insurance at the time of the accident. This includes B suing A for the deductible.
In this case, person A and C are the same, but the rules still apply. (I am not a lawyer but I play one on the internet.)
So, as far as I can tell, BF’s insurance company has to cover the damage to both BF’s and Trish’s cars, since Trish was covered by BF’s insurance at the time of the accident. If BF sues Trish, she can kick the suit up to the legal department of BF’s insurance company, putting BF in the position of suing his own insurance company. Trish’s insurance will quite lawfully refuse to provide any coverage, either to Trish’s car or the BF’s car. BF can sue Trish in small claims court, in which case BF’s insurance would not be involved and she would surely lose. But in some states the defendant has the right to refuse a small claims case and escalate it to a regular trial, which brings the BF’s insurance company back into it on her side.
No, she doesn’t owe him the deductible because there was an implied estoppal when he lent her the car, covered under his insurance. You will find that term in To Kill a Mockingbird or Black’s Law Dictionary. The deductible doesn’t transfer to her. He assumed the risk when he lent her the car.
Your “Consider:…” paragraph makes my head hurt, but I’ll take your word for it. This is one among many reasons I am not an attorney! Assuming you’re correct, and/or that ZombieWoof is correct in use of the term “implied estoppal” (again, if you say so, ZW), I would still think that BF’s insurance company, if it DID pay out the entire amount for both cars, could then sue and recover from Trish if it wanted to bother with small claims court. She’s the one who messed up, by her own admission, and insurance companies can and do sue other drivers who were negligent and cause an accident to recover their payouts. But the entire amount of their payout wouldn’t cover BF’s $500 deductible. He could easily successfully sue her for that amount.