Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Which points to the notion that the property owner is more or less always somehow/someway at fault. If not why would the medical claims portion of policies more or less always pay?
Alright both of you are wrong and kinda right.
The owner of land is responsible under certain circumstances. The grass cutter was invited to the property and tripped over a hazard that could have been noticed and fixed. There was a payout from the liability insurance because the carrier recognized the case was worth X irrespective of fault. Juries decide damages. Damages are more than just the bills and lost wages. You have pain and suffering, and potentially disabilities (among others). Trip and falls are 50/50 so they probably took a discount and offered. Plaintiff accepted recognizing the risk. Very common
The other insurance you guys were thinking of was probably MedPay. MedPay pays the bills no questions. Even with med pay, you still can make a liability claim
The owner of land is responsible under certain circumstances. The grass cutter was invited to the property and tripped over a hazard that could have been noticed and fixed. There was a payout from the liability insurance because the carrier recognized the case was worth X irrespective of fault. Juries decide damages. Damages are more than just the bills and lost wages. You have pain and suffering, and potentially disabilities (among others). Trip and falls are 50/50 so they probably took a discount and offered. Plaintiff accepted recognizing the risk. Very common
The other insurance you guys were thinking of was probably MedPay. MedPay pays the bills no questions. Even with med pay, you still can make a liability claim
I understand all that.
How does that run counter to what I wrote just above?
Because they are two different coverages. You can have 0% liability but your insurer might pay out MedPay. MedPay is a separate concept.
Zero liability means there is no reason to pay either though liability or medical insurance. I get that lots of legal nuance is in play but I'm talking broadly.
That is how my buddies insurance worked when that woman fell on the lawn she shouldn’t have even been on .
Because it was his property they covered her bills , but she couldn’t get a penny for negligence….
Right. It sucks but the system has been honed over the centuries to enrich lawyers over all else.
One does not have to be negligent to be liable per these medical payouts.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
