Discussions

So we.should all be happy to pay 1700$ for insurance on a truck worth 3000$. We are getting so much value for our dollars. And yes mpi undervalued vehicles on every first off. As for the replacement value insurance back in 1985 we were one of the first in province to buy this coverage. Because we had that coverage mpi forced us to have our truck repaired as opposed to write off. The truck was 18000$ new. Was 6 months old. The frame get bent in the accident. It cost over 17000$ to fix but never was to toll right after. Only took 6 months for them to get us the truck back.

It started right at the time of the accident. In my judgement of people, experienced from years as a landlord, this chick was (and still is) trying to get herself out of a spot. The nerve of her to make a stranger to falsify the report and the MPI claim makes me feel that she's slime. "Hi... Sorry for crashing into your car and I know you don't know me at all... But, can you do me a big favor? Can you leave me out of this and claim it as a hit and run at a parking lot?" WHAT BALLS! Right then and there, she's deemed untrustworthy. What is she hiding? ...A poor driving record? ...No licence? ...No money? ...Not her car? ...She's not supposed to be driving or under "house arrest"? ... Or maybe she's under the influence of something? Jeez, the "what ifs" that could come from this woman! If someone tried that (change the claim) on me right after an accident, I'd be calling for the police, just to make sure she's not going to continue to try to deceive me. Why would anyone agree to that kind of arrangement? She gets off of a traffic ticket and later can claim no fault on her part, all the while guaranteeing this boy to pay his cars deductible.  
 
I'm glad Momtofours son didn't change the report of the accident. Good for him in keeping things honest. But, he will probably be still screwed out of the deductible for his car. While she walks away... Basically scot-free. She will more than likely to get away from getting demerits or a ticket for the traffic infraction. And there's no need for her to report her part of the accident or make a insurance claim if her vehicle is still drivable. Thus, still sticking him with the deductible on his claim (because we all know that MPI will never be the one who get's "short changed"). And even if MPI catches up to this sly girl, the best they can do is force her to pay when she renews her drivers licence or car insurance. Which can be up to a year before the boy get compensated. ...And that's IF she renews. Then of coarse, there's the chance of the change in the story and placing the blame towards the boy. That too, will drag things out and maybe alter MPI's final decision to a 50/50 fault, since there's no police report and they simply have the words of two conflicting driver statements.  
 
Yup, people like her only think of themselves. I've had my share of sneaky, two faced, selfish dingdongs who cheat, lie and ignore to avoid their problems. Be grateful it's only two hundred dollars lost from her actions/inactions. Hopefully, he will eventually see his money with the help from MPI. But I wouldn't be waiting for it to show up soon.  
 
All the best for Momtofours son (no sarcasm intended), I do like to see the chance of the "good guy" winning against these types clowns, every once in a while.  
 
Just my opinion, I could be wrong.

Well my son just got letter in the mail they have decided that he is 100 percent at fault saying he was making a directional turn without it being safe to do so. He had witness gave mpi the number to the witness, I don't understand she was in turning lane with signal on turning left my son was on opposite side turning left he pauses to make sure she is turning so he proceeds with his turn she goes straight a Rams into him they say he is at fault. He is going to fight this if there are anymore witnesses out there who seen this accident he may need your help. It has been awhile now since the accident but hope someone remembers it. Happened sept 2 on Victoria ave and 8 th street

You never said he was turning as well. In that case he IS at fault. It would have been his job to ensure that it was safe to proceed. It obviously was not. I was always taught not to go by signals or anything. Wait until your 100% sure there turning (so once they've turned). You made it sound like your son was going straight and she pulled out of the turning lane and hit him... But the way you just explained it he is at fault!

The person making the left hand turn is making the most dangerous maneuver according to the highway traffic acts, this is why he would be 100%

He was turning left and she was on opposite side turning left in the turning lane she decided not to turn I guess and went straight and hit him in the back end around where the gas tank is  

So he would be 100% at fault. If someone is turning they should not do so until they are 100% sure if it safe to do so. You're son clearly didn't do this. Making him at fault. Doesn't matter if she had her signal on, if she was driving straight she had the right of way.  

I totally understand what you are saying when turning left you can't pull out in front of someone, she was in the furthest lane there are two straight away lanes then there is a lane that you pull into when you are turning north on that corner, he already made sure it was clear in the straight away lanes it was ,he proceeded his turn then she decided no I am going to go straight instead

Look... whenever your making a left turn on coming traffic you will always be at fault, regardless of the situation. This is just not Manitoba, but every province.  
 
I have a friend that was making a left turn on a busy intersection and I'm sure most people come into this scenario. But she was waiting to make a left turn, the signal turns yellow, there is oncoming traffic that passes through the yellow, at time she's well into the intersection and by the time she makes the left turn the signal turns red.  
 
Well in the case, while making that left turn a guy from the oncoming traffic decides to run the red light and hit her in the back of the vehicle. Now everyone would think "oh he ran a red light he's at fault". Nope, she was at fault because she was making that left turn, even though the guy ran the red light. This happened in Brandon.  
 
There is no point in fighting it, because you have already lost. Just pay the deductible and be thankful your son is alive and well. If they totaled the car, then do your research and negotiate a far deal with MPI for payout and move on.  
 
Edited by Getty, 2015-11-21 06:46:38

You say you understand, but you don't. As the person above said, it  
Doesn't matter where that other  
Person was, or what she indicated she was doing - take that out and look at  
The facts. She changed her mind and went straight and your son made the left hand turn when it was unsafe  
To do so. same rule applies to people who are speeding: unless  
You can prove it, IE if they got a ticket  
From The police( and even then it's not for sure) it's, it's still your fault that you turned in front of someone. It sucks but again, he's alive - it could have been worse. Accept the 5 points  
To the DSR and pay the deductible and treat it As a Life lesson

had a guy in a big motor home back into the side of my car. He lived in Brandon and had Alberta insurance. I had to pay my deductible even though he backed into my car when it was on the street. I did get a refund check once they recovered the costs from his insurance company. So that means that IF they could not get his insurance company to pay up then I would have been SOL. I think that is stupid, why punish the person that was not at fault?

Im currently in the claim process and because the other person hasnt claimed yet I would be responsible to pay the deductible until they have made their claim. I would be then reimbursed the $200. This is in case the judgement is changed upon the other person putting in their claim. In my instance however, the guy doesnt want to lose his license, so hes not making the claim. However, I have and i am not at fault. But i will still have to pay the deductible.

 
"So he would be 100% at fault. If someone is turning they should not do so until they are 100% sure if it safe to do so. You're son clearly didn't do this. Making him at fault. Doesn't matter if she had her signal on, if she was driving straight she had the right of way"  
 
 
Sooo. when you get to a light and the person is in the TURNING lane with the blinker on you should just sit there in case they change their mind...they were both turning left she said, (one going east, one going west...or whatever direction, regardless, they weren't turning the same direction if they were both turning left) so they'd both be sitting there facing each other waiting for what...? to see if one was going to change their mind? If she was in a turning lane she made an illegal straight.  
 
 
Edited by gopherit, 2015-11-21 12:26:24

There's no turning lane on 8th st for a left. By the sounds of they were both on 8th. He turned. She had her signal on but went straight. That would not be an illegal straight.

There is a turning lane, they where turning off of Victoria on to 8th street she was turning north he was turning south. And I did phone mpi info line and explained the same thing to her and asked her who would be at fault she said the lady would be cause you can't just change your mind in a turning lane and go straight,

The only reason he was found 100% is they could not get ahold of witness, someone witnessed the whole thing and seen what had happened

both were going to turn left, then she decided not to and go straight from the left turn lane.

You have no proof she just "changed her mind". She could have signalled back out of that lane into the straight lane.

did they paint the road to re-line to make it a left turn only? because it seems like its a one way lane for either left right or straight, especially 8th st heading south.

Thank you annetta!!

Ok. I must have miss read. I swore it said they were on 8th. I would contact the witness if you're able! The other driver would definitely be at fault!

Needs to report this to the police so then it can go through the proper channels to have the person at fault be held responsible.

where doing a diagram with Google Earth would help explaining the incident better.

Do a diagram with google maps showing road views of the intersection one from my point of view and one from hers and wrote on it to explains that she came through the left turn lane  

everyone should start waiting to turn left from a left turn lane wait for the opposing left turning lane to be free of vehicles. Because you never know when the driver would suddenly decide to go straight through instead of turning from the turning lane.

When the accident happened, she wanted my son to lie and say it was a parking lot hit and run , or just don't claim it at all, she also said she would write down her info for him and wrote the wrong info down so lucky he noticed that, he claimed it immediately that day with mpi told them everything she wanted him to lie about it took the lady weeks to even claim hers

Mpi apparently couldn't get ahold of the witness so they took the lady's word over my sons, it's not all about the detuctable he is going to get demerits on his licence his insurance will be higher and he is upset that he told the truth and done everything right and he got shafted. If you appeal it they don't get in contact with you again they just go over the info they already have, so that's not fair either. So the only way now is to take her to court which we are going to do

Is why I have a dashcam. I hope to never have to use it, but if I do, then I have video proof.  
 
Good luck.

They believe that all people have done wrong report. The question now is, if some people do not report, then we will pay for themselves, which is not fair. Also, you now have a witness, why not MPI and the police investigation, let you pay. In some cases the displacement of a large displacement of small cars and car crash, as well as speed and angle problems, the loss of small-displacement car that is big. If she was wrong, the loss is small, she did not want to report, like privately resolved, then I do not want to privately resolve, I reported to the MPI, I would pay myself, without any reason. Finally, I think the police have a problem, why is lower than the 1000 accident, the police can not live? I think no matter how much traffic accident, the police have to go to record it, go to the scene judgment, right or wrong. Thus, dishonest people, afraid to take responsibility, no loopholes.