Two curious questions needing answers concerning guardrails and self insured cover up

I am long winded, keep reading.

Two questions that I need answers for. Have a friend trucker who was hauling a tanker carrying spring water in PA and rolled it around a curve taking out part of the guardrail. Tanker was only vehicle in the accident. She worked for a self insured company. Owner is an ### and fired her the same day. Again the company she drove for was self insured. Couple days ago she received a bill in the mail from PennDot demanding payment for the replacement of the guardrail. Who is legally responsible for this? The driver of the rig (she is not an owner operator) or the company she worked for?

The same tanker was rolled before numerous times by different drivers in the past decade. In all cases, the owner has the truck towed from the scene back to his work property. No DOT inspections ever. He pays off the tow truck driver and doesn't report his accidents to the DOT. Also makes all repairs or pays off another company to do the repairs. Leaving everything off the books. Is this legal? If not, who in the DOT should be made aware and how do you make them aware?

She currently has legal counsel representing her for her injuries and fighting in her favor for the tickets the state police pushed in her lap.

 

the person who tore it up should pay.. if the driver drove through your house>??? who do u want to pay..?????????







jb hunt brain check

 

There was a big stink over the PA DOT billing a couple of individuals who took out gaurd rails.

The stink part of it was the individuals who got billed all lost their lives in the accidents. Seems the letters upset the family members.

Yeah, she is responsible... The owner wasnt driving the truck. In the end she wrecked it.

 

I think the company is the one that pays. He's truck did the damage. She is working under his insurance. Your only a agent for that company. If you drive their trucks. If I hit something with an ABF truck they pay all bills for damage. Now what were her tickets, equipment, brakes, tires. Or driver issued, speed, log book. Equipment tickets are the owners, If she reported them and they refused to fix them, Then she should refuse to drive that equipment, Or they sign off on the write up.
But the company pays for the damage
This is NYS, may differ from state to state.

Please let us know whats happens...

 

The company is suppose to be responsible as she's employed by them and was acting on their behalf. They are the policy holder. Company drivers don't have the option of insuring their own driving. O/O's do.
What normally happens is the insurance pays the claim and then the insurance company has the option of suing the insured if they feel like pursuing it. Alot of times they pay and move on. With repeat claims they either raise the rates or drop the insured. Then if the company wants to sue the driver then they can. At least that's the way it's suppose to work.

I do remember from my younger days when I grew up in PA... They are a No Fault insurance state. I'm not up on that anymore. There might be some state law different from most. Since it's a no fault state, they might be able to bypass all the litigation and bill the one at the bottom.

 

Any damage that was caused should be look after by the insurer. It's all part on the same incident and claim.

 

http://backstabberreport.com/penndot-bills-innocent-amputee-for-guardrail-damage-to-highway/

Apparently the state uses the State Trooper's report on where to send the bill.

The article states "...it comes out of your pocket, or your insurance company."

There must be a accident report, where would the DOT get the info to bill her... so If her old boss is hiding problems, paperwork etc.... maybe she can leverage the accident report into making him pay.

 

That's the way it works in the "real" world, not sure about the Commonwealth of Pa. Good ploy for job creation though. Send one of those official sounding letters to every person listed on an accident report. Driver, passenger, witness, dog catcher, the list goes on and on.

I can't believe people are so gullible as to believe that the driver would actually be the one that is primarily responsable for the claim. If that was the case WHY would liability insurance be mandatory in the majority of the civilized world?

 

Very wrong...when items by the road are dammaged in an accident, the driver gets billed....telephone poles, guardrails, etc. The fact the company is "self insured" complicates it since you would normally forward the bill as part of a covered event. Since the owner is now technically the insurance company, and he will not pay, and the driver has no contract to enforce like with an insurance company, I think the owner of the vehicle is responsible. They can sue the driver claiming "due care" was not exercised, oe recklessness was involved to try to recoup the $$, the same things claimed in the firing...

 

when the WRECKER pays there are a lot less wrecks.........fact not fiction