98
99

[CA] Truck with a "Not responsible for broken windshields" sign, broke my windshield. (self.legaladvice)

brokenwindshieldz が 投稿

I was on my way to work in the morning and on the freeway going the speed limit. Truck carrying debris gets in front of me and all of a sudden a small rock comes off the truck and hits my windshield. There's a long crack across and I made an appointment to get it fixed tomorrow.

I (very luckily) have a dashcam and it recorded the whole thing. I called the truck company and they said they weren't responsible because I was "probably following too closely," and all their trucks have signs saying to stay back 100 feet for this reason. The thing is, the truck basically cut me off making it impossible to stay back that far when the incident happened.

What should I do? The company refuses to even talk to me. The windshield is gonna cost me $200 and I'm not even sure it's worth that to try and collect from these people.

全 20 件のコメント
並べ替え:
ベスト
トップ新着論争中古い順Q&A

[–]mkizys 215 ポイント216 ポイント  (2子コメント)

Sue them, they're responsible for anything that flies off their trucks, the sign just deters people because they think it has a legal standing.

[–]Molly_Battleaxe 69 ポイント70 ポイント  (0子コメント)

I'm really happy to confirm this is true

When you are flying down the highway with no tarp and a load of gravel it is not my fault and I've seen those rocks bounce far as heck

[–]JimmyDean82 121 ポイント122 ポイント  (7子コメント)

The sign holds zero weight. They are responsible for damages caused by an unsecured load (and if gravel is bouncing out it is unsecured)

You can give them another call and tell them you will have no recourse but to take them to small claims. You can mention you have video.

Normally letting them know your evidence wouldn't be advised, but they know they are responsible (this won't be the first or last time it's happened), and it may get them to just pay up instead of making you waste time

[–]swim1929 16 ポイント17 ポイント  (2子コメント)

Stupid question, but I'm just curious in case I'm ever in a similar situation:

Normally letting them know your evidence wouldn't be advised

How come?

[–]A_Soporific 18 ポイント19 ポイント  (1子コメント)

Because then they can put work into getting that evidence thrown out.

[–]DogeshireHathaway 3 ポイント4 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Is that possible in small claims?

[–]wolfie379 17 ポイント18 ポイント  (1子コメント)

I'd explain the situation to the DOT, and ask them how to go about getting the trucking company to pay for your windshield. The DOT might be able to use your dashcam evidence in an enforcement action - an improperly secured load is a 5-figure fine.

[–]KBCme 9 ポイント10 ポイント  (0子コメント)

In addition, the DOT may be able to give you the company's insurance information and you can file an insurance claim directly with the carrier and not even deal with the trucking company.

[–]Lampwick 8 ポイント9 ポイント  (1子コメント)

The sign holds zero weight.

Well, I would say it holds a little weight... in that it demonstrates that they are aware they have a problem with crap falling off their trucks!

[–]Lying_idiot 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Also that they don't consider it their responsibility to prevent accidents.

[–]ThePretzul 47 ポイント48 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Here's the thing: they are liable for every pebble that comes out of their truck, because they failed to contain it properly within the truck (even if they attempted to tarp it that means the tarping was obviously insufficient). The signs are to try and prevent you from making a claim against them because you think you'll lose (and it appears to be working on you, so far).

You may give them a courtesy call to let them know that you'll be filing in small claims court unless they'd like to settle, but that's not necessary (it just makes things easier if they pay you without needing to go to court). When you win in small claims court you can start placing liens on their property if they still try to refuse paying you. Companies tend to pay up real fast when the alternative is having the equipment they need for business auctioned off to pay the judgement.

[–]Obidias 25 ポイント26 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Same thing happened to me. Fuck those guys.

Give them the truck ID, location, and a copy of the repair bill.

The lawyer costs them more than the repair.

[–]rikaisuru 5 ポイント6 ポイント  (0子コメント)

The sign is just to deter people from following too close.

Sue them in small claims.

[–]mask2697 4 ポイント5 ポイント  (1子コメント)

That sign has just about as much legal standing as a "Not responsible for gunshot wounds" sign would plastered to the back of Charles Whitman.

Sue them for the damages.

[–]knightricer210 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

I have said it's the same as a sign on my front bumper stating "stay out of the way, not responsible for running your ass over" but now I will be stealing this one.

[–]weinerpretzel 2 ポイント3 ポイント  (0子コメント)

CA has a law about securing loads to prevent debris on roadways, http://leginfo.legislature.ca.gov/faces/codes_displaySection.xhtml?lawCode=VEH&sectionNum=23114. Not sure where you could take this info but CHP might be a good start, they might not be able to help but could lead you in the right direction.

[–]Minchialino 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Work with your insurance company so they contact theirs? Provide your insurance company with the video.

[–]slick519 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (0子コメント)

I might be mistaken, but there are only two things in CA that can fall off of your vehicle and not be considered litttering-- clean water and feathers.

[–]Laborer76 1 ポイント2 ポイント  (0子コメント)

Tell them you have a sign that says people who hit your car with debris are responsible for damage. Boom, out lawyered.

[–]what-about-99 0 ポイント1 ポイント  (0子コメント)

$200 sounds low for a windshield. Are you sure?

If the damage exceeds $1000, then note under California law you must file an SR-1 to report it.

Report the incident to your insurance company as your policy almost surely requires.

Depending on your deductible and whether you have a windshield rider exempt from the deductible, your insurer might make you whole.